This blog post was created in tandem with ChatGPT4 and the Русский Аналитик Агент created and trained by Scot Terban.

The “Gerasimov Doctrine” refers to a framework attributed to Valery Gerasimov, the Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Russia. It’s named after an article he wrote, which many Western analysts interpreted as a blueprint for a new form of Russian hybrid warfare. This interpretation posits that the doctrine advocates for a strategy that blends military, technological, information, diplomatic, economic, cultural, and other tactics for the purpose of achieving strategic goals, especially in the context of modern, non-linear warfare.

The article by Gerasimov was published in 2013 in the Russian military newspaper “Voyenno-Promyshlenny Kurier” (Military-Industrial Courier).

Origins and Misconceptions: The term was coined by Mark Galeotti in 2013, following a speech and article by Gerasimov. Galeotti’s interpretation suggested that Gerasimov presented a new theory of warfare integrating non-military and military measures. However, this has been acknowledged as a misconception. Gerasimov’s article discussed contemporary Western methods of warfare, emphasizing non-military tactics alongside military operations, not proposing a novel Russian military doctrine​​​​.

Western Interpretation and Russian Perspective: The so-called doctrine is seen by many in the West as a blend of military and non-military strategies, including cyber warfare, information warfare, and political subversion. Gerasimov emphasized the importance of non-military actions in achieving political and strategic objectives. Western analysts often interpret these strategies as an evolution in warfare, blurring the lines between war and peace. However, many Russian experts and scholars argue that there is no such official doctrine, and what Gerasimov described was not a new strategy but rather an analysis of Western methods​​​​​​.

Implementation and Effects: The strategy, as perceived by the West, has been linked to Russia’s actions in Ukraine and its alleged interference in the 2016 U.S. elections. The approach, characterized by ambiguity and a mix of military and non-military tactics, has been effective in creating confusion and difficulty in responding effectively. This has led to debates about the effectiveness of such strategies in achieving long-term strategic goals​​​​​​.

Critical Viewpoint: Critics of the Western interpretation argue that the focus on the “Gerasimov Doctrine” might lead to misunderstandings of Russian strategy. They suggest that Western analysts have projected their interpretations onto Gerasimov’s comments, which in reality were an analysis of Western military tactics. Furthermore, they argue that the emphasis on non-military means does not diminish the role of traditional military power, as evidenced by Russia’s actions in Syria and the development of its military capabilities​​​​​​.

Conclusion: The “Gerasimov Doctrine,” as understood in the West, represents a comprehensive blend of military and non-military strategies to achieve political objectives, often through creating ambiguity and confusion. However, this interpretation is contested, with many arguing that it misrepresents Russian military thought and that Gerasimov’s statements were more an analysis of Western methods than a declaration of Russian strategy. The debate highlights the complexities and challenges in understanding and responding to contemporary forms of warfare that blend political, informational, and military tactics.

To create a tabletop outline of the mechanics of the “Gerasimov Doctrine” as perceived in Western analysis, we can structure it in phases and components, focusing on its implementation strategy. It’s important to note that this outline is based on Western interpretations and may not accurately reflect official Russian military strategy or doctrine.

Tabletop Outline: “Gerasimov Doctrine In Practice”

Phase 1: Preparation

Information Gathering:

• Cyber espionage
• Intelligence operations
• Monitoring political and social landscapes of target countries

Strategic Planning:

• Identifying vulnerabilities (political, economic, social)
• Setting objectives (destabilization, influence, territorial gains)

Phase 2: Soft Power Utilization

Information Warfare:

• Dissemination of propaganda and disinformation
• Amplification of divisive issues through social media and state-backed outlets

Political Subversion:

• Financial and logistical support to sympathetic political parties or groups
• Exploiting and aggravating internal conflicts

Economic Influence:

• Leveraging economic dependencies
• Use of energy resources as political tools

Phase 3: Covert Military Actions

Cyber Operations:

• Attacks on critical infrastructure
• Hacking and data leaks

Use of Proxies and Unmarked Forces:

• Supporting insurgent groups
• Deploying “little green men” (unmarked military personnel)

Hybrid Warfare Tactics:

• Blending conventional and irregular military tactics
• Use of deniable operations and mercenaries

Phase 4: Escalation and Direct Involvement

Military Interventions:

• Limited military engagements
• Special operations forces deployment

Territorial Expansion:

• Annexation of territories (e.g., Crimea)
• Establishment of control zones (e.g., Eastern Ukraine)

Phase 5: Consolidation and Adaptation

Political Engineering:

• Installing sympathetic governments or leaders
• Shaping political narratives to legitimize actions

Long-term Strategy and Adaptation:

• Assessing successes and failures
• Adapting strategies based on responses from international community and internal developments

Supporting Components:

Continuous Media Operations: Consistent use of state media to shape narratives and public opinion.

Diplomatic Maneuvers: Utilizing diplomacy to legitimize actions and divide international responses.

Technological Advancements: Investing in and utilizing emerging technologies (e.g., AI, cyber capabilities) for strategic gains.

Has the Gerasimov Doctrine Been At Play since 2016 Against The U.S. ?

The mechanics outlined above are speculative and based on observed Russian actions in various geopolitical contexts, particularly in Eastern Europe and during the events in Ukraine.

The concept of the “Gerasimov Doctrine” has been a subject of significant discussion and debate, particularly in relation to Russia’s international actions and strategies. It’s important to start by clarifying that the so-called Gerasimov Doctrine is not a formal doctrine or policy outlined by Russia but rather a term coined by Western analysts based on an article written by Russian General Valery Gerasimov. The article, published in 2013, discussed the changing nature of warfare, emphasizing the growing role of non-military means, such as information warfare, in achieving strategic objectives. However, the existence of a cohesive and formalized “Gerasimov Doctrine” is contested by many experts​​​​​​​​.

In relation to the United States, the question is whether Russia has applied principles similar to those outlined in Gerasimov’s article in its dealings with the U.S., especially from 2016 onwards. There is evidence suggesting that Russia has engaged in a multifaceted campaign that aligns with the broader concepts attributed to the Gerasimov Doctrine, particularly in the realm of information warfare and cyber operations.

Social Media Influence and Cyber Operations: The Mueller Report, released in 2019, detailed a comprehensive Russian campaign targeting the United States before, during, and after the 2016 Presidential election. This campaign included social media influence operations led by the Internet Research Agency (IRA), a cyber hacking operation by the Russian military intelligence (GRU), and infiltration operations related to the Trump campaign​​​​​​.

Influence on Public Debate and Political Polarization: The IRA’s operations started as early as 2014, initially focusing on creating impersonation accounts and building audiences around non-political content. By early 2015, they shifted to politically divisive topics, and by 2016, the focus was on influencing the U.S. presidential election, particularly through anti-Clinton and pro-Trump narratives. This campaign managed to reach millions of Americans and significantly influenced public debate and political polarization​​.

Information Warfare Strategy: The strategy used in these operations reflects a significant aspect of what is attributed to the Gerasimov Doctrine – the emphasis on non-military means for achieving strategic goals. The IRA’s operations aimed to sow discord and destabilize the social and political fabric of the United States, a strategy that aligns with the idea of using information space and digital operations to impact real-world events and perceptions​​​​.

In summary, while the term “Gerasimov Doctrine” may not correspond to a formal Russian military doctrine, the strategies and actions of Russia, particularly in relation to its campaign against the United States from 2016 onwards, display characteristics that are in line with the concepts put forth by Valery Gerasimov in the article he penned

Links:

On the “Gerasimov Doctrine”
Why the West Fails to Beat Russia to
the Punch

Getting Gerasimov Right

Hybrid Warfare Helps Russia Level The Playing Field