Russia in Review: July 7 – July 20, 2021

 By Mason Clark and Rachel Kenny

Russia Expands Military Presence in Central Asia in Response to Afghan Instability

The Kremlin is increasing its military presence and diplomatic outreach in Central Asia to prevent Taliban-led violence from destabilizing former Soviet states. The Kremlin aims to contain instability created by the US withdrawal from Afghanistan and Taliban advances within Afghanistan itself. Potential refugee flows, Taliban advances beyond Afghanistan, or the creation of safe havens for jihadist groups to strike across Central Asia could all threaten the Kremlin’s campaign to maintain dominant influence over Central Asia.

Russia’s military base in Tajikistan began regular military exercises on July 6 near the Afghan border that are scheduled to continue into August. The Taliban rapidly gained control of most districts within Badakhshan and Takhar provinces, bordering Tajikistan, in early July.[1] Russian troops at the 201^st Military Base in Dushanabe, Tajikistan—Russia’s only formal international military base—have held regular military exercises since July 6.[2] The Kremlin announced that Russia began constructing and providing funding for modernized border posts on the Tajik-Afghan border on July 14.[3] The 201^st Military Base will hold joint exercises with Tajikistan and Uzbekistan at the Tajik-Afghan border from August 5 to 10.[4] Kremlin-backed media outlet Izvestiya reported on July 15 that the Russian military will hold several joint exercises in August and September with Central Asian militaries through the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) to practice repelling jihadist groups from Afghanistan.[5]

The Kremlin assesses that its current forces in Tajikistan are sufficient to stabilize the border but retains the option of deploying additional forces, potentially leveraging the CSTO. The Russian Foreign Ministry stated that Russia’s existing forces in Tajikistan can stabilize the border without external support on July 6, but caveated that Russia will undertake “additional efforts” if needed.[6] The Tajik government submitted an official request for CSTO military assistance on July 7, citing an inability to handle the situation independently.[7] The head of the CSTO Joint Staff said July 8 that the CSTO will provide technical assistance but does not need to deploy joint military forces.[8] The Kremlin retains the option of deploying the CSTO Rapid Reaction Force—which it has prioritized integrating into Russian command structures since mid-2020—if it assesses existing Russian troops are no longer sufficient.[9] The CSTO and SCO exercises scheduled for August and September are likely intended to prepare for this contingency, or could themselves support the deployment of international troops under the cover of exercises.

The Kremlin in part seeks to mitigate the legitimate security risk of violence in Afghanistan spreading into the former Soviet states. The Kremlin maintains that it does not intend to conduct operations inside Afghanistan and called on the Taliban to “prevent the spread of tensions” beyond Afghanistan’s borders during a meeting with Taliban officials in Moscow on July 8.[10] The Russian military has publicly discussed the risks to Russia of a US withdrawal from Afghanistan for several years.[11] Russian military exercises since 2018 have increasingly prepared to combat jihadist groups that could exploit instability to strike targets in the former Soviet Union.[12] Russian military exercises and potential new deployments are in large part responses to this legitimate threat.

The Kremlin’s military deployments in Central Asia threaten US interests. The Kremlin will likely seek to expand its military base in Tajikistan and establish basing in neighboring Uzbekistan or Turkmenistan in the next 6 months. Additional Russian bases in Central Asia and further military cooperation will support Russia’s campaign to integrate the militaries of the former Soviet Union under Russian structures. The Kremlin is additionally likely maneuvering against Ankara’s efforts to establish Turkey as a significant player in Central and South Asia, as well as pushing back on Chinese influence in the former Soviet Union. Finally, the Kremlin does not share NATO’s objectives in Central Asia and will not be a reliable counterterrorism partner in the region.

1. Belarusian authorities began a coordinated campaign of countrywide raids against Belarusian media and NGO groups in mid-July. The Belarusian KGB announced the start of a “large-scale operation to cleanse radicals” on July 8.[13] Belarusian security forces began raiding dozens of Belarusian journalists and human rights activists across Belarus on July 8; those raids were ongoing as of July 20.[14] Belarusian forces additionally raided the Minsk bureau of the US Government-sponsored Radio Free Europe media outlet.[15] Belarusian authorities notably released most detainees within a day of their arrest, in contrast to typical prolonged detention. Belarusian authorities have not conducted targeted raids at this scale since fall 2020, at the peak of popular protests. Many of the targeted groups do not have direct ties to the protest organizers or opposition media outlets that the Belarusian regime has previously targeted. Self-declared Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko is likely targeting all independent media or non-government organizations, regardless of their past activities, to degrade the opposition’s will and deter further support for the opposition. Lukashenko’s crackdown will further isolate Belarus, deepening his reliance on support from Russia. Lukashenko met Russian President Vladimir Putin for an unannounced July 13 meeting in Russia to discuss further Russian economic support to Belarus, and likely further Belarusian concessions to Russia, in response to tightening Western sanctions.[16]
2. Moldova’s pro-Western party won an absolute majority in snap parliamentary elections as the Kremlin abandoned its preferred political proxy. Pro-Western Moldovan President Maia Sandu’s Action and Solidarity party won an absolute majority over the pro-Russia Party of Socialists of the Republic of Moldova (PSRM) party in snap parliamentary elections on July 12.[17] Sandu called for snap elections in April 2021 after PSRM blocked two prime minister appointees following her election in November 2020.[18] Action and Solidarity’s majority will enable Sandu to increase cooperation with the EU to combat corruption in Moldova and grow trade ties, two of Sandu’s key campaign promises.[19] The Kremlin stated that it respects the election results and will work with the new government, despite its pre-election claims of “ongoing EU interference.”[20] The Kremlin has steadily withdrawn support for PSRM following a string of setbacks since November 2019.[21] The Kremlin will likely adapt to the loss of its preferred political proxy and increase its engagement with Sandu’s pro-Western—but not necessarily anti-Kremlin—government to maintain its interests in Moldova, including energy contracts and the presence of Russian troops in the breakaway region of Transnistria.
3. The Russian National Guard (Rosgvardia) began “Zaslon-2021,” its first-ever operational-strategic exercise, in July to prepare for participation in the Russian military’s Zapad-2021 exercise in September. The exercise will occur in several regions of southwest Russia from July 12 to July 30.[22] Zaslon-2021 is Rosgvardia’s first operational-strategic exercise since its establishment in 2016 and is explicitly intended to prepare Rosgvardia for participation in the Russian military’s annual capstone exercise Zapad-2021, scheduled to begin in September.[23] Rosgvardia reports directly to Russian President Vladimir Putin and is intended to counter internal threats such as protests, terrorists, and what the Kremlin frames as Western-backed support for “color revolutions” within Russia.[24] The Kremlin will likely continue to prioritize integrating Rosgvardia into major military exercises to counter perceived threats from terrorist groups or claimed NATO subversion.
4. Russia reversed course on vetoing a UN Security Council resolution for maintaining the final international aid delivery point to Syria not controlled by the Assad regime. The Kremlin voted on July 9 to extend international aid deliveries through the Bab al-Hawa border crossing in opposition-controlled Idlib Province on the Turkish-Syrian border, the final UN aid crossing into Syria not controlled by the Assad regime.[25] The resolution maintains the crossing for six months with an option for a six-month extension. The Kremlin threatened to veto the resolution prior to the vote, asserting that an international crossing point violates Syrian sovereignty.[26] The Kremlin may have withdrawn its veto in an effort to secure concessions from the United States. The Kremlin praised “coordinated efforts” between the United States and Russia on Syria following a call between President Putin and President Biden on July 9. Russia’s UN ambassador stated the vote was “in the spirit” of the Geneva summit between Putin and Biden.[27] The Kremlin’s short-term concession does not remove the Kremlin’s leverage in Idlib. Continuing Russian and pro-Assad strikes on civilian infrastructure and limited aid deliveries will amplify the humanitarian crisis in Idlib. The Kremlin retains the ability to increase offensive operations against Idlib to pressure Turkey’s proxies in Syria and create the threat of a refugee influx.
5. Russian President Vladimir Putin published an essay cementing his view of Russia-Ukraine relations. The Kremlin published the essay directly on July 12.[28] The essay argues that Russians and Ukrainians are one people and claimed that Ukraine can only be sovereign in partnership with Russia. Putin claims Ukraine’s separate national identity has been “fabricated” by Europe to divide Ukraine from Russia. He further claimed the West and Ukrainian elites have created the current conflict between Ukraine and Russia—in which Russia illegally annexed the Crimean Peninsula and controls proxy forces in occupied eastern Ukraine—and seek to exploit Ukraine economically. Kremlin-run media has subsequently claimed that the essay positively argues for close cooperation between Russia and Ukraine, despite Putin’s overt rejection of Ukraine’s existence as a national polity.[29] The Russian government has taken several steps to elevate the article, including Defense Minister Shoigu issuing an order for Russian military personnel to study the essay.[30] The essay is likely intended to outline the Kremlin’s preferred framing of Ukraine for a domestic Russian audience and the Russian government, rather than directly change Ukraine’s relationship with Russia.
6. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky replaced Ukraine’s powerful interior minister to reform the Ukrainian security services and remove a rival from power. The replaced minister, Arsen Avakov, resigned on July 15 after serving in the position for over 7 years.[31] Avakov developed a significant independent power base through his control of the interior ministry and was the only Ukrainian minister to serve under both President Zelensky and former President Petro Poroshenko.[32] Avakov is deeply unpopular in Ukraine due to numerous high-profile scandals and corruption allegations, including a longstanding failure to address police brutality.[33] Avakov was the greatest counterweight to Ukrainian President Zelensky’s Servant of the People (SoP) party within the Ukrainian government, and insiders familiar with the event suggest that the two agreed on private terms surrounding Avakov’s resignation.[34] Zelensky replaced Avakov with Servant of the People MP Denys Monastyrsky.[35] SoP stated Monsastyrsky will pursue institutional reform and split up the centralized Ukrainian law enforcement agencies that Avakov refused to implement.[36] Zelensky likely replaced Avakov to eliminate his entrenched institutional power and further consolidate control over the Ukrainian government in addition to the legitimate goal of instituting these reforms.
7. Russia will likely secure a basing agreement in Sudan despite hesitancy from the Sudanese government, expanding Russian power projection capabilities in the Indian Ocean. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov met with Sudanese Foreign Minister Mariam Al-Sadiq Al-Mahdi in Moscow on July 12. The meeting focused on cooperation between Russia and Sudan in the UN and on ongoing conflicts in Libya and Syria. Lavrov and Al-Mahdi confirmed that their governments will start the ratification process of an agreement, previously announced in November 2020, allowing Russia to construct a naval base in Sudan.[37] Sudan previously announced in June 2021 it would review the agreement to ensure that it benefited Sudan.[38] It is unclear from available sources why Sudan dropped its objections to the basing agreement or if Sudan secured concessions from Russia. A Russian naval base in Sudan will enable further Russian power projection in Africa and support the Russian Navy’s efforts to reestablish a global footprint.

Contributors to this Report: 

Mason Clark 

George Barros

Will Baumgardner

Brian Darios

Catherine Hodgson

Rachel Kenny

Matthew Sparks

 

---

[1] Bill Roggio, “Mapping Taliban Contested and Controlled Districts in Afghanistan,” Long War Journal, July 17, 2021, https://www.longwarjournal.org/mapping-taliban-control-in-afghanistan.

[2] Russia maintains three Motor Rifle regiments and several combat support elements at the 201st Military Base in Dushanabe, Tajikistan. Fredrick W. Kagan, Catherine Harris, “Russia’s Military Posture: Ground Forces Order of Battle,” Institute for the Study of War, March 2018, http://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/Russian%20Ground%20Forces%20OOB_ISW%20CTP_0.pdf; [“In Tajikistan, Russian Military Pilots Launched a Missile Attack on a Mock Enemy Grouping,”] Russian MoD, July 6, 2021, https://function.mil dot ru/newspage/country/more.htm?id12370320egNews; [“The Russian Military Began Exercises in Tajikistan Against the Backdrop of Exacerbation in Afghanistan,”] Interfax, July 14, 2021, https://www.interfax dot ru/world/777832.

[3]  Olesya Stepakova, [“The Foreign Ministry Told about Russia’s Participation in the Construction of a Border Post in Tajikistan,”] TV Zvezda, July 14, 2021, https://tvzvezda dot ru/news/2021714645-1qY2L.html.

[4]  [“In August, as the Harb-Maidon training Ground, a Joint Exercise of the Military Personnel of Russia, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan will Take Place,”] Russian MoD, July 19, 2021, https://function.mil dot ru/news_page/country/more.htm?id=12372819@egNews.

[5] The Russian Ministry of Defense and other participating organizations have not formally announced these exercises. Izvestia is closely linked with the Kremlin, however, and its report on upcoming exercises is likely accurate. Roman Krezul and Anna Cherepanova, [“threat Revealed: Russia to Conduct Series of Exercises on Afghan Border,”] Izvestia, July 16, 2021, https://iz dot ru/1193112/roman-kretcul-anna-cherepanova/vskrytaia-ugroza-rossiia-provedet-seriiu-uchenii-na-afganskoi-granitce.

[6] [“The Russian Foreign Ministry Said that the 201^st Military Base is Equipped to Provide Assistance Near the Border with Afghanistan,”] TASS, July 6, 2021, https://tass dot ru/politika/11833209.

[7] [“Tajikistan Requested Assistance from the CSTO due to the Situation in Afghanistan,”] Ria Novosti, July 7, 2021, https://ria dot ru/20210707/afganistan-1740325094.html; [“CSTO Task Force Arrived in Tajikistan to Monitor the Border with Afghanistan,”] Izvestia, July 6, 2021, https://iz dot ru/1189414/2021-07-06/opergruppa-odkb-pribyla-v-tadzhikistan-dlia-monitoringa-granitcy-s-afganistanom.

[8]  [“The CSTO Sees No Need to Deploy  the Collective Forces of the Organization to Tajikistan,”] TASS, July 8, 2021, https://tass dot ru/mezhdunarodnaya-panorama/11859585.

[9] Goerge Barros, “Russia in Review: Putin’s ‘Peacekeepers Will Support Russian Wars,” Institute for the Study of War, November 16, 2020, http://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russia-review-putins-%E2%80%9Cpeacekeepers%E2%80%9D-will-support-russian-wars.

[10] [“Consultations with a Taliban Delegation,”] Russian MFA, July 8, 2021, https://www.mid dot ru/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/4810299.

[11] Alexander Lapin, [“Afghanistan Again?”] VPK, May 28, 2018, vpknews dot ru/articles/42857.

[12] Mason Clark, “the Russian Military’s Lessons Learned in Syria,” Institute for the Study of War, January 2021, http://www.understandingwar.org/report/russian-military%E2%80%99s-lessons-learned-syria.

[13] [“On July 8, At Least 14 Journalists and Civic Activists Were Detained and Held in a Detention Center,”] Radio Svaboda, July 9, 2021, https://www.svaboda.org/a/31349848.html; [“Operation to Cleanse Radicals in Belarus – KGB,”] Belta, July 8, 2021, https://www.belta dot by/society/view/v-belarusi-prohodit-operatsija-po-zachistke-ot-radikalno-nastroennyh-lits-kgb-449686-2021/.

[14] [“Searches Came to Viasna's Human Rights Defenders: Attack on NGOs in Belarus Continues,”] Viasna Human Rights Center, July 14, 2021, https://spring96 dot org/ru/news/104286; [“Journalists Connected with Radio Svaboda and Belsat TV Channel Were Searched. There Are Detainees,”] Radio Svaboda, July 16, 2021, https://www.svaboda dot org/a/31361235.html; [“List of Political Prisoners,”] Viasna Human Rights Center, accessed July 20, 2021, https://prisoners.spring96 dot org/ru/table; [“Detentions and Searches in Belarus on July 20,”] Viasna Human Rights Center, July 20, 2021, http://spring96 dot org/ru/news/104375; [“Detentions and Searches in Belarus Continue on July 15,”] Viasna Human Rights Center, July 15, 2021, http://spring96 dot org/ru/news/104305; [“July 16. Searches Against Journalists Continue. Security Officials in the Office of Radio Svaboda,”] Dev Belarus, July 16, 2021, https://dev dot by/news/16-iulya-obyski; Yuras Karmanau, “Belarus Targets Rights Activists, Journalists with Raids.” Washington Post, July 14, 2021, https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/belarus-targets-rights-activists-journalists-with-raids/2021/07/14/f9abc96a-e49a-11eb-88c5-4fd6382c47cb_story.html; [“In Just a Day, at Least 30 Searches Were Carried Out, More Than 10 People Were Detained,”] Naviny Belarus, July 15, 2021, https://naviny dot online/new/20210715/1626322988-tolko-za-den-bylo-provedeno-ne-menee-30-obyskov-zaderzhano-bolee-10-chelovek; “Belarus Continues Media Crackdown, Detains Three More Journalists,” RFE/RL, July 19, 2021, https://www.rferl.org/a/31367176.html.

[15] “RFE/RL, Other Media Raided as Belarusian Police Search Offices, Homes of Journalists,” RFE/RL, July 16, 2021, https://www.rferl.org/a/belarus-raids-rferl-journalists/31361517.html.

[16] [“Meeting with President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko,”] Kremlin, July 13, 2021, http://kremlin dot ru/events/president/news/66185; [“Working Visit to the Russian Federation. Talks with Vladimir Putin”] Belarusian Presidential Office, July 13, 2021, https://president.gov dot by/ru/events/rabochiy-vizit-v-rossiyskuyu-federaciyu-1626156820.

[17] [“Moldova: Sandu’s Party Wins Early Parliamentary Elections,”] Radio Svaboda, July 12, 2021, https://www.radiosvoboda.org/a/news-sandu-moldova-peremoga/31354099.html.

[18] Savannah Modesitt and Paisley Turner, “New Moldovan President Presents Opportunity to Limit Kremlin Suzerainty in Moldova,” Institute for the Study of War, December 10, 2020, http://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/new-moldovan-president-presents-opportunity-limit-kremlin-suzerainty-moldova.

[19] Maia Sandu, interview by Steve Rosenberg, Chisinau, Moldova, November 16, 2020, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54942847.

[20] [“Briefing of the Official Representative of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs M.V. Zakharova, Moscow, July 9, 2021,”] Russian MFA, July 9, 2021, https://www.mid dot ru/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/4811091.

[21] Savannah Modesitt and Paisley Turner, “New Moldovan President Presents Opportunity to Limit Kremlin Suzerainty in Moldova,” Institute for the Study of War, December 10, 2020, http://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/new-moldovan-president-presents-opportunity-limit-kremlin-suzerainty-moldova.

[22] Rosgvardia announced the exercises will occur in Russia’s Central, Volga, and Southern federal districts. Rosgvardia did not specify the number of troops or specific units participating in the exercises. [“The Active Phase of the Large-Scale Operational and Strategic Exercise ‘Zaslon-2021’ Under the Leadershp of Director general of the Army Viktor Zolotov has Begun in Rosgvardia,”] Rosgvardia, July 12, 2021, https://rosguard.gov dot ru/ru/news/article/v-rosgvardii-nachalas-aktivnaya-faza-krupnomasshtabnogo-operativnostrategicheskogo-ucheniya-zaslon2021-pod-rukovodstvom-direktora-generala-armii-viktora-zolotova.

[23] “Operational-strategic exercise” is a Russian term for a large military exercise occurring in multiple locations, combining staff exercises with field deployments. The term has previously been used to identify the Russian military’s major annual exercises. Zaslon-2021 is Rosgvardia’s first use of the term.

[24] Mikhail Falaleev, [“Rosgvardia will conduct an Operational-Strategic Exercise ‘Zaslon-2021,’”] Rossiskaya Gazeta, July 2, 2021, https://rg dot ru/2021/07/02/rosgvardiia-provedet-operativno-strategicheskoe-uchenie-zaslon-2021.html; [”Colonel-General Viktor Strigunov Highly Appreciated the Actions of the Rosgvardia Units During the Training to Destroy a Conditional Terrorist Group as Part  of the Exercise ’Zaslon-2021,‘“] Rosgvardia, July 20, 2021, https://rosguard.gov dot ru/ru/news/article/generalpolkovnik-viktor-strigunov-vysoko-ocenil-dejstviya-podrazdelenij-rosgvardii-v-xode-trenirovki-po-unichtozheniyu-uslovnoj-terroristicheskoj-gruppy-v-ramkax-ucheniya-zaslon2021; [“The Russian guardsmen in the Murmansk Region Worked to Neutralize Terrorist During the Tactical Episode of the Exercise ‘Zaslon-2021,’”] Rosgvardia, July 17, 2021, https://rosguard.gov dot ru/ru/news/article/nejtralizaciyu-terroristov-otrabotali-rosgvardejcy-v-murmanskoj-oblasti-v-xode-takticheskogo-epizoda-ucheniya-zaslon-2021.

[25] “Security Council Extends Use of Border Crossing for Humanitarian Aid into Syria, Unanimously Adopting Resolution 2585 (2021),” United Nations, July 9, 2021, https://www.un.org/press/en/2021/sc14577.doc.htm.

[26] [“Russia Insists on Non-Extension of the Cross-Border Assistance in syria,”] Ria Novosti, July 7, 2021, https://ria dot ru/20210707/siriya-1740196392.html.

[27] [“Telephone Conversation with US President Joseph Biden,”] Kremlin, July 9, 2021, http://kremlin dot ru/events/president/news/66172; “Security Council Extends Use of Border Crossing for Humanitarian Aid into Syria, Unanimously Adopting Resolution 2585 (2021),” United Nations, July 9, 2021, https://www.un.org/press/en/2021/sc14577.doc.htm.

[28] [“Article by Vladimir Putin ‘On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians,’”] Kremlin, July 12, 2021, http://kremlin dot ru/events/president/news/66181.

[29] [“Real Good Neighborliness,”] Kommersant, July 14, 2021, https://www.kommersant dot ru/doc/4899556; [“Putin Noted the Rich and Indivisible Cultural Heritage of Russia and Ukraine,”] TASS, July 12, 2021, https://tass dot ru/politika/11886623; [“Rada Deputy Called Putin’s Article Strong,”] TASS, July 13, 2021, https://tass dot ru/mezhdunarodnaya-panorama/11890065.

[30] [“Peskov Considers it Understandable and Natural for the Russian Military to Study Putin’s Article on Ukraine,”] TASS, July 16, 2021, https://tass dot ru/obschestvo/11918627.

[31] [“Statement by the Minister of Internal Affairs of Ukraine Arsen avakov,”] Ukrainian Ministry of Internal Affairs, July 13, 2021, https://mvs.gov dot ua/uk/press-center/news/zayava-ministra-vnutrisnix-sprav-ukrayini-arsena-avakova.

[32] [“Why Avakov Resigned and What Will be his Future,”] BBC Ukraine, July 14, 2021, https://www.bbc.com/ukrainian/features-57833404.

[33] “Ukraine’s Powerful Interior Minister Tenders Resignation,” RFE/RL, July 13, 2021, https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-avakov-minister-resigns/31356810.html.

[34] “Ukraine’s Interior Minister Submits Resignation,” Reuters, July 13, 2021, https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraines-interior-minister-resigns-2021-07-13/.

[35] “Ukrainian Parliament Approves Denys Monastyrskiy as New Interior Minister,” RFE/RL, July 16, 2021, https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-interior-minister-monastyrskiy/31362321.html.

[36] Ukraine’s Interior Ministry is heavily centralized, controlling Ukraine’s police, National Guard, border patrol, and territorial defense units. [“Reform Awaits the Ministry of Internal Affairs: Arahamiya Named the Main Task of Minister Monastyrsky,”] Unian, July 19, 2021, https://www.unian dot ua/politics/na-mvs-chekaye-reforma-arahamiya-nazvav-golovne-zavdannya-ministra-monastirskogo-novini-ukrajina-11486563.html.

[37] [“Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov’s Talks with Sudanese Foreign Minister Mikhail Al-Mahdi,”] Russian MFA, July 13, 2021, https://www.mid dot ru/ru/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/4812421; [“Lavrov: Sudan is Preparing to ratify the Agreement on the Support Point of the Russian Navy,”] TASS, July 12, 2021, https://tass dot ru/politika/11882579.

[38] [“Sudan Decided to Revise the Agreement with Russia on the Creation of a Naval Base,”] Ria Novosit, June 1, 2021,, https://ria dot ru/20210601/baza-1735174544.html.

 

 

Turkey Will Likely Leverage Syrian Proxies for Afghanistan Mission

 By Ezgi Yazici

Key Takeaway: There are increasing reports of Turkey’s plans to recruit Syrian fighters for deployment to Afghanistan as Ankara finalizes a deal to secure the Kabul International Airport. Turkish officials may be in talks with at least six Turkish-backed Syrian factions to prepare an initial round of 2,000 Syrians as private contractors for deployment to Afghanistan. Reporting is still limited as of July 20. Ankara’s deployment of Syrian proxies to expand the Turkish footprint and offset casualty risks for the Turkish Armed Forces in Afghanistan would be consistent with recent Turkish military behavior in Libya and Azerbaijan. A long-term Turkish presence in Afghanistan with the risk of Taliban attacks may not serve Ankara’s strategic interests at home or abroad in the long term, however.

Turkey may be preparing to deploy Syrian proxies to Afghanistan in September 2021. Local Syrian sources report that Turkey is recruiting Syrian mercenaries to deploy to protect the Kabul airport, government institutions, and international forces for a relatively large monthly salary of 3,000 USD.[1]  Turkish intelligence officials reportedly asked at least five Turkish-backed Syrian National Army factions to prepare an initial batch of 2,000 troops by September during an alleged meeting in northern Syria in late June. [2]  Turkish private military company SADAT will likely lead the recruitment and transfer of Syrian mercenaries to Afghanistan in line with its past responsibilities in Libya and Nagorno-Karabakh.[3]  SADAT is a Turkish private security company founded by close Erdogan ally and retired Brigadier General Adnan Tanriverdi. SADAT has drawn domestic and international criticism for its reported role in training Islamist militias in Syria.[4]

Turkey and Russia may seek to move extremist groups out of Idlib to Afghanistan, according to low-confidence reporting from Russian news sources.  Russian news outlet ANNA News claimed that Turkey and Russia may be negotiating for Turkey to fulfill its promise to clear the extremist presence from Idlib in Syria by moving fighters to Afghanistan or the borders of Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan.[5] ANNA News has previously reported accurate information on Russian deployments in Syria, but the source of this report remains unverified. This reporting follows Hayat Tahrir al-Sham's (HTS) campaign to provide international legitimacy to its quasi-security institutions by offering rival and independent groups the option to either “join HTS or leave Idlib.[6] The HTS campaign could push groups with organic connections to Afghanistan to move operations and recruits to Afghanistan.[7] Both Turkish and Russian interests would benefit from an exodus of foreign fighters from the Idlib area. However, a Turkish role or Russian support in facilitating such a movement of fighters is unclear.

Turkey’s Play in Afghanistan

A successful bid in helping stabilize Afghanistan or backing the right internal leaders could demonstrate that Turkey is a necessary player in the region and an important security partner to its allies in and outside NATO. Ankara could improve US-Turkish relations and build Turkish leverage over the United States by stepping up for a key NATO-encouraged mission in Afghanistan. A Turkish military-diplomatic foothold in Afghanistan could provide additional gains for Turkey like economic access, improvements to its global security posture, and greater power projection in Central Asia.

Turkey likely seeks to leverage the NATO departure and the Taliban’s advance as an inflection point to maximize its impact in Afghanistan. Turkish officials timed Turkey’s involvement in Libya and its support for Azerbaijan in Nagorno-Karabakh around similar inflection points where limited Turkish involvement had an outsized impact in shaping the military conflicts to favor Turkish interests. Both military campaigns led to mixed post-conflict diplomatic and strategic results, however. In Nagorno-Karabakh, Russia outmaneuvered Turkey in delivering the diplomatic victory in Azerbaijan. In Libya, Turkey’s long-term influence is in question despite its significant role on the battlefield. President Erdogan will likely attempt to position Turkey as a unique actor that could leverage its Muslim outreach for a unique stabilizer role between Afghanistan’s different stakeholders. Erdogan already stated on July 19 that Turkey is planning direct talks with the Taliban despite two statements calling for Turkish troops’ withdrawal from Afghanistan.[8] The details of future Turkey-Taliban talks are unknown as of July 20.

Expanding the Turkish presence with Syrian proxy support could better secure Turkish troops and maximize Turkey’s powerbroker role.  Turkey may seek to spread its political and military presence beyond the airport to add operational depth to its Afghanistan missions. Turkey also seeks to send “domestic security advisors” to the Afghan government, according to anonymous Turkish government sources. Turkey will likely support pro-Turkey and Turkey-amenable actors inside the former Northern Alliance against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Turkish officials seek to minimize their risk of casualties and financial cost by discussing security arrangements with the United States, Iran, Afghanistan, and Afghanistan’s bordering countries. However, securing the Kabul airport will remain a high-risk mission for the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) amid public Taliban threats. Acquiring backroom assurances and security understandings from regional partners like Pakistan or from the Taliban will likely be a requirement for Turkey to maintain troops after the NATO withdrawal.

Turkey’s Need for Proxies

Syrian mercenaries can deliver Turkey additional power projection capabilities without further Turkish deployments. Turkey is more casualty-averse and less experienced than the other states with active interests in Central Asia. Turkey has used Syrian forces in combination with its air support and military advising abilities to achieve a military impact that rivaled states like Russia on the ground. Turkey could leverage Syrian recruits to achieve its initial operational objective of securing the Kabul Airport and key locations in Kabul at a lower cost than if it relied solely on TSK forces. Turkey’s ability to fund, command, and control proxy forces will become even more critical if Ankara seeks to support Afghan political leaders related to the former Northern Alliance more actively.

The Turkish government will likely use Syrian recruits to mitigate domestic skepticism of the mission in Afghanistan. The Turkish military role in Afghanistan lacks public support. Most Turks view Afghanistan as too far afield and not a Turkish responsibility—unlike perceived counterterrorism operations against Kurdish groups in Syria and Iraq. Employing Syrian mercenaries could allow Turkey to pursue high-risk missions without suffering the domestic political cost of a major casualty attack that might damage President Erdogan’s credibility. Ankara will likely seek to avoid creating a large Turkish troop presence in Afghanistan. Turkish Defense Minister Hulusi Akar stated that Turkey is not planning to deploy more Turkish troops to Afghanistan beyond the existing 600. However, Turkish-backed proxies remain plagued by in-fighting, limited operational security, and weak command structures. It is also unclear how well Syrian mercenaries will interact with Turkish troops on the ground.

Implications and Risks

A Turkish deployment of Syrian mercenaries could challenge Turkish-US security negotiations in Afghanistan. NATO allies will likely seek to keep Syrian mercenaries out of another NATO ally’s mission in Afghanistan—particularly after the US condemnation of Turkey for a Turkish-backed Syrian faction’s use of child soldiers on July 1, 2021.[9] SADAT may offer official contracts to the mercenaries for the first time to “legalize” their presence, according to Syrian opposition sources.[10]  Contracting Syrian fighters could make the Turkish government's often opaque and arbitrary arrangements with Syrian recruits more binding while still posing challenges to Turkish-US cooperation in Afghanistan.

Turkey risks facing Taliban or other Salafi-Jihadi attacks in Afghanistan without the NATO safety net. Erdogan stated that Turkey will negotiate with the Taliban [CM1] A further deterioration Ankara-Taliban relations could lead to a high-casualty Taliban attack in Afghanistan or a greater Salafi-Jihadi targeting of Turkish assets across the Middle East and put significant public pressure on Turkish officials. Moreover, the potential influx of radical Islamist groups into Afghanistan could deteriorate the security environment further and increase Turkey’s dependency on outsourcing fighters from Syria.

Turkey will likely struggle to translate its military presence in Afghanistan to its strategic advantage. Turkey’s most ambitious military presence abroad poses both opportunities and risks. Turkey has struggled to translate similar military opportunities in Libya and Nagorno-Karabakh into long-term strategic advantages, likely due to relative inexperience with such deployments. Ankara may be unable to stabilize Afghanistan rapidly or without higher casualty and financial costs even with the proxy presence or allies’ support.

 

 

---

[1] https://efrinnews24.com/?p=3329

https://www.syriahr.com/en/219053/ The London-based Syrian Observatory has often reported accurate information on Turkish-backed Syrian National Army factions due to its network of well-placed activists in northern Syria.

ISW assesses with medium-high confidence that Turkish officials are indeed describing the position as such to recruit enough Syrian fighters. Turkish officials could expand the mission description arbitrarily or in exchange for extra pay.

[2]https://www.facebook.com/furat.netkuord/posts/769312043755157

[3] https://twitter.com/UNWatch/status/1315012242866397186

https://twitter.com/Hasan__Jan/status/1317200148578111489

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/tu-sadat.htm

[4] https://www.duvarenglish.com/turkish-mafia-leader-claims-erdogans-parallel-army-sent-weapons-to-al-nusra-in-syria-news-57667

[5] https://t.me/anna_news/14120

[6] https://twitter.com/IdlibEn/status/1413108286170206213

https://twitter.com/borwjj/status/1410976382012727300?s=20

 

[7] https://twitter.com/OAjjoub/status/1415681961633345542?s=20

https://www.syria.tv/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA%D9%81%D9%83%D9%83-%D8%A3%D9%88-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%86%D8%B6%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%85-%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B4%D8%A7%D9%85-%D8%AA%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B5%D9%84-%D8%AD%D9%85%D9%84%D8%AA%D9%87%D8%A7-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AC%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%B9%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AC%D9%87%D8%A7%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D8%AC%D9%86%D8%A8%D9%8A%D8%A9

 

[8] https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/taliban-warn-consequences-if-turkey-runs-kabul-airport-2021-07-13/

https://twitter.com/abdbozkurt/status/1417130796033495041?s=12

[9] https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/us-adds-turkey-list-countries-implicated-use-child-soldiers-2021-07-01/

[10] https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/afghanistan-turkey-us-near-deal-kabul-airport-mission

https://www.syriahr.com/en/219053/

---

 [CM1]Is this the end of a sentence?

 

 

 

Iranian Proxies Increase Attacks on US Forces to Catalyze a US Withdrawal from Iraq

 By Katherine Lawlor and Nicholas Carl

Contributor: Camille Jablonski

Key takeaway: Iran’s Iraqi proxies have likely become more willing to kill Americans and may soon do so to catalyze the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq and Syria. These proxies are advancing an Iran-directed campaign that has increased in frequency, accuracy, and lethality since January 2021. This campaign is expanding to include not just Iraq but also Iraqi Kurdistan and Syria. Proxies have also begun using more lethal munitions and drones that can bypass US defenses. Attacks will continue until US forces withdraw from Iraq and Syria or reestablish deterrence with both Iran and its proxy network.

The Iran-directed escalation campaign to expel US forces from Iraq and Syria has changed in five ways since the Biden administration took office in January 2021:

1. Proxies are increasing the frequency of their attacks against US forces in Iraq. The militias have conducted 20 rocket attacks and 11 drone attacks on US personnel and facilities in Iraq and Syria since President Biden took office in January 2021.[1] Six of those attacks occurred in the first week of July alone. That is a dramatic increase in tempo compared to the five proxy rocket attacks conducted in the final three months of the Trump administration. Iran and its proxies remain demonstrably undeterred. [2]
2. Proxies are increasingly attacking US intelligence and military assets in the once-protected Kurdistan Region of Iraq (KRI). Iran’s proxies conducted their first known attack on US forces in the KRI under in September 2020, firing six rockets at Erbil International Airport from beyond the KRI borders. The small-caliber rockets caused no casualties. Proxies have attacked US facilities inside the KRI five times since then, including a 14-rocket barrage in February 2021.[3] Drone attacks targeted an alleged CIA hangar at Erbil International Airport in April, a presumed US Joint Special Operations Command headquarters at Harir airbase near the Iranian border in May, a civilian house in Erbil Province in June, and Erbil Airport again in July.[4] The June attack triggered US retaliatory airstrikes along the Iraq-Syria border.
3. Proxies are increasing the geographic scope of their escalation to include US basing in Syria. The US retaliatory strikes struck minor Iranian proxy facilities in Iraq’s Anbar Province and Syria’s Deir ez-Zor Province on June 28.[5] Proxies fired 34 122 mm rockets at US forces stationed at a counter-ISIS forward operating base in Deir ez-Zor known as Green Village hours after the US strikes.[6]  US air defenses at Green Village prevented injury—never a guarantee with such large salvos of high-caliber munitions. [7] Proxies conducted another drone attack against the same US base on July 7, likely demonstrating their intention to continue targeting forces in Syria as well as Iraq.[8]
4. Proxies appear increasingly willing to inflict US casualties. The June 28 attack on Green Village in Syria is one of the largest attacks against the United States in the Middle East since US forces withdrew from Iraq in 2011—second only to Iran’s ballistic missile attack on Ain al-Assad airbase after the killing of Qassem Soleimani in January 2020. The scale of the Green Village attack indicates that Iran and its militias intended to inflict casualties. The 122 mm rockets used are larger and more lethal than the usual 107 mm Katyushas that proxies use in harassing attacks throughout the region. Other attacks in 2021 have also demonstrated a readiness to inflict casualties, including the February 15 attack on Erbil International Airport that killed one and injured 14 and the July 7 rocket barrage on Ain al-Assad that injured two.[9]
5. Proxies are demonstrating increasingly advanced drone capabilities to bypass US defenses. Iran-backed Iraqi militants conducted their first drone attack targeting a presumed CIA hangar in Erbil on April 14, 2021. They have since conducted nine additional drone attacks in Iraq and Syria. The drones used are coded with their targets’ GPS coordinates, often evade the US air defense systems that regularly intercept rocket attacks, and have struck multiple sensitive US assets.[10]

Iran has likely calculated that causing US casualties will motivate a US withdrawal from Iraq and Syria. Iranian leadership holds that the United States is extremely casualty-averse.[11] Tehran and its proxies likely believe that even a small number of US casualties in Iraq and Syria could convince the Biden administration to withdraw forces from those theaters—a key Iranian strategic objective. Iran and its proxies are likely emboldened by the US withdrawal from Afghanistan and believe that a similar bleeding of the US political will to remain will achieve the same outcome in Iraq. The head of the Iran-backed militia Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq, Qais al-Khazali, announced in April that “dialogue and logic does not work … the Afghan method is the only way to expel [US forces from Iraq].”[12]

Iran will continue its campaign to expel US forces from Iraq and Syria regardless of the outcome of US-Iran negotiations to restore the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Iran’s leadership has seemingly assessed that the Biden team is prioritizing the JCPOA above all else. That calculation has also emboldened them. Tehran is likely concerned that a future American president will pursue another “maximum pressure” policy similar to that of the Trump administration. The regime will therefore try to prepare itself economically and militarily to better resist coercion upon the potential return of maximum pressure during or after the Biden administration. Proxy attacks will likely continue so long as Iranian leaders see little risk and the potential for a huge reward (the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq and Syria).[13]

Forecast: Iran’s proxies in Iraq and Syria will likely continue to escalate against US forces and facilities until the United States withdraws its forces or reestablishes deterrence. Escalations will likely include simultaneous rocket and drone attacks to better evade US defenses in Iraq and Syria, the use of larger, more lethal munitions like 122 mm rockets, and the continued targeting of alleged US intelligence assets in Iraqi Kurdistan. Proxies will increasingly aim to inflict US casualties to create a politically untenable situation for the Biden administration, thereby catalyzing a US withdrawal.

 

This analysis is co-published by the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) and the Critical Threats Project at the American Enterprise Institute.

 

---

[1] https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/iraqs-drone-and-rocket-epidemic-numbers.

www dot alaraby dot co.uk/politics/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%82-%D8%A5%D8%B3%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%B7-%D8%B7%D8%A7%D8%A6%D8%B1%D8%AA%D9%8A%D9%86-%D9%85%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%B1%D8%AA%D9%8A%D9%86-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%A8%D8%BA%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AF-%D8%A5%D8%AD%D8%AF%D8%A7%D9%87%D9%85%D8%A7-%D8%AA%D8%AD%D9%85%D9%84-%D9%85%D8%AA%D9%81%D8%AC%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%AA.

www dot alaraby dot co.uk/politics/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%82-%D8%A7%D9%86%D8%AA%D8%B4%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D8%A3%D9%85%D9%86%D9%8A-%D8%A8%D9%85%D8%AD%D9%8A%D8%B7-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D9%86%D8%B7%D9%82%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AE%D8%B6%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%A1-%D8%A8%D8%B9%D8%AF-%D8%A5%D8%B3%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%B7-%D8%B7%D8%A7%D8%A6%D8%B1%D8%A9-%D9%85%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%B1%D8%A9.

https://apnews.com/article/syria-iraq-middle-east-d28a8cf02234a8f6c2ff431118f27c51
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/rockets-land-in-baghdads-green-zone-near-us-embassy/2021/07/08/f24aa1aa-dfd6-11eb-a27f-8b294930e95b_story.html

www dot alaraby dot co.uk/politics/%D9%87%D8%AC%D9%88%D9%85-%D8%A8%D8%B7%D8%A7%D8%A6%D8%B1%D8%A9-%D9%85%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%B1%D8%A9-%D9%8A%D8%B3%D8%AA%D9%87%D8%AF%D9%81-%D9%85%D8%B7%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D8%A3%D8%B1%D8%A8%D9%8A%D9%84-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B0%D9%8A-%D8%AA%D8%AA%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%AC%D8%AF-%D9%81%D9%8A%D9%87-%D9%82%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A3%D9%85%D9%8A%D8%B1%D9%83%D9%8A%D8%A9.

https://twitter.com/OIRSpox/status/1406598211679272961.

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/rockets-hit-iraqi-base-housing-us-forces-no-casualties-us-coalition-2021-07-05/.

https://twitter.com/OIRSpox/status/1412720373691469825.

[2] https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/deterring-militias-iraq-what-works-and-what-doesnt

[3] https://www.forbes.com/sites/pauliddon/2021/02/27/why-werent-us-air-defenses-in-erbil-airport-activated-during-recent-rocket-strike/?sh=2e514f4a2178

[4] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/04/world/middleeast/iran-drones-iraq.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/iraq-militia-drones-threat/2021/05/28/864e44d0-bc8f-11eb-922a-c40c9774bc48_story.html

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/explosive-laden-drone-hit-erbil-airport-iraq-aimed-us-base-security-sources-2021-07-06/

www dot rudaw dot net/english/kurdistan/26062021

[5] https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Releases/Release/Article/2672875/statement-by-the-department-of-defense/

[6] https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2021-03-12/us-troops-syria-civil-war-biden

https://twitter.com/OIRSpox/status/1409976895425417219?s=20

[7] https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/2676421/pentagon-press-secretary-john-f-kirby-holds-a-press-briefing/

[8] https://apnews.com/article/syria-iraq-middle-east-d28a8cf02234a8f6c2ff431118f27c51

[9] https://apnews.com/article/syria-iraq-middle-east-d28a8cf02234a8f6c2ff431118f27c51

[10] https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/28/politics/us-airstrikes-new-iran-drone-attacks-avoid-surveillance/index.html

[11] https://iranprimer.usip.org/resource/irans-military-doctrine

[12] https://t dot me/Tura313/13542

[13] https://www.criticalthreats.org/briefs/iran-file/iranian-presidential-election-tracker-the-coronation-of-ebrahim-raisi

 

 

 

 

Russia in Review: June 23 – July 6

  By Mason Clark

July 8, 2021

ISW has revamped its Russia in Review product to provide more-complete snapshots of Russian activity around the globe.

Russian Navy Increases Number of Aggressive Actions to Counter NATO Exercises and Freedom of Maneuver Operations in the Black Sea

NATO is currently conducting its largest-ever Black Sea naval exercises to strengthen maritime collective defense and resist Russian efforts to limit international access to the Black Sea. Sea Breeze 2021 is the largest iteration yet of NATO’s annual Sea Breeze exercises, held in the Black Sea since 1997 to strengthen interoperability between NATO and partner navies. The United States and Ukraine are cohosting the ongoing Sea Breeze 2021 exercise, which runs from June 28 to July 10, in the Black Sea.[1] NATO explicitly intends Sea Breeze 2021 to “demonstrate presence and assure allies of [NATO’s] maritime commitment to collective defense.” The exercises involve 32 states, 5,000 personnel, 32 ships, and 40 aircraft.[2] Participating warships and personnel will practice multiple types of operations, including amphibious warfare, maritime interdiction, air defense, and anti-submarine warfare.[3]

The Kremlin decries Sea Breeze 2021 as a NATO provocation and violation of Russian waters and is conducting several naval exercises in response. Five Russian warships in Russia’s Mediterranean Taskforce, including the missile cruiser and Black Sea Fleet flagship Moskva, the frigates Admiral Essen and Admiral Makarov, and two submarines began exercises in the Mediterranean Sea on June 25.[4] The exercises practiced repelling simulated air attacks and defending Russia’s naval base in Tartus, Syria. Russia’s Black Sea Fleet, based in Crimea, began conducting air defense training checks on June 29 (the day after the start of Sea Breeze 2021) including several S-400 and Pantsir air defense systems and 20 aircraft.[5] The Moskva and Admiral Essen redeployed from the Mediterranean to Crimea on June 5 to replenish supplies and join these ongoing Black Sea Fleet training checks.[6] The Russian Black Sea Fleet and Mediterranean Task Force will likely continue to hold exercises parallel to Sea Breeze 2021 to demonstrate Russian capabilities and imply limits on NATO freedom of action in the Black Sea.

The Kremlin increased its aggressive responses to NATO and Ukrainian actions in international waters in June prior to Sea Breeze 2021. The Kremlin claimed its forces fired warning shots and dropped bombs near the Royal Navy’s HMS Defender while it conducted a freedom of navigation operation off the shore of occupied Crimea on June 23.[7] The United Kingdom denied Russian claims of bombing the HMS Defender and asserted the United Kingdom’s freedom of navigation rights near Crimea.[8] Russian aircraft have shadowed NATO warships in the Black Sea throughout June, and the Kremlin likely used electronic warfare to falsify the locations of several NATO warships in late June, making them appear to be violating Russia’s claimed territorial waters.[9]

Expanded NATO exercises and freedom of maneuver missions are necessary to support US partners in the Black Sea region and counter the Kremlin’s illegal efforts to limit international access to the Black Sea. The Kremlin seeks to limit Ukraine and NATO’s freedom of action in the Black Sea to cement Russian dominance over this region and pressure US allies including Ukraine, Georgia, and Turkey. The Russian Navy has expanded its aggressive actions in the Black Sea in 2021 and intends to normalize Russian dominance over international waters in violation of international law.

1. The European Union (EU) rejected a Franco-German proposal to hold a summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin. France and Germany submitted a proposal to the European Council on June 23, 2021, without advance notice, calling for a summit between EU leadership and Putin to develop closer EU-Russia engagement.[10]  The European Council rejected this proposal during a private meeting on June 25, instead issuing a joint statement calling on Russia to “demonstrate a more constructive engagement” as a condition of further EU outreach.[11]  Central and Eastern European states—particularly Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and Romania—publicly decried France and Germany’s call for closer relations with Russia as a dangerous concession in the absence of changes to Russia’s malign actions in Europe.[12]  French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel reiterated their intent to meet with Putin independently of the EU following the June 25 European Council summit.[13]  Macron directly called for a “structured dialogue” with Russia during a call with Putin on July 2.[14]  Direct engagement with the Kremlin by EU members without substantial changes in Russian malign behavior will undermine collective European policies and further embolden Putin to act without fear of repercussions.
2. Belarus withdrew from the EU's Eastern Partnership cooperation initiative after the EU levied sectoral sanctions against Belarus. The EU approved sectoral sanctions against the Belarusian economy on June 24 in response to Belarus' grounding of Ryanair flight 4978 on May 23.[15]  Belarus suspended its participation in the EU’s Eastern Partnership Initiative—an EU framework to promote trade, travel agreements, and democracy between Western Europe and former Soviet states, including Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine—in response on June 28.[16]  EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell stated the EU is ready to continue working with the “Belarusian people” despite the Belarusian government’s withdrawal from the Eastern Partnership, likely through communication with exiled Belarusian opposition leader Svetlana Tikhanovskaya.[17]  The Kremlin will likely take advantage of Belarus’ increasing isolation from non-Russian partners to further isolate Belarus and integrate it into Russian-controlled structures.[18]
3. Russia and China signed a five-year extension to the Sino-Russian friendship treaty. Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping announced a five-year extension of the Sino-Russian Treaty on Good-Neighborliness, Friendship and Cooperation (signed in 2001) on June 28.[19]  Putin praised the agreement for reaffirming mutual support for protecting “state unity and territorial integrity,” (referencing Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea) and the rejection of the first use of nuclear weapons. Putin claimed that joint Sino-Russian economic projects and Sino-Russian cooperation have a stabilizing role in world affairs, highlighting the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, BRICS, and Sino-Russian cooperation in the Korean Peninsula, Syria, Afghanistan, and Iran. President Xi Jinping praised Sino-Russian efforts to build a multipolar world order and said he appreciated that Russia and China support each other's interests on the international stage. The Kremlin continues to be threatened by rising Chinese power but will increasingly seek to selectively leverage China against US efforts to counter Russia’s aggressive foreign policy.
4. The Russian Pacific Fleet was highly active during June 2021. The Russian Pacific Fleet conducted its largest naval exercises since the Cold War in the central Pacific Ocean and near Hawaii from June 14 to 30, practicing the simulated destruction of an enemy carrier strike group and strikes against shore facilities.[20]  Approximately 20 warships participated, including the missile cruiser Varyag (the Pacific Fleet’s flagship), two destroyers, three corvettes, a missile-tracking ship, an unspecified number of submarines and support vessels, and at least 20 aircraft. A US Navy Indo-Pacific Command spokesperson said some of the Russian vessels operated 20 to 30 nautical miles off the coast of Hawaii.[21]  The US scrambled F-22 fighters in Hawaii on June 14, likely in response to this Russian activity.[22]  The Russian MoD additionally announced on June 29 that the Russian Pacific Fleet will expand the infrastructure at its Kamchatka submarine base by the end of 2021.[23]  The Russian Navy is increasing its power projection capabilities in the Pacific to support the Kremlin’s campaign to expand its global military footprint.
5. The Kremlin likely continued to pressure Belarus for additional concessions on Russo-Belarusian government integration. Secretary of the Russian Security Council Nikita Patrushev—a senior Kremlin security official close to Vladimir Putin—and self-declared Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko discussed Russo-Belarusian security cooperation issues “not subject to public disclosure” in Minsk on June 29.[24]  Lukashenko atypically declined to make any public statement on the meeting. The unusually sensitive nature of their conversation indicates they likely discussed Russo-Belarusian security and military integration. Senior Russian-Belarusian meetings at this level have historically precipitated significant Belarusian security integration concessions and new deals for the Kremlin.[25]  Russian President Vladimir Putin and Lukashenko held another call on July 1, discussing further security and economic cooperation.[26]  The Kremlin is continuing to advance its campaign to establish a permanent military presence in Belarus postured against NATO and Ukraine.[27] 
6. Russian President Vladimir Putin approved an increasingly combative National Security Strategy (NSS) that removed all mention of cooperation with the West. Putin approved the new NSS on July 3, replacing the existing NSS written in 2015.[28]  The new NSS paints an increasingly alarmed picture of perceived Western threats. The NSS increases formal emphasis on protecting Russia’s “cultural sovereignty” and traditional values against perceived Western pressure, policy changes the Kremlin has prioritized since 2015. The NSS removes all references to cooperation with the United States and NATO, as well as specific arms control and nuclear non-proliferation objectives previously included in the 2015 strategy. Much of the strategy remains the same from 2015, and the Kremlin has already enacted many of the policy changes and adaptations formalized in this document.[29]  The Kremlin’s formalization of its defensive worldview and removal of all mentions of cooperation with the West indicate an increasingly combative mindset that is unlikely to respond to Western outreach or strategic dialogue in good faith.
7. Tajikistan will mobilize military reservists to the Afghan border with Kremlin promises of support. Tajik President Emomali Ramhmon ordered the mobilization of 20,000 reservists to support ongoing military deployments to Tajikistan’s border with Afghanistan on July 5 in response to Taliban advances in Afghanistan.[30]  Putin promised his counterparts from Tajikistan and Uzbekistan support from the Russian military both bilaterally and through the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) on July 6.[31]  The Russian Foreign Ministry further stated Russia’s 201st military base in Tajikistan— Russia’s only formal international military base—is equipped with “everything necessary” to support Tajikistan if required.[32]  The Kremlin will likely increase its military presence in Central Asia to counter the potential threat of a jihadist resurgence in Afghanistan. The Kremlin will also prioritize maintaining its dominant influence in Central Asia and advancing its unitary security interests; its deployments to the area are unlikely to effectively replace NATO security operations in Afghanistan.

 

 

---

[1] “U.S. Sixth Fleet Announces Sea Breeze 2021 Participation,” US Navy, June 21, 2021, https://www.navy.mil/Press-Office/News-Stories/Article/2664699/us-sixth-fleet-announces-sea-breeze-2021-participation/.

[2] The states participating in Sea Breeze 2021 include Australia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Denmark, Egypt, Estonia, France, Georgia, Greece, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Morocco, Norway, Pakistan, Poland, Romania, Senegal, Spain, South Korea, Sweden, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, and the United States.

[3] “NATO Allies and Partners Ready for Exercise Sea Breeze 2021,” Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe, June 25, 2021, https://shape.nato.int/news-archive/2021/nato-allies-and-partners-ready-for-exercise-sea-breeze-21.

[4] [“Ships of the Russian Navy repelled an Attack of a Mock Enemy During Exercises in the Mediterranean Sea,”] TASS, June 27, 2021, https://tass dot ru/armiya-i-opk/11765763.

[5] [“Pilots of the Naval Aviation of the Black Sea Fleet and Aviation of the Southern Military District Checked the Air Defense System of Crimea,”] Russian MoD, June 29, 2021, https://function.mil dot ru/news_page/country/more.htm?id=12369232@egNews.

[6] [“Guards Missile Cruiser ‘Moskva’ and frigate ‘Admiral Essen’ of the Black Sea Fleet are Returning from the Mediterranean Sea,”] Russian MoD, July 5, 2021, https://function.mil dot ru/news_page/country/more.htm?id=12370157@egNews.

[7] “Russian Border Guards to Continue Thwarting Provocations in the Black Sea – Kremlin,” TASS, June 24, 2021, https://tass dot com/politics/1306799; “Any Actions Possible in Response to Provocations Violating Russian Borders, Says Kremlin,” TASS, June 24, 2021, https://tass dot com/politics/1306821.

[8] Ben Wallace, “Exercises In the Black Sea,” UK Parliament, June 24, 2021, https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-statements/detail/2021-06-24/hcws122.

[9] “Black Sea Fleet Monitor US Destroyer Entering Black Sea – Russian Defense Ministry,” TASS, June 26, 2021, https://tass dot com/defense/1307593; H I Sutton, “Positions of Two NATO Ships Were Falsified Near Russian Black Sea Naval Base,” USNI News, June 21, 2021, https://news.usni.org/2021/06/21/positions-of-two-nato-ships-were-falsified-near-russian-black-sea-naval-base.

[10] Sam Fleming, Valentina Pop, Mehreen Khan, Michael Peel, Henry Foy, and Victor Mallet, “Berlin and Paris Propose Reset for EU Relations with Moscow,” Financial Times, June 23, 2021, https://www.ft.com/content/03528026-8fa1-4910-ab26-41cd26404439.

[11] European Council Conclusions on External Relations, 24 June 2021,” European Council of the European Union,  June 24, 2021, https://www.consilium.europa dot eu/en/press/press-releases/2021/06/25/european-council-conclusions-on-external-relations-24-june-2021/.

[12] “European Council Conclusions on External Relations, 24 June 2021,” European Council of the European Union,  June 24, 2021, https://www.consilium.europa dot eu/en/press/press-releases/2021/06/25/european-council-conclusions-on-external-relations-24-june-2021/; Sabine Siebold, Robin Emmott, and Gabriela Baczynska, “France and Germany Drop Russia Summit Plan after EU's East Objects,” Reuters, June 25, 2021, https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/france-germany-drop-plans-russia-summit-after-eu-outcry-2021-06-25/; “Kremlin 'Regrets' EU Rejection Of Proposed Summit With Putin,” Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty, June 25, 2021 https://www.rferl.org/a/eu-summit-brussels-putin-russia-france-germany-lithuania/31325264.html.

[13] David Herszenhorn, “Summit Exposes Stark Clash of EU Views on Russia,” Politico, June 25, 2021, https://www.politico dot eu/article/emmanuel-macron-russia-vladimir-putin-european-union/.

[14] [“Telephone Exchanges with Mr Vladimir Putin, President of the Russian Federation,”] French Presidency, July 2, 2021, https://www.elysee.fr/emmanuel-macron/2021/07/02/echange-telephonique-avec-m-vladimir-poutine-president-de-la-federation-de-russie; [“Telephone Covnersation with French President Emmanuel Macron, Kremlin, July 2, 2021, http://kremlin dot ru/events/president/news/66055.

[15] “EU Imposes Sanctions on Belarusian Economy,” European Council of the European Union, June 24, 2021, https://www.consilium.europa dot eu/en/press/press-releases/2021/06/24/eu-imposes-sanctions-on-belarusian-economy/.

[16] Olga Demidova, [“Belarus Suspends Participation in Eastern Partnership,”] Deutsche Welle, June 28, 2021, https://www.dw dot com/ru/belarus-priostanovila-uchastie-v-vostochnom-partnerstve/a-58080349.

[17] Tweet. Josep Borrell Twitter Account, June 28, 2021, https://twitter.com/JosepBorrellF/status/1409594465296306179.

[18] George Barros, “Belarus Warning Update: Forced Integration with Russia – Not the Protest Movement – is Lukashenko’s Biggest Threat,” Institute for the Study of War, February 19, 2021, http://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/belarus-warning-update-forced-integration-russia%E2%80%94not-protest-movement%E2%80%94-lukashenko%E2%80%99s.

[19]  [“Conversation with President of the People's Republic of China Xi Jinping,”] Kremlin, June 28, 2021, http://kremlin dot ru/events/president/news/65940; [“Joint statement of the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China on the Twentieth Anniversary of the Signing of the Cooperation Agreement on Neighborliness, Friendship and Cooperation Between the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China,”] Kremlin, June 28, 2021, http://static.kremlin dot ru/media/events/files/ru/hkwONx0FSpUGgXPaRU3xUHRmkRneSXIR.pdf.

[20] The Russian Ministry of Defense reported the “main part” of the exercises concluded on June 24. The final reported exercises concluded on June 30. Anna Berestovaya, Denis Ivlev, [“In the Central Part of the Pacific Ocean, the main Part of the Operational Exercises of the Pacific Fleet has been Completed,”] TVZvezda, June 24, 2021, https://tvzvezda dot ru/news/2021624254-pGRxa.html; [“The Crews of the Ships of the Pacific Fleet During the Exercise in the Far Sea Zone Worked out the Tasks of Destroying the Aircraft Carrier Strike Group of the Mock Enemy,”] Russian Ministry of Defense, June 21, 2021, https://function.mil dot ru/news_page/country/more.htm?id=12367884@egNews; [“In the Central Part of the Pacific Ocean, an Operational Exercise of the Diverse Forces of the Pacific Fleet is Being Conducted,”] Russian Ministry of Defense, June 10, https://function.mil dot ru/news_page/country/more.htm?id=12366072@egNews; [“A Squadron of Ships of the Pacific Fleet Conducted Rocket and Artillery Fires in the Pacific Ocean,”] Russian Ministry of Defense, June 30, 2021, https://function.mil dot ru/news_page/country/more.htm?id=12369401@egNews; [“A Squadron of Ships of the Pacific Fleet Conducted Rocket and Artillery Fires in the Pacific Ocean,”] Russian Ministry of Defense, June 30, 2021, https://function.mil dot ru/news_page/country/more.htm?id=12369401@egNews.

[21] William Cole, “Russian Naval Exercise Ends as Spy Ship Remains in Hawaii area,” Honolulu Star-Advertiser, June 21, 2021, https://www.staradvertiser.com/2021/06/21/breaking-news/navy-conducts-drills-near-hawaii-as-russian-spy-ship-cruises-north-of-oahu/; Brendan Cole, “Russian Navy Warships Come Within Two Dozen Miles of Hawaii,” Newsweek, June 23, 2021, https://www.newsweek.com/hawaii-pacific-fleet-russian-navy-uss-vinson-coast-close-1603292.

[22] Tyler Rogoway, “Hawaii-Based F-22s Scrambled on FAA's Request But Nobody Will Say Why (Updated),” The Drive, June 14, 2021 https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/41089/hawaii-based-f-22s-scrambled-on-faas-request-but-nobody-will-say-why.

[23] Timur Sherzad, [“Kamchatka Submariners Will Receive Three Dozen New Structures by the End of the Year,”] Tv Zvezda, June 29, 2021, https://tvzvezda dot ru/news/20216291239-oEvxv.html.

[24] [“Lukashenko Discussed Issues with the Secretary of the Russian Security Council,”] Izvestia, June 29, 2021, https://iz dot ru/1185699/2021-06-29/lukashenko-obsudil-s-sekretarem-sovbeza-rossii-voprosy-bezopasnosti-stran.

[25] George Barros, “Belarus Warning Update: Belarus Confirms Plans to PurchaseAdvanced Air Defense Systems from Russia,” Institute for the Study of War, January 14, 2021, http://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/belarus-warning-update-belarus-confirms-plans-purchase-advanced-air-defense-systems; George Barros, “Belarus Warning Update: Putin Intensifies Russian-Belarusian Military Integration,” Institute for the Study of War, October 27, 2020, http://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/belarus-warning-update-putin-intensifies-russian-belarusian-military-integration.

[26] [“VIII Forum of the Regions of Russia and Belarus,”] Kremlin, July 1, 2021, http://kremlin dot ru/events/president/news/65982.

[27] George Barros, “Russia in Review: Russia Opens Permanent Training Center in Belarus and Sets Conditions for Permanent Military Basing,” Institute for the Study of War, April 8, 2021, http://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russia-review-russia-opens-permanent-training-center-belarus-and-sets-conditions.

[28] [“On the National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation,”] Kremlin, July 3, 2021, http://static.kremlin dot ru/media/events/files/ru/QZw6hSk5z9gWq0plD1ZzmR5cER0g5tZC.pdf; [“On the National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation,”] Kremlin, December 31, 2015, http://static.kremlin dot ru/media/acts/files/0001201512310038.pdf. 

[29] Nataliya Bugayova, “Putin’s Offset: The Kremlin’s Geopolitical Adaptations Since 2014,” Institute for the Study of War, September 2020, http://www.understandingwar.org/report/putins-offset-kremlin%E2%80%99s-geopolitical-adaptations-2014.

[30] [“Tajikistan Mobilizes 20,000 Personnel amid Taliban Offensive,”] RBC, July 5, 2021, https://www.rbc dot ru/politics/05/07/2021/60e3266e9a794748f0fb74fd; [“Meeting of the Security Council of the Republic of Tajikistan,”] President of the Republic of Tajikistan, July 5, 2021, http://president dot tj/ru/node/26124.

[31] [“Telephone Conversation with President of Tajikistan Emomali Rahmon,”] Kremlin, July 5, 2021, http://kremlin dot ru/events/president/news/66143; [“Telephone Conversation with President of Uzbekistan Shavkat Mirziyoyev,”] Kremlin, July 5, 2021, http://kremlin dot ru/events/president/news/66144.

[32]  [“The Russian Foreign Ministry Said that the 201st Military Base is Equipped to Provide Assistance Near the Border with Afghanistan,”] TASS, July 6, 2021, https://tass dot ru/politika/11833209.