Wyniki wyszukiwania - Biblioteka Nauki

Ten serwis zostanie wyłączony 2025-02-11.

Nowa wersja platformy, zawierająca wyłącznie zasoby pełnotekstowe, jest już dostępna.
Przejdź na https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Ograniczanie wyników

3 Ante Portas – Studia nad Bezpieczeństwem

Znaleziono wyników: 3

Liczba wyników na stronie

Wyniki wyszukiwania

Sortuj według:

Ogranicz wyniki do:

REGIONAL ASPECTS OF GEOSTRATEGIC MODALITY IN 21ST CENTURY: RUSSIA’S MILITARY STRATEGY REVIEW

100%

Maisaia V.

Ante Portas – Studia nad Bezpieczeństwem

2016

tom 1(6) Kryzys ukraiński i jego znaczenie dla bezpieczeństwa międzynarodowego: aspekty militarno-polityczne

119-129

Russia’s incumbent government is seeking to prepare the country for permanent warfare conditions and aim at making its Armed Forces at constant readiness level against any foes (for instance, NATO, ISIS, etc.). Transformation of Russian military institutions and structures into level of permanent combat readiness level – creation of National Defence Centre, setting up Special Destination Forces, adoption of new Military Doctrine (December 2014), preparation military planning documents for peaceful time, etc. Russia recently created an Operational-Strategic Command HQs as independent Army Group HQs and its usage as independent Army HQ entities in autonomous regime that make possible to use nuclear strike attack even in convenient warfare operations.

TERRITORIAL DEFENCE FORCES OPERATIONS IN ACTIONS. GEORGIAN AND OSSETIAN TERRITORIAL DEFENCE FORCES COMBAT STRATEGIES ANALYSES IN RUSSIA-GEORGIA 2008 AUGUST WAR: COMPARATIVE STUDY

100%

Maisaia V.

Ante Portas – Studia nad Bezpieczeństwem

2016

tom 2(7) Obrona Terytorialna i jej rola we współczesnych systemach bezpieczeństwa

249-269

The Caucasus region is still considered as one of the hottest geostrategic spot in the world politics and still inter-state war scenarios are most plausible and could be revoked into real scenario development at any moment. Even current example of Georgian and Russian relations is to be one of the evident of the occasion. As it is known, Georgia and Russia are still in formally in war, both de facto and de iure and only a truce between the parties named as „Saakashvili-Medvedev-Sarkozi” treaty is indicating a fragile peace in the region. Hence, the consequences of the warfare waged in August of 2008 are being echoed in contemporary period of time. However, from the geostrategic point of view, only the fights between Georgian and Russian Armed Forces are being reviewed and analyzed but no one paid attention to and scrutinized combat operations between Georgian and Ossetian military formations scrutinizing, whereas both sides perceived territorial defence forces as one of the serious strike units at the initial stage of the conflict on 3-9 August of 2008 which was falling within the scope of Low Intensity Conflict. The operations could be analyzed on how the parties were using this kind of active reserve military formations, how efficient had been both territorial defence systems before the war and how it reflected the situations developed after the war. The comparative analyses of the engaged parties’ capabilities with regard to territorial defence strategies and properly used tactical reserve forces are very important and omnipotent to relevantly consider possibility and opportunity to achieve peace and stability at the regional level and reinforce regional security provisions.

GENERAL IMPLICATIONS OF RUSSIA-USA GEOSTRATEGIC APPROACHES TOWARD SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA: “SOFT POWER” VS. “HARD POWER” STRATEGIES IN ACTION (SUDAN CASE-STUDY)

63%

Maisaia V. , Beraia E.

Ante Portas – Studia nad Bezpieczeństwem

2017

tom 2(9) Security Issues in Sub-Saharan Africa

87-99

Due to the escalation processes in Middle East and Persian Gulf, situation is being deteriorated and fueled in Sub-Saharan Africa and geopolitical uncertainties corroborating with emergence of asymmetric challenges (including illegal migration to the EU countries, spillover military conflicts from the Middle East region, fierce geopolitical competition between Russia and USA for dominance in Sub-Saharan Africa, ISIS and Al-Qaeda profound presence in the area linked with spreading international terrorism in this area, failed states dilemma, etc.) more transforming the region into “Rim of Instability” of global level. Despite of the international community efforts to deal with these challenges(particularly, with the great effort of the all four global power centers – the USA, Russia, EU and China as the national interests of even survival origin are foreseen in the region), it makes no sense to endorse stability climate and promote peacebuilding at the regional level. It is interesting to note that two global powers – Russia and USA are tailoring and exploiting in order to achieve their proper national interests and foreign policy missions, to implement new instrumental forms in order to promote these goals in aegis of the hybrid warfare strategies and to increase their so-called “soft power“ leverages thereof. Herewith interesting to mention that both Russia and USA have different approaches toward regional engagement with proper leverages and Hard Power vs. Soft Power is a real description of the engagement cases.