Russia in Review: December 12, 2018 - January 16, 2019

Russia in Review is a weekly intelligence summary (INTSUM) produced by the Institute for the Study of War (ISW). This ISW INTSUM series sheds light on key trends and developments related to the Russian government’s objectives and its efforts to secure them. Receive future Russia in Review INTSUM products via-email by signing up for the ISW mailing list.

Reporting Period: December 12, 2018 - January 16, 2019

Authors: Catherine Harris, Darina Regio, and Andrea Snyder

Contributor: Matti Suomenaro

Key Takeaway: The Kremlin is creating and exploiting opportunities to advance its campaigns aimed at countering the West in multiple theaters including Ukraine, Belarus, and Syria. Russia will continue to use multiple approaches to weaken pro-Western Ukrainian President Poroshenko ahead of the Ukrainian Presidential Elections on March 31, 2019. Russia will similarly continue to pressure Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko to sign bilateral agreements that expand the Kremlin’s control over Belarus. Russia will also seek to expedite the announced withdrawal of the U.S. from Syria as part of its wider campaign to undermine and replace the U.S. in the Middle East and North Africa.

Russia is attempting to weaken Ukrainian President Poroshenko ahead of the 2019 Ukrainian Presidential Elections. Russia is using multiple instruments of power including military pressure to threaten Ukraine as it approaches a key political milestone that could enable further integration with the West. The Kremlin may have intended to use the threat of a military escalation to coerce Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to implement an extension of martial law that would jeopardize his domestic support and weaken his position ahead of Ukrainian Presidential Elections on March 31, 2019. Poroshenko did not take this bait and allowed martial law to expire on December 26, 2018.[1] The Kremlin will thus likely adapt its approach to create instability in Ukraine. These efforts could include a mixture of military and non-military provocations, ranging from increased cyber-attacks and covert sabotage to a direct military escalation. Russia took one such move with the announced completion of a border fence on the occupied Crimean Peninsula on December 28, 2018.[2] Russia claimed that the fence aims to defend against saboteurs from Ukraine. It could serve other purposes, however. Russia may use its need to secure the fence to justify increased military assets along the southern border of Ukraine – raising costs to the Ukrainian Armed Forces and positioning itself for an unlikely but dangerous option to seize additional terrain in Kherson Oblast in Southern Ukraine. The Institute for the Study of War (ISW) has not yet detected clear evidence of such activities.

The Kremlin may also attempt to disrupt internal stability in Ukraine in order to create security concerns that undermine the Government of Ukraine. Multiple actors have conducted small-scale attacks using grenades across Ukraine since late December 2018.[3] The Ukrainian Security Services (SBU) arrested an individual reportedly planning to conduct a terrorist attack in Mariupol in Southern Ukraine on January 10, 2019.[4] The individual allegedly held ties to the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB). Regardless of attribution, this violence generates problems for Poroshenko that will be exploited by the Kremlin.

Russia is using soft power to strengthen its influence over Belarus. Russian President Vladimir Putin and Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko announced the creation of an intergovernmental working group in late December 2018 tasked with developing bilateral proposals under the framework of the 1999 Russia-Belarus Union Treaty.[5] The Union Treaty envisions a federation-type state with a common military and political structure that will ensure the long-term allegiance of Belarus to Russia.[6] Putin likely leveraged the dominant position of his energy sector to extract this political concession from Lukashenko as previously assessed by ISW in August 2018.[7] Russia is gradually implementing an energy tax reform that will significantly raise the price of its petroleum products for consumers in Belarus.[8] Lukashenko has adamantly asserted that Belarus will remain a sovereign state amid the negotiations with Putin.[9] This rhetoric is likely disingenuous and targeted toward preempting domestic backlash against Lukashenko. Russia will continue to use its economic and political instruments of power to preserve and expand its perceived sphere of influence over Belarus.

Russia will capitalize on the announced withdrawal of the U.S. from Syria to expand its political and military influence in Syria and the wider Middle East. The Kremlin will attempt to expand its role as a mediator in the Syrian Civil War in order to gain critical natural resources and undermine the position of the U.S. in the Middle East. Russia is actively brokering negotiations between Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and the majority-Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) - the primary ground partner of the U.S. Anti-ISIS Coalition in Syria. Russia will nonetheless seek to balance these talks against its ongoing effort to coopt Turkey as a strategic partner and wedge in NATO. Russia hosted a delegation from the SDF in Moscow in late December 2018.[10] The Kremlin likely offered token support to deter an offensive by Turkey against the SDF in Northern Syria. Russian Military Police began conducting joint patrols with the SDF near the contested town of Manbij near the Syrian-Turkish Border on January 10, 2019.[11] Russia nonetheless likely intends only to deter further territorial gains by Turkey in Syria rather than meaningfully defend the SDF. The Kremlin also seeks access to critical oil infrastructure held by the SDF in Eastern Syria that could serve as a source of revenue as well as a base to contest the freedom of maneuver of the U.S. along the Syrian-Iraqi Border. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stressed that Russia ultimately expects Eastern Syria to return to the control of Assad on January 16, 2019. The Kremlin will likely use a combination of military pressure and political incentives to compel the SDF to capitulate to such a deal with Assad. Russia will likely accelerate these efforts if it perceives any delay in the announced withdrawal of the U.S. from Syria.

---
[1] “Poroshenko Ends Martial Law in Ukraine as Tensions with Russia Continue,” Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty, December 26, 2018, https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-ends-martial-law/29677677.html.
[2] “Russia Builds Border Fence Between Crimea and Ukraine Proper,” Al Jazeera, December 28, 2019, www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/12/russia-builds-border-fence-crimea-ukraine-proper-181228145700919.html.
[3] [“An Explosion in Mariupol Apartment: People Died,”] Hromadske, January 6, 2019, https://hromadske(.)ua/posts/u-kvartiri-v-mariupoli-stavsya-vibuh-ye-zagibli; “Two Persons Reportedly Killed in Mariupol Flat Blast,” UNIAN, January 6, 2019, https://www.unian.info/society/10400208-two-persons-reportedly-killed-in-mariupol-flat-blast-photos.html; [“In Ternopol: Grenade Exploded in a Hostel: One Dead, Two Injured,”] Zik Media, January 2, 2019,
https://zik(.)ua/news/2019/01/02/u_ternopoli_v_gurtozhytku_vybuhnula_granata_odyn_zagyblyy_dvoie_travmovanyh_1480977; [“Zaporizhya Police Seized About 280 Grams of Marijuana, Weapons, and Grenades,”] Ukrainian National Police - Zaporizhya Oblast, January 3, 2019,
https://zp.npu.gov(.)ua/news/novini/u-zaporizhzhi-policzejski-viluchili-blizko-280-gramiv-marixuani-zbroyu-ta-granatu; Nova Gorlivka, [“An Explosion on the Bridge in Proletraskiy District,”] Twitter, January 2, 2019, https://twitter.com/NovaGorlivka/status/1080413215744581632.
[4] [“SBU Prevented a Terrorist Act in Mariupol,”] Mariupol Municipality, January 10, 2019, https://www.0629.com(.)ua/news/2269562/v-mariupole-sbu-predotvratila-terakt-foto.
[5] “Meeting With President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko”, Kremlin, December 29, 2018, http://en.kremlin(.)ru/events/president/news/59618.
[6] [“Union Treaty Agreement,”] Information Portal of the Union State Treaty, January 16, 2019, http://www.soyuz(.)by/about/docs/dogovor5.
[7] [“Speech and Answers to Media Questions by Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergey Lavrov During a Press Conference Following Russian Diplomacy Activities in 2018,”] Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, January 16, 2019, www.mid(.)ru/ru/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/3476729.
[8] [“Belarus Might Not Get Compensation for Russian Tax Maneuver,”] Vedomosti, December 14, 2018, https://www.vedomosti(.)ru/business/articles/2018/12/14/789370-belorussiya-mozhet-ne-poluchit-kompensatsiyu.
[9] “Lukashenko: Sovereignty is a Sacred Thing for Belarus,” Belarus News Agency, December 14, 2018, https://eng.belta(.)by/president/view/lukashenko-sovereignty-is-a-sacred-thing-for-belarus-117354-2018.
[10] Elise Labott, “Bolton Leaves Turkey on Sour Note Over Trump’s Syria Plans,” Politico, January 8, 2019, www.politico.com/story/2019/01/08/bolton-turkey-trump-syria-plans-1088715; Matthew Bodner and Zeynep Bilginsoy, “Russian And Turkish Ministers Meet for Syria Talks,” Washington Post, December 29, 2019, www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/russian-and-turkish-ministers-meet-for-syria-talks/2018/12/29/51ef3a30-0b6d-11e9-8942-0ef442e59094_story.html; “Russia to Mediate New Talks Between Syrian Kurds, Damascus: Official,” Rudaw, January 1, 2019, http://www.rudaw.net/english/middleeast/syria/010120191.
[11] “Syria: Russia Military Police Begin Patrols Around Manbij”, Defense Post, January 8, 2019, https://thedefensepost.com/2019/01/08/syria-russia-military-police-manbij-patrols.

Russia's New Tool for Wielding Information

By Mason Clark with Catherine Harris

Key Takeaway: The Kremlin took a significant step to enhance the military’s ability to control the information space within the Russian Armed Forces by establishing a Military-Political Directorate within the Russian Ministry of Defense. This Directorate could also support efforts to shape the information space abroad. The U.S. and NATO must recognize that Russia is serious about integrating information operations with both conventional and unconventional military operations down to the lowest levels of combat and adjust their preparations for potential conflict with Russia accordingly.

The Kremlin is prioritizing conducting and defending against hybrid operations as part of its broader campaign to modernize the Russian Armed Forces. It is reorienting the military away from preparations for large-scale conventional warfare in favor of increased information and hybrid warfare capabilities as well as programs to counter information campaigns that threaten the integrity of its own narratives. Russian Chief of the General Staff Valery Gerasimov has asserted that the transformation of modern warfare has shifted the relative importance of “military and non-military forms of struggle” in determining the political outcome of war. The Russian General Staff argued that this new ratio of “military and non-military forms of struggle” is as high as one-to-four during a research planning conference in 2017. This insight is likely driving much of its modernization campaign.[1] The Institute for the Study of War (ISW) has previously argued that the Kremlin’s prioritization of reforms to military doctrine that incorporate hybrid warfare concepts is reflective of the most likely way it will engage in future conflicts.

The Kremlin is prioritizing the buildout of a new structure to support the cohesiveness of its own information operations. Russian President Vladimir Putin authorized the creation of a Military-Political Directorate within the Russian Ministry of Defense on July 30, 2018. He appointed Colonel General Andrei Valerievich Kartapolov - the former Western Military District Commander and former Chief of Staff of the Russian Forces in Syria - to lead the Directorate.[2] This promotion is a continuation of a pattern of promoting officers with combat experience in Syria to high-level positions in the Russian Ministry of Defense. ISW has previously assessed that Russian commanders in Syria hold significant influence in the development of the Russian Armed Forces. Kartapolov’s reassignment from the critical Western Military District to the Military-Political Directorate demonstrates the importance that this new structure holds in the overall modernization effort and therefore the likely trajectory of the future style of warfare practiced by Russia.

The Kremlin will integrate officers reporting to the Military-Political Directorate into all units of the Russian Armed Forces in a parallel command structure perceived to be suited to modern conflicts. Russian Ministry of Defense Public Council Deputy Chairman Alexander Kanashin articulated the official goals of the new Directorate on February 5, 2018.[3] Kanashin stated that the Directorate will integrate personnel into military units down to company-level as a separate command chain to manage “the moral and ideological component” in the Russian Armed Forces.[4] He argued that the “role of political and moral unity within the army and society drastically grows” in modern “conditions of a global information and psychological confrontation.”[5] Russia has not had political officers in its military since the collapse of the Soviet Union. The USSR integrated political officers throughout its military to ensure compliance with the Communist Party. The apparent reestablishment of these structures indicates that the Kremlin is concerned with ensuring military personnel act in accordance with its objectives. The Kremlin’s emphasis on countering enemy propaganda suggests that it is also concerned that external actors could threaten the integrity of its own narratives. The Kremlin will therefore likely use this structure to ensure its externally-focused information campaigns are pervasive throughout all levels of the Russian Armed Forces.

Kartapolov further expanded upon the goals of the Military-Political Directorate in a speech to officer cadets on September 1, 2018. Kartapolov stated that the Directorate would create “patriotic consciousness” throughout the military and carry out “military-patriotic work” with civilian society. He stressed that the Directorate would differ from the Soviet Union due to its lack of integration with a political party. He also stated his intent to integrate military-political training into the curriculum of officer training schools throughout the Russian Armed Forces by March 1, 2019.[6] The Kremlin is thus conducting institutional reform in order to ensure future generations of officers internalize the importance of political adherence to its goals and how to carry them out in the Russian Armed Forces.

The Military-Political Directorate may additionally be responsible for shaping external information campaigns in support of foreign military action by Russia. RBK - an independent news outlet - reported that it acquired an internal planning document that indicated an externally-focused role for the Directorate on September 4, 2018.[7] RBK claimed that the text was confirmed by an unnamed source within the Russian Ministry of Defense. RBK reported that the Directorate will organize “military-political propaganda” and collaborate with the civilian media to promulgate this information. The Kremlin regularly uses state-run media outlets to support its information campaigns and seeks to fully integrate these campaigns with its military lines of effort. This integration will expand its capability to match military actions with propaganda messaging and increase the flexibility of its information campaigns. The Directorate will also assume control over all “departmental media” of the Russian Armed Forces. This centralized control over information-framing will bolster the military’s ability to function in complicated information environments. The Directorate will additionally conduct “counter-propaganda work to protect personnel from negative information and psychological impact” in order to maintain political and moral unity within the Russian Armed Forces.[8] These reported goals are likely correct. Russian generals with command experience in Syria have repeatedly emphasized the importance of expanding their information warfare capabilities.[9] The Directorate will advance the Kremlin’s prioritization of information and hybrid warfare development.

The U.S. and NATO should be actively leveraging the information space against the Russian Armed Forces instead of reacting to information campaigns promulgated by the Kremlin. The Kremlin manipulates the information space in order to create plausible deniability and confusion that obscures its aggressive actions. The Military-Political Directorate’s formation suggests that the Kremlin perceives a vulnerability to similar tactics within its own forces. NATO can seek to exploit this vulnerability by reinforcing its own ability to saturate the information environment with the truth. The U.S. and NATO must also recognize the threat posed by Russia’s efforts to increase the coherence and pervasiveness of its information operations throughout the entire Russian Armed Forces.

---
[1] A.A. Bartosh, [“Friction and Wear in Hybrid War,”] Voennaya Mysl’, January 2018, https://dlib.eastview.com/browse/doc/50268190.
[2] [“The Russian Army Recreates Political Control,”] Meduza, July 30, 2018, https://meduza(.)io/news/2018/07/30/v-rossiyskoy-armii-vossozdali-politicheskoe-upravlenie.
[3] [“The Governing Political Body Will Be Recreated in the Russian Army,”] Interfax, February 5, 2018, https://www.interfax(.)ru/russia/598553.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Ibid.
[6] [“Deputy Defense Minister Named the Main Tasks of the New Military-Political Bodies of the RF Armed Forces,”] TASS, September 1, 2018, https://tass(.)ru/armiya-i-opk/5514456.
[7] [“’Propaganda Against Extremism’: What Shoygu’s Political Department Will Do,”] RBK, September 4, 2018, https://www.rbc(.)ru/politics/04/09/2018/5b8d247d9a79478151f3fc2d; [“RBK: Military-Political Management of the Ministry of Defense Will Deal with the Fight Against Extremism and Propaganda,”] Kommersant, September 4, 2018, https://www.kommersant(.)ru/doc/3731784; [“RBK Spoke About the Main Tasks of the Political Department of the Ministry of Defense,”] Vedemosti, September 4, 2018, https://www.vedomosti(.)ru/politics/news/2018/09/04/779830-politupravleniya-minoboroni.
[8] [“’Propaganda Against Extremism’: What Shoygu’s Political Department Will Do,”] RBK, September 4, 2018,
https://www.rbc(.)ru/politics/04/09/2018/5b8d247d9a79478151f3fc2d.
[9] A.V. Dvornikov, [“Headquarters for New Wars,”] Voyenno-Promyshlennyy Kur'yer, July 23, 2018, https://vpk-news(.)ru/articles/43971; A.P. Lapin, [“Syrian Academy,”] Voyenno-Promyshlennyy Kur'yer, April 24, 2018, https://vpk-news(.)ru/articles/42359.

Syria Situation Report: December 13, 2018 - January 9, 2019

By ISW's Syria Team and Syria Direct

The following graphic marks the latest installment of the Syria Situation Report (SITREP) Map made possible through a partnership between the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) and Syria Direct. The map depicts significant developments in the war in Syria during the period December 13, 2018 - January 9, 2019.

Click image to enlarge.

Russia and Iran Prepare For New Syria Battlefield

By Matti Suomenaro, Samantha Leathley, and Aaron Hesse with Christopher Kozak

Key Takeaway: Russia and Iran have begun to exploit the new strategic environment created by the forthcoming withdrawal of the U.S. from Syria (map). Russia, Iran, and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad mobilized additional units to the Middle Euphrates River Valley in Eastern Syria in late December 2018.[1] These reinforcements - which included elite units of the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) as well as elements of the Russian Armed Forces - are postured to cross the Euphrates River and seize valuable oil-rich terrain currently held by the U.S. Anti-ISIS Coalition and allied Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). Russia and Assad also deployed reinforcements to block an imminent offensive by Turkey against the SDF in Manbij in Northern Syria on December 28. These deployments are not included in this graphic’s field of view. The Russo-Iranian Coalition likely intends to deter further gains by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan while it engineers a political reconciliation between the SDF and Damascus.

The Russo-Iranian Coalition is also using the announced withdrawal to coopt partners and allies of the U.S. in Syria and Iraq. The SDF has recognized that it cannot withstand combined pressure from Russia, Iran, Syria, and Turkey without the support of the U.S. Anti-ISIS Coalition. It has reopened talks - albeit from a weaker bargaining position - regarding a diplomatic resolution with Assad. It has also called for further pro-regime deployments to secure the Syrian-Turkish Border. The ultimate outcome of these negotiations will likely include the handover of large parts of Northern and Eastern Syria to the Russo-Iranian Coalition. Meanwhile, concerns over border security have also drawn Iraq closer to the Russo-Iranian Coalition. Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mehdi dispatched a high-ranking delegation led by Iran-friendly Iraqi National Security Advisor Falih al-Fayyadh to Damascus on December 30. Assad authorized Iraq to conduct unilateral cross-border airstrikes against ISIS in Syria. Russia and Iran will likely attempt to encourage these deepening ties as yet another vector to increase their influence over the Government of Iraq and develop regional power projection capability at the expense of the U.S. in the Middle East.

The map below depicts the Russo-Iranian Coalition’s known positions in Eastern Syria and Western Iraq as of January 3, 2019. The graphic has also been updated to depict positions held by the SAA and Iraqi Security Forces (ISF). Position locations are based on information available in open sources reviewed by the Institute for the Study of War. The map does not show positions held by the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) or U.S. Anti-ISIS Coalition.

The following map depicts the Russo-Iranian Coalition's posture on December 19, 2018 -- the day the U.S. announced its impending withdrawal from Syria.

---
[1] “Russia Is at the Forefront Again in Deir Ezzor,” December 24, 2018, https://en(.)deirezzor24.net/russia-is-at-the-forefront-again-in-deir-ezzor/?fbclid=IwAR01gRtRDLK1WQJVEPFZ_h2I0a3dScL1liufIoJLdmofhcTKHAT1PSUeDro; Euphrates Post, Twitter, December 22, 2018, https://twitter.com/EuphratesPost/status/1076694931983552517.

Warning Update: Russian Preparations for Military Operations in Ukraine Continue

By Catherine Harris, Frederick W. Kagan, Kimberly Kagan, and the ISW Russia Team

Russia continues to build up and prepare its military forces for possible offensive operations against Ukraine from the Crimean Peninsula and the east. The Institute for the Study of War (ISW) has been warning that Russia could conduct such operations at short notice since December 11, 2018. It remains impossible to assess whether Russian President Vladimir Putin has decided to launch an offensive or will do so, or whether the visible military preparations are intended to pressure Ukraine and its partners without escalating to additional open conflict. The data suggests that Putin is preparing to attack, although alternative interpretations are possible. One can make reasoned arguments about why it would be unwise for him to attack now (or, indeed, at all). The West should nevertheless focus first on the data itself and the risks that flow from it, rather than on reasoning about Putin’s intentions.

Since ISW’s last warning on December 17, 2018, ISW has observed the following additional data points:

• 19 DEC: Russia is moving military convoys north on the Simferopol-Armyansk highway toward the border between Kherson Oblast’ in Ukraine and Crimea. These convoys include artillery, armored personnel carriers, trucks and a field kitchen. The correspondent of RFE/RL in Crimea observed these convoys moving on December 19 in the village of Pervomayskoye roughly 30 miles from the border with the Ukrainian mainland. ISW cannot assess the sizes of these movements at this time. 

• 20 DEC: Russia is increasing its information campaign to frame Ukraine as the military aggressor should Putin decide to invade. Russian officials, including Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, the Foreign Ministry spokesperson, and the head of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service, are continuing to warn about an imminent Ukrainian attack on Russia-backed separatists in Eastern Ukraine and on the Kherson-Crimea Oblast border at the end of December 2018.[1] This propaganda effort could serve multiple purposes. The Russians may be intending fabricate a threat to rally separatist forces to escalate in eastern Ukraine in order to distract from Russia’s main effort north of Crimea. The Kremlin may also be attempting to frame Ukraine as the main aggressor ahead of a Russia-backed provocation in order to obfuscate blame. 

• 21 DEC: Unidentified Russian submarines of the Black Sea Fleet conducted planned drills in the Black Sea to practice covert movements while submerged.[2] The crew of one submarine carried out separation from surveillance while the crew of another one maintained surveillance as long as possible. The crews attempted to maneuver as covertly as possible during the submerged position. 

• 21 DEC: A Reuters witness spotted a Russian missile frigate 1.5 km off the coast moving from Feodosia towards the Sea of Azov. A helicopter was visible on-board. 

• 22 DEC: Russia shifted 'more than a dozen Su-27 and Su-30 fighter jets' to Belbek Airbase near Sevastopol, Crimea according to an unidentified 'Reuters witness.' The Russian Ministry of Defense had announced on 17 DEC that it would relocate ten Su-27SM and Su-30M2 fighter jets from Krymsk airfield in Krasnodar Territory to the Belbek airfield in Crimea.[3]

These data points are consistent with preparations for an attack from the northern Crimean Peninsula toward the Dnepr River near the city of Kherson. Such an attack could be intended to seize the canal supplying fresh water to Crimea, which Ukraine has blocked since the 2014 Russian invasion. Putin would likely unjustifiably claim the right to invade to stop a humanitarian crisis resulting from the blockage of the canal. Such a claim has no legal validity since Crimea remains legally part of Ukraine over which Russia has no rights, and thus the status of the canal is, in law, an entirely internal Ukrainian matter. Accepting Putin’s justification would ipso facto accept the legality of the Russian annexation of Crimea.

A Russian occupation of Kherson would allow Russian forces to interfere with—and possibly cut off—ship movement into and out of Mykolaiv, one of Ukraine’s most important ports and shipbuilding centers. Such a development, together with the illegal seizure of Sevastopol and aggression around the Kerch Strait, would leave Ukraine only a single major port (Odesa) outside the Russian area of military influence.

Russian and proxy forces remain poised on Ukraine’s eastern border, near the contested port city of Mariupol and to its north, although ISW has not noted any further major military movements in this area, apart from mining activities and reports of the deployment of an additional sniper unit into this area.[4] It is possible but less likely that Putin could be aiming to seize the areas around this port city, perhaps bypassing the city itself, in an effort to establish control over the coastline along the Sea of Azov.

The risk of Russian offensive operations in the last week of December is modestly mitigated by weather. The weather for the next few days appears marginal for an air-ground operation of the sort that would likely be needed for Russian forces to take Kherson, with temperatures forecast to be between 21 and 35 degrees Fahrenheit with periods of rain and snow showers.

The disadvantages of weather are temporary. The well-known challenges of fighting in Russia in the winter largely do not apply to southern Ukraine. Rostov-na-Donu, home of the largest concentrations of Russian conventional military power in the region, is roughly 600 miles south of Moscow. The region’s position on the ocean tempers its climate further, compared to the bitter cold of interior Russia. Frozen ground, even with snow, allows rapid armored movements. The Soviets launched the World War II Battle of Stalingrad, 250 miles northeast of Rostov-na-Donu, in late November 1942 and continued it in subsequent operations through February 1943. The principal climatological challenge of fighting in Ukraine is not winter but the spring thaw, which turns vast areas into deep mud. If Putin intends to invade southern Ukraine, climatological considerations would cause him either to move during winter itself or after the thaw.

The U.S., NATO countries, and the international community have taken some steps to attempt to deter Russian aggression in Ukraine following the Russians’ illegal seizure of Ukrainian coast guard ships off the Kerch Strait on November 25, 2018. The United Kingdom is sending HMS Echo to the Black Sea, increasing port visits and protecting freedom of navigation. And the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution on December 17, 2018 calling for Russia to withdraw its armed forces from Crimea and another on December 22, 2018 reaffirming the UN’s position that Crimea is Ukrainian territory and condemning Russian human rights violations during its unlawful occupation of the peninsula. It is possible that Putin is conducting a show of force in response to that resolution, although the buildup is somewhat more extensive and expensive than pure posturing warrants.

ISW therefore assesses that Russia has the capability to go on the offensive in Ukraine imminently and is conducting military maneuvers consistent with that intent.

---
[1] “Lavrov Discusses Ukraine’s Plans to Instigate a Provocation on the Border with Crimea in December” (https://www(.)kommersant.ru/doc/3833809)
[2] “Russian submarines conducting drills off coast of occupied Crimea”
(https://www(.)unian.info/war/10386630-russian-submarines-conducting-drills-off-coast-of-occupied-crimea.html)
[3] “More than 10 Fighters Transferred to Crimea” (https://www(.)kommersant.ru/doc/3833957?from=hotnews)
[4] “Russia sends Chechen snipers to positions outside Ukrainian-controlled Mariupol” (https://www(.)unian.info/war/10380195-russia-sends-chechen-snipers-to-positions-outside-ukrainian-controlled-mariupol.html)

The Looming Vacuum in Syria

By the ISW Research Team

Key Takeaway: Russia and Iran are poised to exploit the U.S. withdrawal from Syria announced by U.S. President Donald Trump on December 19. They and their proxies hold positions along the Syrian-Iraqi Border surrounding areas that the U.S. Anti-ISIS Coalition and allied Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) currently hold. Russia and Iran will undoubtedly attempt to fill the security vacuum left behind by the U.S. in Eastern Syria. The Russo-Iranian Coalition is nonetheless stretched thin and likely cannot secure this new terrain without opening exploitable vulnerabilities for ISIS and Al-Qaeda in Syria and Iraq. Turkey and other regional actors will also likely attempt to exploit this opening to compete for terrain and influence in Syria.

This map depicts the Russo-Iranian Coalition’s known positions in Eastern Syria and Western Iraq as of December 21. Position locations are based on information available in open sources reviewed by the Institute for the Study of War. The map does not depict positions held by the SDF and Iraqi Security Forces (ISF). It also does not include locations held solely by the Syrian Arab Army (SAA).

Map Credit: Matti Suomenaro, Samantha Leathley, and Aaron Hesse

UPDATE: The map below was updated with additional data. See the new map with additional data on deployments as of December 19, 2018 here. A subsequent assessment of the Russo-Iranian coalition's posture in early January 2019 is available here.

ISIS Threat Update - December 2018

By Brandon Wallace with Jennifer Cafarella

The U.S. and its allies have not defeated ISIS in Iraq or Syria. ISIS has fixed the attention of the U.S. Anti-ISIS Coalition on the last remaining territorial pocket of its caliphate even as it regroups in other parts of Syria. ISIS is also reconstituting in its traditional strongholds in Iraq. Current conditions on the ground do not warrant the withdrawal of the U.S. from Syria.

See the previous version of this assessment published in October 2018 here.

ISIS in Syria:

• The U.S. Anti-ISIS Coalition has not yet destroyed the final physical stronghold of ISIS along the Middle Euphrates River Valley in Eastern Syria. ISIS retains control over roughly twenty kilometers of terrain that it uses as a staging ground for counterattacks on the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). The SDF reportedly seized the majority of the town of Hajin on December 14. The urban center remains contested and partner forces were only able to progress after an intense and sustained air campaign by the U.S. Anti-ISIS Coalition.[1]
• ISIS is intensifying its campaign to destabilize Ar-Raqqa City – its de facto former capital and the nucleus for reconstruction efforts by the U.S.Anti-ISIS Coalition in Northern Syria. ISIS detonated a Vehicle-Borne Improvised Explosive Device (VBIED) in Ar-Raqqa City on November 4. The blast marked the first such attack in Ar-Raqqa City since its seizure by the SDF and U.S. Anti-ISIS Coalition in October 2017. ISIS has expanded the support zones where it enjoys freedom of movement in rural Ar-Raqqa Province.
• ISIS still retains a support zone in the rural desert of Central Syria. ISIS scattered its fighters into Eastern Homs Province after the conclusion of a pro-regime offensive on the Al-Safa Region on the Syrian-Jordanian Border on November 17. The Syrian Arab Army (SAA) claimed to defeat ISIS in Al-Safa while activists reported that ISIS had evacuated under a deal brokered by Russia.[2] ISIS likely maintains access to the Syrian-Jordanian and Syrian-Iraqi Borders as well as the key crossroads town of Palmyra in Central Syria.
• ISIS has also expanded its support zone in the rural desert near Abu Kamal in Southern Deir ez-Zour Province. ISIS has relied upon a dense network of caves and tunnels as well as the transfer of reinforcements from the Al-Safa Region of Southern Syria in November 2018. ISIS has thus far conducted only limited operations near Abu Kamal but it could threaten key oil infrastructure such as the T2 and T3 Pumping Stations in Central Syria.

ISIS in Iraq:

• ISIS has built upon its support and attack zones near Mosul in Northern Iraq. ISIS detonated a VBIED in Mosul on November 8. The blast marked the first such attack in Mosul since its seizure by Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) and the U.S. Anti-ISIS Coalition in July 2017. ISIS had previously demonstrated its regenerating capabilities with additional VBIEDs in Southern Ninewa Province on October 23, Kirkuk City on October 13, and Northern Salah ad-Din Province on September 12. ISIS has also sustained its assassination campaign targeting Sunni tribal leaders near Mosul. The cell responsible for this campaign is likely based in a support zone in the Adayah Foothills southwest of Mosul.
• ISIS is consolidating its durable support zone in Northern Diyala Province. ISIS expanded its attack zone northeast of Lake Hamrin near Khanaqin on the Iraqi-Iranian Border. ISIS has also raided villages around the triangle formed by Qara Tapah, Jalula, and Khanaqin. The ISF remains largely fixed in a static military base in Sadiyah south of Jalula.[3] The ISF failed to secure this area during celebrations of Arbaeen by Iraqi Shi’a in October 2018.[4]
• ISIS is resurging in the Western Baghdad Belts. ISIS has sustained an assassination campaign targeting Sunni tribal leaders west of Baghdad despite clearing operations by the ISF and Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF). ISIS also detonated a VBIED in Fallujah on October 6. The blast marked the first such attack in Fallujah since its seizure by the ISF and U.S. Anti-ISIS Coalition in June 2016.

---

[1] “Continuous Clashes Between SDF and ISIS in Areas Within the Last Enclave East of Euphrates,” Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, November 19, 2018, http://www(.)syriahr.com/en/?p=109523.

[2]  “After the Deal of Handing Over the Kidnapped People, Hundreds of ISIS Members Vanish from Tlul al-Safa After 116 Days of the Deadliest Attack Ever in Al-Suwaida,” Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, November 17, 2018, http://www(.)syriahr.com/en/?p=106885.

[3] [“Leader in the Popular Mobilization Forces Killed During a Security Operation in Diyala,”] Al-Ghad Press, November 18, 2018, https://www(.)alghadpress.com/news/%D8%A3%D8%AE%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%82/183291/%D9%85%D9%82%D8%AA%D9%84-%D9%82%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%AF%D9%8A-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AD%D8%B4%D8%AF-%D8%AE%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%84-%D8%B9%D9%85%D9%84%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%86%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A8%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%89.

[4] Karzan Sulaivany, “Iraqi Police Arrest Suspect Who Tried to Plant Bomb at Security Members Home,” Kurdistan24, October 30, 2018, http://www(.)kurdistan24.net/en/news/3aa4669a-af06-42ac-90ad-82933b30b123.

Russia's Pressure Points on Ukraine

By the ISW Russia Team

Key Takeaway: Russia is expanding the variety of means it uses to threaten Ukraine along multiple borders - from the Sea of Azov and Donbas to Western Ukraine. The Kremlin retains the capability and intent to escalate these threats as necessary in order to challenge the Government of Ukraine. The Kremlin is attempting to inflame religious and social tensions to polarize Ukraine ahead of Ukraine’s 2019 Presidential and Parliamentary Elections. Russia will continue to use all means necessary to advance its long-term objective to reassert its sphere of influence over Ukraine.

Russia continues to bolster its military capabilities on the occupied Crimean Peninsula, including air, naval and anti-access area-denial assets, in order to create a credible deterrent against a potential response by NATO. 

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Russia continues to threaten military escalation and maintain a de-facto blockade of Ukrainian ports in the Sea of Azov. Russia’s likely long-term objective is to gain total control over the Sea of Azov and the port city of Mariupol. The blockade fosters economic grievances among Ukrainians in Berdyansk and Mariupol and is intended to further weaken the fragile Government of Ukraine.

Russia is fueling tensions over the Ukrainian Orthodox Church’s recent acquisition of autonomy from Moscow to polarize Ukraine. Ukrainian officials warned that the Russian Security Services (FSB) are organizing violent demonstrations in Kyiv, Odessa, Kharkiv, Zaporizhia, Kherson, and Mykolayiv Oblasts against the autocephalous status of the Ukrainian Eastern Orthodox Church. Russia however failed in its attempts to disrupt a significant meeting to recognize the Ukrainian Eastern Orthodox Church on December 15. The threat nonetheless remains a pressure point for future relations between Ukraine, Russia, and Turkey.

Russia is preparing its separatist proxies for a potential escalation in Donbas in Eastern Ukraine. The Kremlin is flooding the information space with false warnings that indicate its intentions to spread fear about an upcoming attack. The Russian Foreign Ministry claimed that Ukraine and the West are planning imminent attacks in Donbas. Russian-backed separatists alleged that Ukraine and its allies plan to conduct a chemical weapons attack near separatist-held Eastern Ukraine. Ukrainian Armed Forces Commander Gen. Viktor Muzhenko confirmed a buildup of Russian T-62s along the Russian-Ukrainian Border since October 2018.

Russia is subverting the upcoming elections in Ukraine. The Ukrainian Security Services (SBU) accused Russia of using “troll factories” to interfere in the 2019 Ukrainian Presidential and Parliamentary Elections.

Russia is intensifying its information campaign in Southern Ukraine in order to sow distrust and weaken the legitimacy of the Government of Ukraine. Russian media claimed that Ukraine plans to attack Kherson Oblast near Crimea in Southern Ukraine on December 24 - 25.

Russia is targeting the borders of Western Ukraine. Russia continues to use subversive tools to inflame ethnic tensions and separatist sentiments in Zakharpatiya Oblast in order to drive a wedge between Ukraine and its neighbors in Poland and Hungary. Russia hackers attacked the computer systems of more than one hundred military and state institutions in Western Ukraine on December 14, according to the SBU.

Syria Situation Report: November 29 - December 12, 2018

By ISW's Syria Team and Syria Direct

The following graphic marks the latest installment of the Syria Situation Report (SITREP) Map made possible through a partnership between the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) and Syria Direct. The map depicts significant developments in the war in Syria during the period November 29 - December 12, 2018.

Click image to enlarge.

Russia Sees Opportunity in Europe's Crises

By Jason Zhou with the ISW Russia Team

Key Takeaway: Russia is poised to escalate its campaign in Ukraine at a time when domestic crises, partly fueled by the Kremlin, distract key U.S. allies in Europe. America’s three most important allies in NATO - France, Germany, and the United Kingdom - face ongoing political instability even as events in Eastern Europe divert the attention of NATO. These crises all have domestic roots, but nearly all of them are being fanned or influenced by the Kremlin. The crises occupy the attention of critical political leaders in NATO and have already contributed to weak responses by NATO and the EU to Russia’s aggression in the Kerch Strait. Russian President Vladimir Putin likely calculates that crucial NATO leaders are currently too weak and preoccupied with domestic affairs to respond meaningfully to further escalation. This calculus increases the likelihood that Putin may commit additional acts of aggression, such as the seizure of additional territory in Eastern Ukraine.

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Update (December 14, 2018): The text for the fourth point in the map has been updated to reflect a significant development in Kosovo's Parliament.

Turkey Brief: November 27 - December 12, 2018

Turkey Brief is a biweekly intelligence summary (INTSUM) produced by the Institute for the Study of War (ISW). This ISW INTSUM series sheds light on key trends and developments related to the Turkish government’s objectives and its efforts to secure them.

Reporting Period: November 27 - December 12, 2018

Authors: Elizabeth Teoman with Paul Becker and Kieran Hatton

Key Takeaway: Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is unlikely to meaningfully challenge Russia’s increasing aggression in the Black Sea despite its harm to the interests of both Turkey and NATO. He is instead remaining effectively neutral in order to preserve a cooperative relationship with the Kremlin that provides him economic benefits and freedom of action in Syria. Erdogan’s effective neutrality in the Black Sea is a boon to Russian President Vladimir Putin, who is currently prepared to launch a renewed ground offensive against Ukraine.

Turkey is unlikely meaningfully to contest Russia’s recent aggression in the Black Sea. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been muted in response to Russia’s illegal attack against the Ukrainian Navy in the Kerch Strait on November 25. Russia’s aggression is a threat to the sovereign rights of Turkey in the Black Sea. Erdogan has nonetheless prioritized high-level diplomatic engagement over a military response. He urged de-escalation in separate phone calls with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, and U.S. President Donald Trump on November 28. He later attempted but failed to mediate the release of the Ukrainians detained by the Kremlin.[1] Erdogan also ordered small-scale military exercises to reassure his population. The Turkish Navy began a limited three-day naval drill in the Black Sea on December 11.[2] It also will hold recurring small-scale exercises in the Dardanelles Strait throughout December 2018. These maneuvers are too limited in scope and scale to deter Russia.

Erdogan is likely unwilling to jeopardize his deepening bilateral relationship with the Kremlin by counter-escalating in the Black Sea. Turkey and Russia are jointly constructing the TurkStream natural gas Pipeline under the Black Sea. TurkStream grants greater leverage to Erdogan as a key energy transit hub to Europe while diversifying the export options available to Putin. Turkey also has a vested economic interest in the continued flow of commercial shipping to Ukraine and Russia via the Kerch Strait. Turkey remains heavily dependent on trade and tourism from Russia. Turkey similarly relies upon Russia to protect its freedom of action against the Syrian Kurdish YPG in Syria as well as to uphold a delicate demilitarized zone in al Qaeda-dominated Idlib Province. Erdogan may also doubt that NATO will fully support him in a confrontation with Russia in the Black Sea. His effective neutrality in the latest crisis is a boon for Putin, who is currently prepared to launch a renewed ground offensive against Ukraine.

Erdogan nonetheless hopes to retain a growing relationship with Ukraine despite his unwillingness to confront Russia over the Kerch Strait. Erdogan has forged closer economic, diplomatic, and defense ties with Ukraine since 2014. He has repeatedly reaffirmed support for the territorial integrity of Ukraine.[3] Erdogan seeks to expand his indigenous defense industry through greater technology exchange with Ukraine. He also likely supported the recent decision of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople to grant autonomy to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church on October 11. The Russian Orthodox Church in response severed ties with Constantinople. He has also preserved a historic cultural patronage of Ukraine’s Turkic Crimean Tatars - a population resistant to Russia’s illegal occupation of the Crimean Peninsula. Erdogan actively intervened to secure the release of two leading Crimean Tatars from Russia in October 2017. His government also plans to construct a Crimean Tatar Cultural Center in Kiev by 2019. Erdogan will likely sustain these lines of effort in order to counterbalance against Russia in the Black Sea.

---
[1] [“Response from Peskov to Erdogan: We Are Grateful But There Is No Need,”] Sputnik, November 29, 2018, https://tr(.)sputniknews.com/rusya/201811291036386530-peskov-erdogan-sorusuna-yanit/.
[2] [“Safety of Navigation,”] Turkish Naval Forces Office of Navigation, Hydrography, and Oceanography, December 10, 2018, http://www(.)shodb.gov.tr/shodb_esas/index.php/en/safety-of-navigation/navigational-warnings/all-stations/20-all-stations/samsun-navtex-station/1712-turnhos-n-w-1252-18.
[3] [“Visit of Minister of Foreign Affairs Mevlut Cavusoglu in Milan to Attend OSCE 25th Council of Ministers Meeting, 6-7 December 2018,”] Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, December 7, 2018, http://www(.)mfa.gov.tr/disisleri-bakani-mevlut-cavusoglu-nun-agit-25-inci-bakanlar-konseyi-toplantisi-na-katilimi-6-7-aralik-2018.tr.mfa.

Russia in Review: Russia Poised to Escalate Ukraine Campaign

Russia in Review is a weekly intelligence summary (INTSUM) produced by the Institute for the Study of War (ISW). This ISW INTSUM series sheds light on key trends and developments related to the Russian government’s objectives and its efforts to secure them. Receive future Russia in Review INTSUM products via-email by signing up for the ISW mailing list.

Special Topic Update: Russia Poised to Escalate Ukraine Campaign

Author: Catherine Harris, Mason Clark, and Nicole Geis with the ISW Research Team

Key Takeaway: Russia will likely escalate militarily against Ukraine imminently. Russia is setting military conditions to prepare its forces for open conflict with Ukraine. Russia is already creating the pretext to escalate by circulating the false narrative that Ukraine and the West are preparing imminent attacks, including a chemical weapons attack, in Eastern Ukraine. Russia may fabricate evidence of a chemical weapons attack – or may itself conduct a chemical weapons attack -- near Russia-backed areas of Ukraine to create chaos, justify the overt involvement of the Russian Armed Forces, and set conditions for future military operations. NATO’s inaction following Russia’s escalation in the Sea of Azov is likely emboldening Putin to continue challenging the West in Ukraine. NATO must reassess the threat that Russia poses to European security and the rules-based international order and respond decisively to deter an increasingly likely Russian military escalation in Ukraine itself.

Russia is taking overt steps towards open conflict with Ukraine. Russia has been waging a covert war against Ukraine using proxy separatist forces in eastern Ukraine since 2014. The Russian military is now preparing its forces for direct military involvement. The Kremlin is reinforcing ground, naval, and air elements in its Southern Military District - the command likely responsible for managing its ongoing war in Ukraine. Moscow may calculate that the international community will not meaningfully respond if the visibility of its role in the war now increases.

• Ground: Russia reportedly transferred an additional mechanized regiment to the 150th Motor Rifle Division (MRD) on December 2.[1] The 150th MRD is a uniquely tank-heavy unit subordinate to the 8th Combined-Arms Army located 20-30 kilometers from the Russian-Ukrainian border. ISW previously assessed that the 150th MRD could support a ground advance by Russia along the northern coast of the Sea of Azov if the Kremlin launched a large-scale offensive against Ukraine. The Kremlin has also increased the number of armored vehicles along the Russian-Ukrainian border. Ukrainian Armed Forces Commander General Viktor Muzhenko has publicly warned of a significant buildup of Russian T-62M Main Battle Tanks along the Russian-Ukrainian border that had occurred by October 2018. ISW had previously warned about this mobilization in September 2018. 

• Air: Russia is likely integrating additional airmobile units into existing units in the Southern Military District (SMD). SMD Commander Colonel General Aleksandr Dvornikov announced earlier this year that new airmobile units would begin training with naval infantry in the Black Sea Fleet and Caspian Flotilla beginning in December 2018.[2] It is not yet clear if these units have begun their training missions. 

• Sea: Russia is also bolstering the capabilities of its Black Sea Fleet. Russia added a new corvette equipped with cruise missiles to the Black Sea Fleet on December 7.[3] Russia is expected to add four additional warships including patrol boats and minesweepers to the Black Sea Fleet by the start of 2019.[4] Russia also conducted naval and missile drills involving two submarines and Pantsir Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (SAMS) in the Black Sea and Crimean Peninsula on December 5. 

Russia may also be preparing its Central Military District to support the Southern Military District in a conflict. Russia began snap preparations for its “Center-2019” military exercise on December 1.[5] These exercises will not take place until September 2019.[6] This early start to the exercises is atypical and may signal preparation for open conflict with Ukraine under the auspices of military exercises. Russia has previously used military exercises as cover to prepare for offensive operations. The initial phase of the Center-2019 exercise includes “moving from peace to wartime posture” and moving supplies and field hospitals to aid potential casualties in combat. Russian units conducted these exercises in the Volga region northeast of the Southern Military District.[7] Russia may intend to use resources in the Central Military District to support the Southern Military District in rear areas. Alternatively, Russia may be attempting to deter a Ukrainian military response to Russia’s escalation against Ukraine in the Sea of Azov on November 24-25. Russia may however calculate that conditions are set such that Russia should escalate now.

Russia may be preparing to fabricate or launch a chemical weapons attack in Ukraine in order to create a false pretext to escalate against Ukraine. Russia is currently flooding the information space with multiple narratives to alarm the local population in Ukraine and frame the West as the aggressor likely in order to set conditions for a future escalation by Russia. One Kremlin narrative claims that Western personnel are preparing to conduct a chemical weapons attack in territory currently controlled by Russia-backed separatists.[8] A spokesperson from the Russia-backed separatist region of the Donetsk People’s Republic (DNR) claims that the Ukrainian Armed Forces will launch an assault on Mariupol on December 14. These false narratives may represent efforts by Russia to create a false justification for anticipated overt military involvement. This fabrication would be consistent with recent Russian provocations in Syria. Russia and the Syrian regime fabricated a chemical weapons attack in Syria on November 24. Russia responded to this fabricated chemical weapons attack with Russian airstrikes. The U.S. condemned Russia and the Assad regime for this fabrication but did not meaningfully respond. The Kremlin may therefore calculate that it can use the same play in Ukraine at this time.

Putin may seek to create a military distraction for Poroshenko’s government in order to disrupt an upcoming meeting that will formally announce the autocephalous status of the Ukrainian Orthodox church on December 15 in Kyiv. Ukraine’s recent autocephaly represents a loss of social influence that Russia formerly held over Ukraine. Putin may be attempting to cause widespread hysteria before the meeting in order to menace Ukraine and undermine its efforts to distance Ukraine from Russia. Russia may also seek to circulate these narratives to frame Ukraine as the aggressor ahead of a vote at the UN General Assembly to formally condemn Russian militarization of Crimea, the Sea of Azov, and the Black Sea on December 17. Russia is nonetheless demonstrating that it is preparing to engage Ukraine in open conflict.

Russia likely perceives the lack of a unified NATO response to Moscow’s aggression in the Sea of Azov as an opportunity to escalate against Ukraine and elsewhere in the future. NATO failed to agree on a unified course of action in response to Russia’s escalation in the Kerch Strait during a foreign ministerial meeting on December 4-5. Moreover, NATO member-states are signaling different degrees of concern over overt Russian escalation. None of the responses are likely sufficient to deter Putin, whereas the disagreement itself will likely embolden him.

• United States: The U.S. has demonstrated the strongest response to Russia’s aggression, though it is likely insufficient to deter further offensive action by Russia in Ukraine. U.S. Commander of EUCOM and Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) General Scaparrotti will meet with Russian Chief of the General Staff Valery Gerasimov in Azerbaijan on December 12.[9] The U.S. is attempting to constrain Russia and prevent it from making future illegal claims to other bodies of water. The U.S. is preparing the option of sending a warship, likely from the 6th Fleet, to the Black Sea in coordination with Turkey in a likely effort to deter Russia from expanding its aggression into the Black Sea. The United States also conducted a freedom of navigation exercise in the Sea of Japan near the Russia-claimed Kuril Islands on December 5 in a move that U.S. officials called a direct challenge to Russian naval activity in the Pacific theater. This U.S. maneuver follows Russia’s announcement that it will pass legislation requiring foreign ships to notify the Kremlin before traversing the Northern Sea Route in 2019.[10] The U.S. with allies also conducted a flight over Ukraine under the Open Skies Treaty to reaffirm support for Ukraine and European nations on December 6. 

• European Union: The EU will likely fail to pass additional sanctions on Russia. The UK called for the EU to enact “appropriate sanctions” in response to Russian aggression, though this effort will be unsuccessful. France and Germany have signaled their unwillingness to impose further sanctions on Russia and their preference to pursue a diplomatic solution to the escalation. French officials are furthermore currently distracted by large-scale protests in France that may be partially fueled by Russian disinformation.[11]

• Turkey: Ankara is attempting to demonstrate Turkish resolve in the Black Sea. Turkey is currently conducting live-fire exercises in the southeastern portion of the Black Sea from December 10-14 and recently announced recurring small-scale exercises in the Dardanelles Strait throughout December.[12]

Russia will continue to divert attention away from Russia’s escalating pattern to undermine a stronger NATO response. Putin will likely use a mixture of incentives and pressures on Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to increase the likelihood that Erdogan will not meaningfully challenge a future escalation by Russia against Ukraine. Russia likely already initiated this effort in the Syrian theater. Russia conducted airstrikes within hundreds of meters of a Turkish military position in Western Aleppo Province, Syria under the false pretext of retaliating against anti-Assad forces for using chemical weapons on November 26. Russia may have intended to use this set of airstrikes to test international reactions to a fabricated chemical weapons attack; to compel Turkey to back down in the Black Sea; and to divert international attention away from its military escalation against Ukraine and toward an alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria. The Kremlin will also likely use subversive methods to fuel protests in France and possibly other NATO member-states in order to create distractions and divert resources away from a future escalation by Russia.

The U.S. and NATO must be increasingly prepared for an emboldened Russia to escalate in multiple theaters. Russia has previously demonstrated its ability to simultaneously escalate its various malign campaigns against the West in multiple theaters. Russia likely feels more emboldened to do so at this time following NATO’s inaction. NATO must therefore be prepared for Russia to escalate in Ukraine but also in other theaters, such as Syria. ISW has repeatedly warned that Russia, Assad, and Iran are setting military conditions to ultimately expel the U.S.-led coalition from Eastern Syria. Russia may accelerate both of these efforts simultaneously in a most dangerous scenario. NATO must prioritize deterring an increasingly aggressive Russia in order to maintain the resolve of the NATO alliance and uphold the rules-based international order.

---
[1] Daria Mikhalina, [“A new regiment Formed As part of the 150th Motorized Rifle Division Near Rostov”,] TV Zvezda, December 2, 2018, https://tvzvezda(.)ru/news/forces/content/201812021804-73o7.htm
[2] [“Shoigu Stated Strategic Exercises “Tsentr-2019” Will Be Held in September”,] Rambler, December 4, 2018,
https://news.rambler((.))ru/army/41371557-shoygu-anonsiroval-ucheniya-tsentr-2019/
[3] “Russia deploys Latest Cruise Missile Corvette in Occupied Crimea – Media,” Unian, December 10, 2018,
https://www.unian(.)info/politics/10370526-russia-deploys-latest-cruise-missile-corvette-in-occupied-crimea-media.html
[4] “Russia’s Black Sea Fleet to Get Four New Warships,”TASS, December 3, 2018, http://tass(.)com/defense/1033966
[5] Central MD Troops to Start Tarining for Tsentr 2018 CPX on December 1,” Russian MOD, November 30, 2018, http://eng.mil(.)ru/en/news_page/country/more.htm?id=12206225@egNews
[6] [“Shoigu Announced Strategic Exercises “Center” in 2019”,] MKRU, December 4, 2018, https://www.mk(.)ru/politics/2018/12/04/shoygu-anonsiroval-provedenie-v-2019-godu-strategicheskikh-ucheniy-centr.html
[7] [“The Second Army in the Volga Region Received a Rapid Deployment Hospital”,] RIA, July 6, 2018, https://ria(.)ru/20180706/1524084441.html
[8] “Kremlin’s Persistent Claim of “Expected Chemical Attack by Ukraine Armed Forces in Donbas” Worrying -MP,” Unian, December 10, 2018, https://www.unian.info/politics/10370694-kremlin-s-persistent-claim-of-expected-chemical-attack-by-ukraine-armed-forces-in-donbas-worrying-mp.html
[9] “President Ilham Aliyev Received a Delegation Led by the Commander-in-Chief of the NATO Joint Armed Forces in Europe”, Azer Tas, November 12, 2018, https://azertag(.)az/ru/xeber/Prezident_Ilham_Aliev_prinyal_delegaciyu_vo_glave_s_glavnokomanduyushchim_Obedinennymi_vooruzhennymi_silami_NATO_v_Evrope-1223411
[10] “Russia Will Restrict Foreign Warships in Arctic Ocean, Defense Official Syas”, Moscow Times, November 30, 2018, https://themoscowtimes.com/news/russia-will-restrict-foreign-warships-in-arctic-ocean-defense-official-says-63672
[11] “France Opens Probe Into Possible Russian Interference Behind “Yellow Vest” Protests – Media, Unian, December 9, 2018, https://www.unian(.)info/world/10369785-france-opens-probe-into-possible-russian-interference-behind-yellow-vest-protests-media.html
[12] “Gunnery Exercise, Between 10-12 DEC 18,” Turkish Naval Forces Office of Navigation, Hydrography and Oceanography, http://www.shodb.gov(.)tr/shodb_esas/index.php/en/safety-of-navigation/navigational-warnings/all-stations/20-all-stations/samsun-navtex-station/1712-turnhos-n-w-1252-18, “Firing Exercises, between 11-14 DEC 18” Turkish Naval Forces Office of Navigation, Hydrography and Oceanography, http://www.shodb.gov(.)tr/shodb_esas/index.php/en/safety-of-navigation/navigational-warnings/all-stations/20-all-stations/samsun-navtex-station/1719-turnhos-n-w-1256-18

Syria Situation Report: November 8 - 29, 2018

By ISW's Syria Team and Syria Direct

These two graphics mark the latest installment of the Syria Situation Report (SITREP) Map made possible through a partnership between the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) and Syria Direct. The maps depict significant developments in the war in Syria during the period November 8 - 29, 2018.

Map 1: November 8 - 19, 2018
Click image to enlarge.

Map 2: November 19 - 29, 2018
Click image to enlarge.

Russia in Review: Targeting Ukraine to Test the West

Russia in Review is a weekly intelligence summary (INTSUM) produced by the Institute for the Study of War (ISW). This ISW INTSUM series sheds light on key trends and developments related to the Russian government’s objectives and its efforts to secure them. Receive future Russia in Review INTSUM products via-email by signing up for the ISW mailing list.

Special Topic Update: The Kremlin Targets Ukraine to Test the West

Authors: Catherine Harris, Nicole Geis, and Mason Clark

Key Takeaway: Russia conducted a brazen act of war against Ukraine in the Sea of Azov on November 25. The Russian Coast Guard fired on Ukrainian naval vessels and detained their crews in violation of multiple international laws including the Geneva Convention. This escalation is part of a broader deliberate campaign by Russia to test the resolve of the U.S. and NATO, and identify the thresholds at which Russia can conduct aggressive actions against its neighbors without suffering consequences from the West. Russia is waging this campaign across multiple theaters and multiple domains, and its campaign is escalating. The lack of a meaningful response to this act of war by the U.S. and NATO will only encourage further escalation by Russia. The U.S. and NATO must respond decisively to send a strong message to our adversaries and uphold the modern rules-based international order which has prevented large-scale state warfare for decades.

The Kremlin learned that it can commit overt acts of war against its neighbors without a meaningful response from NATO. The Russian Security Services (FSB) Coast Guard rammed and opened fire on three vessels of the Ukrainian Navy attempting to transit from Odesa in Western Ukraine to Mariupol in Eastern Ukraine via the Sea of Azov on November 25. The Ukrainian Security Service (SBU) also claims that Russia fired on the vessels with attack helicopters and fighter aircraft, suggesting the involvement of the conventional Russian Armed Forces.[1] The FSB ultimately seized the vessels and seized their crews as de facto prisoners of war. This aggressive act marks the first publicly acknowledged exchange of fire between the uniformed military personnel of Russia and Ukraine since Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014. The Kremlin framed its attack as a response to a violation of its borders by Ukraine.[2] However, the Sea of Azov is not Russia’s sovereign territory under international law. Russia has in fact been setting conditions to open the Sea of Azov as a new front in its war against Ukraine since early 2018.

The West is currently understating the severity of this escalation by Russia. NATO officially condemned Russia for its “use of military force” and reiterated its support for the sovereignty of Ukraine but did not emphasize the blatant violation of international law by Russia. U.S. President Donald Trump, U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis, and U.S. Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley among other officials also condemned Russia and alluded to the illegality of its actions but failed to clearly articulate the dangerous implications of this severe violation for the wider international order. Many commentators have raised the specific laws violated by Russia, particularly the 2003 Bilateral Agreement between Russia and Ukraine on the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait and the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).[3] Russia and Ukraine agreed in 2003 that both states can freely maneuver military vessels without advanced notice in the Kerch Strait and Sea of Azov.[4] Meanwhile, Article 38 and Article 44 of UNCLOS defend the free passage of vessels through straits between national borders - such as the Kerch Strait between Ukraine and Russia.[5] Russia’s justification for its escalation rests on the false claim that it is sovereign over the Kerch Strait, which in turn rests on its illegal occupation of the Crimean Peninsula. Any effort to accommodate Russia’s version of events thus de facto legitimizes its forceful annexation of Crimea.

The West has also writ large failed to hold Russia accountable for violations of the Geneva Convention in Ukraine. Russia and Ukraine have been in a state of war since 2014 despite the denials and obfuscation of Russia. Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko’s imposition of martial law after the recent incident in the Kerch Strait demonstrates the degree to which this fact is a truism in Ukraine. Russia thus activated the prisoner of war protections set in the Geneva Conventions with its detention of the crewmen from the Ukrainian Navy. Russia violated these legal rules on two accounts. First, Russia labeled the twenty-four detained crewmen as criminal trespassers rather than legal prisoners of war. Article IV of the Geneva Convention defines prisoners of war as captured “members of the armed forces of a party to the conflict” and this reality is not changed despite the lack of recognition offered by Russia. Second, Russia coerced the crewmen to read false confessions about the circumstances of their capture. Article 17 of the Geneva Convention forbids “any form of coercion...to secure from [prisoners] information of any kind whatever” including public confessions.[6] The West’s failure to immediately name and shame these violations of the Geneva Convention supports efforts by the Kremlin to blur the formal definition of wartime and undermine the rules-based international order in favor of Russia.

This escalation is part of a broader campaign by the Kremlin to test the thresholds of tolerance to its aggression and identify vulnerabilities in the U.S. and NATO. The Kremlin has pursued an intensifying campaign to test the tolerance of the West starting with the Russo-Georgian War in 2008. This campaign has only accelerated since 2014. Its lines of effort span multiple domains including the offensive use of military force, assassinations, chemical weapons, cyberattacks, subversion of foreign governments, and violations of international agreements. This campaign spans multiple theaters including Ukraine, Europe, and Syria. The U.S. and NATO have consistently responded insufficiently - if at all - to these probes and have therefore failed to deter further escalation by Russia. ISW will release a forthcoming graphic depicting this campaign, the thresholds tested by Russia, and the insufficient responses by the West.

Russia will likely therefore interpret the lack of a meaningful response as a green light to escalate further in Ukraine and beyond. Russia will likely intensify its military operations to limit or block the access of Ukraine to the Sea of Azov. Ukrainian officials warned that Russia may attempt to seize the key port cities of Mariupol and Berdyansk in Eastern Ukraine. Russia could in a most dangerous scenario launch a ground offensive to seize the terrain between separatist-held Eastern Ukraine and the Crimean Peninsula. Russia would thereby secure a ground logistics route between Crimea and Russia as well as block all access by Ukraine to the Sea of Azov. This effort would likely by spearheaded by separatist forces commanded and supported by the Russian Armed Forces. Russia may simultaneously increase the currently low levels of violence in Eastern Ukraine in order to stretch the Ukrainian Armed Forces and distract from its main effort in the Sea of Azov. ISW assesses that Russia is currently postured to militarily escalate in Ukraine. ISW also warned that Russia was setting conditions to escalate in Eastern Ukraine in September 2018. Russia is already reinforcing its air defenses in Crimea through the installation of a new radar warning system and S-400 Surface-to-Air Missile System (SAMS) to defend against a potential response by NATO.

The West’s weak response to aggression by Russia emboldens malign actors and undermines the rules-based international order. China, Iran, and other adversaries will likely exploit reduced international resolve to confront aggressive powers in order to advance their own malign objectives and threaten the global strategic interests of the U.S. and Europe. The U.S. and NATO must respond decisively in support of Ukraine in order to deter and halt the deliberate pattern of escalation by Russia. They should also hold Russia to account for its multiple violations of international law in order to uphold the modern rules-based international order which has prevented large-scale state warfare for decades.

---
[1] [“SBU Received New Uncontested Evidence of an Aggressive Armed Attack on the Ship of the Naval Forces of Ukraine (Video),”] Ukrainian SBU, November 29, 2018, https://ssu.gov(.)ua/ua/news/1/category/21/view/5475#.qahoG25D.dpbs.
[2] [“Putin Called the Incident in the Kerch Strait a Provocation on the Eve of Elections in Ukraine,”] TASS, November 28, 2018, https://tass(.)ru/politika/5845613.
[3] James Holmes, “Goodbye Grotius, Hello Putin,” Foreign Policy, November 29, 2018, https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/11/29/goodbye-grotius-hello-putin-russia-ukraine-sea-of-azov-kerch-strait-south-china-sea-unclos-law-of-sea-crimea; Editorial Board, “Russia Attacks Ukrainian Ships and International Law,” New York Times, November 26, 2018, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/26/opinion/russia-ukraine-attack-ships-crimea.html; Alexander Vershbow, “Will Trump Let Russia Take the Azov Sea?,” Washington Post, November 28, 2018, https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2018/11/28/will-trump-let-russia-take-azov-sea.
[4] “Agreement Between the Russian Federation and the Ukraine in Cooperation in the Use of the Sea of Azov and the Strait of Kerch,” Gateway to Environmental Law, December 24, 2003, https://www.ecolex.org/details/treaty/agreement-between-the-russian-federation-and-the-ukraine-on-cooperation-in-the-use-of-the-sea-of-azov-and-the-strait-of-kerch-tre-149547/.
[5] “United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea,” United Nations Treaty Collection, November 30, 2018, https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetailsIII.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXI-6&chapter=21&Temp=mtdsg3&clang=_en.
[6] “Geneva Conventions,” Legal Information Institute, June 2017, https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/geneva_conventions.