by Leonid Savin
Military and science specialists in the U.S. have permanently adapted their forces and departments to the new conditions. Starting from aggression in Vietnam and ending with subversive activities in Latin America, Washington investigated tactical and strategic mistakes and made corresponding conclusions. But it became possible to speak of transition to the new form of conflict only after the war in Persian Gulf in 1991, when the U.S. with the help of telecommunication technologies have shown to whole world its military capabilities. Herewith the strikes were made not only to military infrastructure of Iraq, but to critical sites – communication system and energy resources, civilian objects, and in parallel the propaganda campaign was held.
The model, proposed by colonel John Warden, named “the war from inside to outside” and the theory of five strategic rings, proceeded theoretical and practical justification in the following conflicts, particularly, in Yugoslavia.
Thus, due to efforts of admiral Owens, Johnson and vice-admiral Sibrovski, appeared the concept of net-centric warfare, that reflected those changes, that occurred in commercial and information environment of the U.S. Having logically assumed, that these changes will necessarily affect the military sphere, the Pentagon itself began to intensively adapt information systems, armaments, and the most important, intellectual personnel of new generation warfare.
Parallel to this, workers of the RAND corp. John Arquilla and David Ronfeldt drew attention to phenomenon of street fights and guerillas in Latin America, that had support of vast social masses – it were anti-globalist protests and Zapatista revolt in Mexico.
The new form of the social conflict they called the network warfare, having defined its actors – network warriors, which can be both drug cartels and radical environmentalists and animal rights groups; the structures of are a chain network, hub or star network, or all-channel network; types of organizations and their doctrines, technologies and social connections.
In addition we must pay attention to the so-called “non-violent resistance”.
The garland in this issue is given to the Indian fighter for independence – Mahatma Gandhi, but for modern conditions for different countries this method was adapted and developed by the founder of Albert Einstein Institute, Gene Sharp. During the collapse of the Soviet Union he was advisor of separatists from the Baltic countries, and all “color revolutions” – from Yugoslavia to Arabic countries, where muslim brothers were implementing methods, described in Sharp’s book “From dictatorship to democracy”, were held with active consultations of Albert Einstein Institute’s employees, and other structures, related with it.
Moreover, the financial support for regime change in Ukraine, Georgia, Serbia, Kyrgyzstan, Egypt and Tunisia was provided by the U.S. agency of international development.
It will be no exaggeration to say that CIA and other intelligence services of USA took part in initiatives of regime change, which have learned sophisticated manipulations with nationalistic, cultural and dissident movements since the Cold War.
No less interesting is the chaos strategy, proposed by American diplomat Steven Mann in 1991. He proposed to adapt the chaos theory of modern physics to geopolitics, having said, that there is nothing wrong with that, that whole states collapse – because such is the property of any complex system – after its collapse comes the period of equilibrium.
Unlikely he thought of this theory relating to USA, because in the same publication “the chaos theory and strategic thought” he compared state systems with hardware, and ideology – with software, warning the U.S. military from unnecessary destruction of computer systems.
According to Mann, it is easier to run a virus into computer, in this particular case – the liberal democracy of American type, in order to capture states-computers from within and to preserve the integrity of their configuration.
At the same time there appeared other terms – people-centric war, effect-based operations, a television war, cyber-war etc., that reflected one or another aspects of conflicts.
As before scientists created nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, so now are held military experiments outside with social, civic, political and ethnic structures in different countries.
Various virtual simulators train to street fights, computer games teach to organize acts of terrorism and to overthrow governments, and Pentagon emerges into action new agencies, such as cyber-command and space command, to achieve, as it is stated in official document of the Ministry of Defence of the USA – the full spectrum of domination – on the land, in the air, in the space and in cyber-space.
And they don’t hide the fact, that military manipulate social networks – twitter, facebook, blackberry and other communicators are obviously used to incite violence and for escalation of conflicts, which examples are events in Iran, Syria, London and New-York.
Although the use of force against citizens of the USA and Great Britain didn’t go for radical political reforms, which U.S. State Department constantly shouts of relating to other sovereign states.
This indicates that the west stands behind the blur of sovereignties and cultures with large transnational corporations, in the interest of which are not less greedy goals of the world domination, but with rather different methods – by the control of production and distribution of essential goods such as water, food, medicines, shelter, and various essential services.
Given this negative aspect of globalization, we can note, that now we are in a specific historical point, where the new model of conflict conditionally finished there, where it began – in the Middle East. Indeed, whole potential was involved in Libya – in addition to direct military aggression, earlier was launched destabilizing machine of local population, the militants of Al-Qaeda and other terroristic groups of North Africa and Middle East, as well as militants of competing countries, such as Qatar.
The media campaign of BBC, CNN, Al Jazeera and other western resources worked in parallel with electronic suppression of Libyan official resources, and now in Libya invade western and transnational corporations together with private military companies.
However, this conflict will not go out soon. Fast beside are other targets of the west – Syria and Iran, eternally warring Palestine and African countries, groaning from western neo-colonialism.
That’s why the serious struggle lies ahead.
The main thing in it – is to take the right side.