Victories and Losses of the USA and Russia in Asymmetric Conflicts at 21st Century

The article discusses the features of armed confl icts at the beginning of the 21st century through the prism of the theory of asymmetric confl ict. Within the framework of the theory, basic and accompanying asymmetries are distinguished, which determine the reasons for the political, rather than military, defeat of developed countries in wars against relatively weak opponents. At the beginning of the 21st century most of the armed confl icts have pronounced signs of multiple asymmetries that aff ect the course and outcome of confl icts. On the basis of the theory, several important aspects can be distinguished that should be taken into account by the military and politicians when planning and conducting military operations. Among them: the legitimacy of military operations from the point of view of international law, neutralization of anti-war sentiments, minimization of losses of military personnel, ensuring the safety of the population in the war zone. Foreign analytics is characterized by a focus on the reasons for the failures of the United States and other Western states in military operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria. Among the reasons for the failures are a lack of understanding of the culture and characteristics of the countries where hostilities are conducted, the regime of occupation, and attempts at nation-building. Some foreign experts note that the Russian Federation is much more successful in participating in asymmetric confl icts of the 21st century. Among Russian military experts, there is a noticeable interest in developing an “asymmetric war” strategy in the framework of the geopolitical confrontation with the countries of the West. The tendency to develop non-contact methods of warfare and the involvement of private military companies to neutralize anti-war sentiments and minimize losses of military personnel has a universal character. At the same time, the problem of non-selectivity of such methods of warfare and their compliance with international law is becoming more and more acute. The theory of asymmetric confl ict is a theory of international relations, which main assumptions are are useful for politicians and the military to take into account in the process of deciding on the start of hostilities and the possibility of achieving political goals by military means, and not just for fi nding victorious strategies in asymmetric confl icts.

1. Adelkhah, Fariba. “War and State (Re)Construction in Afghanistan: Confl icts of Tradition or Confl icts of Development?” Sibirskie Istoricheskie Issledovaniia, no. 1 (2022),10–35 [In Russian].

2. Borishpolec, Kseniya. “Konkurenciya Velikih Derzhav v XXI Veke: Rossijskie Podhody i Rossijskij Diskurs.” Polis. Politicheskie Issledovaniya, no. 1 (October 28, 2022): 150–65 [In Russian].

3. Golyandin, Nicolaj P., A.G. Esherov, and Alberd M. SHeriev. “Kriminogennye faktory, vliyayushchie na rezul'taty bor'by s terrorizmom na territorii SeveroKavkazskogo federal'nogo okruga.” Probely v rossijskom zakonodatel’stve, no. 5 (2021): 34–39 [In Russian].

4. Deriglazova, Larisa V. “K voprosu ob evolyucii fenomena partizanskoj vojny.” Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya, no. 4 (2009): 95–103 [In Russian].

5. Deriglazova, Larisa V. “Asimmetrichnyj konfl ikt v sovremennoj amerikanskoj politologii.” Mezhdunarodnye processy, no. 2 (2010): 51–64 [In Russian].

6. Zlobin, Vadim A., Aleksandr I. Korol'kov, Dmitrij N. Metelev. “Klassifi kaciya i ocenka asimmetrichnyh ugroz stacionarnym potencial'no opasnym ob»ektam.” Voennaya mysl’’, no. 1 (2021): 85–97 [In Russian].

7. Maksimenkov, Igor' A., Aleksandr S. Bogdanov. “Sovremennye podhody k informacionno-analiticheskoj deyatel'nosti po vyyavleniyu gibridnyh ugroz.” Voennaya mysl’, no. 5 (2021): 42–49 [In Russian].

8. Marichev, Maksim O., Igor' G. Lobanov, Evgenij A. Tarasov. “Bor'ba za mental'nost' – trend sovremennoj vojny.” Voennaya mysl’, no. 8 (2021): 48–57 [In Russian].

9. Oznobishchev, Sergej K., Viktor YA. Potapov, Viktor V. Skokov. Kak gotovilsya ‘asimmetrichnyj otvet’ na ‘Strategicheskuyu oboronnuyu iniciativu’ R. Rejgana. Moskva: Lenand, 2008 [In Russian].

10. Reshiev, Sulajman S., Rustam H. Umarov, Madina L. YAsaeva. “Analiz sistemnyh harakteristik CHechenskoj Respubliki za 2011–2017 gody.” Ekonomika i predprinimatel’stvo , no. 1, (2019): 345–352 [In Russian].

11. Stepanova, Ekaterina A. “Asimmetrichnyj konfl ikt kak silovaya, statusnaya, ideologicheskaya i strukturnaya asimmetriya.” Voennaya mysl’, no. 5 (2010): 47–54 [In Russian].

12. Stepanova, Ekaterina A. ISIS and the Phenomenon of Foreign Terrorist Fighters in Syria and Iraq. – Moscow: IMEMO, Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations, 2020 [In Russian].

13. Sushensov, Andrej A. Malye vojny SSHA: Politicheskaya strategiya SSHA v konfl iktah v Afganistane i Irake v 2000–2010-h godah. Moskva: Aspekt Press, 2014 [In Russian].

14. ТTanajlova, Valentina A. “(Ne)byt' veteranom chechenskih vojn.” Sibirskie istoricheskie issledovaniya, no. 2 (2021): 99–119 [In Russian].

15. Teteryuk, Alexej S., and YAn A. Chizhevsky. “The NATO Strategy in Afghanistan During Obama Administration. The Military Aspect’s Eff ectiveness Evaluation.” Comparative Politics Russia 6, no. 2 (19) (January 1, 2015): 110–124 [In Russian].

16. Teteryuk, Alexej S., and YAn A. Chizhevsky. “Bespilotnye letatel'nye apparaty v asimmetrichnyh konfl iktah.” Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy 14, no. 2 (45) (2016): 189–201 [In Russian].

17. Teteryuk, Alexej S., and YAn A. Chizhevsky. “Teoretiko-igrovoe modelirovanie asimmetrichnogo konfl ikta kazus vojny v Afganistane (2009–2016).” Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy 16, no. 3 (54) (2018): 126–146 [In Russian].

18. Homutov, Aleksandr V. “O protivodejstvii protivniku v usloviyah vedeniya im ‘mnogosfernyh operacij’.” Voennaya mysl', no. 5 (2021): 27–41 [In Russian].

19. Angstrom, Jan, and Isabelle Duyvesteyn, eds.

20. Understanding Victory and Defeat in Contemporary War. Routledge, 2006.

21. Arreguín-Toft, Ivan Michael. How the Weak Win Wars: A Theory of Asymmetric Confl ict. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005.

22. Berglund, Christofer, and Emil Aslan Souleimanov. “What Is (Not) Asymmetric Confl ict? From Conceptual Stretching to Conceptual Structuring.” Dynamics of Asymmetric Confl ict 13, no. 1 (January 2, 2020): 87–98. https://doi:10.1080/17467586.2019.1680855.

23. Caforio, Giuseppe. “The Concreteness of Asymmetric War: Fragments of Experience.” Connections 11, no. 3 (Summer 2012): 21–40.

24. Cassidy, Robert M. Russia in Afghanistan and Chechnya: Military Strategic Culture and the Paradoxes of Asymmetric Confl ict. Carlisle: Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College, 2003.

25. Chekov, Alexander D., Anna V. Makarycheva, Anastasia M. Solomentseva, Maxim A. Suchkov, and Andrey A. Sushentsov. “War of the Future: A View from Russia.” Survival 61, no. 6 (November 2, 2019): 25–48. https://doi:10.1080/00396338.2019.1688563.

26. Cleveland, Charles T., and Daniel Egel. The American Way of Irregular War: An Analytical Memoir. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2020.

27. Deriglazova, Larisa. Great Powers, Small Wars: Asymmetric Confl ict Since 1945. Washington: Woodrow Wilson Center Press & Johns Hopkins University, 2014.

28. Edwards, Aaron. “Deterrence, Coercion and Brute Force in Asymmetric Confl ict: The Role of the Military Instrument in Resolving the Northern Ireland ‘Troubles.’” Dynamics of Asymmetric Confl ict 4, no. 3 (November 2, 2011): 226–41. https://doi:10.1080/17467586.2011.632777.

29. Ewans, Martin. Confl ict in Afghanistan: Studies in Asymmetric Warfare. N.Y.: Routledge, 2005.

30. Fisher, Ronald J. “Challenges of Power Asymmetry and Justice for Problem-Solving Workshops.” Dynamics of Asymmetric Confl ict: Pathways toward terrorism and genocide 3, no. 3 (2010): 145–161.

31. French, David. The British Way in Warfare, 1688–2000. London, Boston: Unwin Hyman, 1990.

32. Golts, Alexander. “Military Reform in Russia and the Global War against Terrorism.” The Journal of Slavic Military Studies 17, no. 1 (2004): 29–41.

33. Gross, Michael. Moral Dilemmas of Modern War: Torture, Assassination, and Blackmail in an Age of Asymmetric Confl ict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.

34. Helmer, Daniel Isaac. The Flipside of the COIN: Israel’s Lebanese Incursion between 1982-2000. Fort Leavenworth, Kan.: Combat Studies Institute Press, 2007.

35. Johnson, Dominic, and Dominic Tierney. Failing to Win: Perceptions of Victory and Defeat in International Politics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006.

36. Kaempf, Sebastian. Saving Soldiers or Civilians?: Casualty-Aversion versus Civilian Protection in Asymmetric Confl icts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018.

37. Kiss, Peter A. “Book Review: Great Powers, Small Wars: Asymmetric Confl ict since 1945 by Larisa Deriglazova.” War in History 22, no. 4 (2015): 569–571.

38. Lefeez, Sophie. “Grégoire Chamayou, Théorie Du Drone.” Socio-Anthropologie 4, no. 28 (December 15, 2013): 168–170. https://doi:10.4000/socioanthropologie.1617.

39. Lieblich, Eliav, and Owen Alterman. Transnational Asymmetric Armed Confl ict under International Humanitarian Law: Key Contemporary Challenges. Tel Aviv: Institute for National Security Studies, 2015.

40. Lieven, Anatol. Chechnya: Tombstone of Russian Power. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1998.

41. Lowther, Adam. Asymmetric Warfare and Military Thought. L.: Glen Segell, 2006.

42. Merom, Gil. How Democracies Lose Small Wars: State, Society, and the Failure of France in Algeria, Israel in Lebanon, and the United States in Vietnam. Cambridge, N.Y.: Cambridge University Press, 2003.

43. Merom, Gil. “The Age of Asocial War: Democratic Intervention and Counterinsurgency in the Twenty-First Century.” Australian Journal of International Aff airs 66, no. 3(2012): 365–380.

44. Morgan, Forrest E. and Raphael S. Cohen. Military Trends and the Future of Warfare: The Changing Global Environment and Its Implications for the U.S. Air Force. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2020.

45. Nagashima, Toru. “Russia’s Passportization Policy toward Unrecognized Republics.” Problems of PostCommunism 66, no. 3 (May 4, 2019): 186–99. https://doi: 10.1080/10758216.2017.1388182

46. Organski, Abramo, and Jacek Kugler. The War Ledger. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1980.

47. Paulus, Andreas, and Mindia Vashakmadze. “Asymmetrical War and the Notion of Armed Confl ict – A Tentative Conceptualization.” International Review of the Red Cross 91, no. 873 (2009): 95–125.

48. Politkovskaya, Anna. A Small Corner of Hell: Dispatches from Chechnya. Translated by Alexander Burry and Tatiana Tulchinsky; with an introduction by Georgi Derluguian. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago press, 2003.

49. Prados, John. Vietnam: The History of an Unwinnable War, 1945–1975. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 2009.

50. Russel, John. Chechnya: Russia’s “War on Terror”. London: Routledge, 2007.

51. Smith, Rupert. The Utility of Force: The Art of War in the Modern World. London: Penguin Books, 2005.

52. Stepanova, Ekaterina. Terrorism in Asymmetric Confl ict: Ideological and Structural Aspects. Oxford University Press, 2008.

53. Stepanova, Ekaterina. “Russia, Central Asia and Nontraditional Security Threats from Afghanistan Following the US Withdrawal.” Global Policy 13, no. 1 (February 11, 2022): 138–145. https://doi:10.1111/1758-5899.13058.

54. Stubbs, Richard. Hearts and Minds in Guerrilla Warfare: The Malayan Emergency, 1948–1960. Singapore: Oxford University Press, 1989.

55. Thornton, Rod. Asymmetric Warfare: Threat and Response in the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge: Polity, 2007.

56. Tierney, Dominic. “Why the United States Is Losing – And Russia and Iran Are Winning.” The Washington Quarterly 44, no. 3 (2021): 69–87.

57. Tierney, Dominic. The Right Way to Lose a War: America in an Age of Unwinnable Confl icts. New York: Little, Brown & Co., 2015.

58. Weiner, Allen S. “Just War Theory and the Conduct of Asymmetric Warfare.” Daedalus 146, no. 1 (2017): 59–70.