Featured Content

Wars that are a continuation of politics by states have practically always been waged according to special rules of warfare, by a specially trained state organization: the army. Analysis of the international situation that has evolved lately shows that the military conflicts occurring in the world are fundamentally different from the classical war type. New-type conflicts lack the uniformity of organized force traditionally represented by the state. Instead, they feature nonstate entities as initiators of organized action and the employment of nonmilitary methods of confrontation along with traditional military methods.

This paper conducts a retrospective analysis of the evolution of views on military security in the Arctic region by Russia’s military-political leadership. It singles out the main factors that have affected the practical implementation of measures to protect the northern borders of the state.

Xinhua: Is China’s military spending too hefty? Is the figure growing too fast? Is the so-called “Chinese military threat” well grounded?

The radical transformation of international relations and the emergence of new types of conflicts are urging Russian military science to step up research on strategic culture.

Xinhua: The US government recently rejected a Russian proposal to extend the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty for at least one year without conditions. Hegemony-minded Washington poses the gravest threat to global strategic security and stability.

This paper examines China’s approaches to conducting information warfare in present-day conditions.

This paper goes over the most popular myths of the Wehrmacht superiority showing that the widespread belief about the superior martial qualities of its soldiers and the captainship of its generals have been grossly overrated, while their treatment of prisoners of war (POWs) and civilians in occupied territories was nothing short of criminal.

Tension around the Korean Peninsula is one of the main threats to international security. North Korea’s acquisition of nuclear and missile weapon systems has become a new serious factor in global strategic stability. Previously, during the cold war era, the only tool of control over strategic weapons was the relationship between Moscow and Washington. At present, the international situation has radically changed. New nuclear powers – India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea – regardless of whether or not the original five members of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) acknowledge them as such, are not under the control of either Washington or Moscow or Beijing, acting at their own discretion, as they see fit.

This article considers the countries of the so-called “Big Three” and the relations among them today. An attempt is made to predict the places and roles of the three countries in reworking the world order, based on the views they hold and features of the existing and future world order. Recommendations are made for their optimization and building harmonious relations capable of establishing a durable and long-lasting peace.

This paper examines the principal features of hybrid warfare and ways of protection from information-psychological impact as a major element within the system of national security. It shows the need to establish within the RF AF a system of providing experts in the area of protection against information warfare conducted in cyberspace.