0 $
2,350 $
4,700 $
1,122 $
COLLECTED IN SEPTEMBER

RAND Corporation Releases Own Roadmap To Russia’s Dissolution

Donate

RAND Corporation Releases Own Roadmap To Russia's Dissolution

Click to see full size image. Photo by Adobe Stock

In continuation of “Russia dissolution” options released by The Hill, the turn has come for RAND Corporation to suggest its take on overextending and unbalancing Russia’s economy and armed forces and the regime’s political standing at home and abroad.

According to the 2019 RAND Corporation research “Overextending and Unbalancing Russia: Assessing the Impact of Cost-Imposing Options,” Russia has several vulnerabilities that may be exploited.

These include: “oil and gas prices well below peak that have caused a drop in living standards, economic sanctions that have furthered that decline, an aging and soon-to-be-declining population, and increasing authoritarianism under Vladimir Putin’s now-continued rule.”

These are further reinforced and deepened by fears of Western-enforced regime change, as well as the loss of great power status and even a direct military attack.

Overextending and unbalancing Russia still would prove a challenging feat to achieve:

“Despite these vulnerabilities and anxieties, Russia remains a powerful country that still manages to be a U.S. peer competitor in a few key domains. Recognizing that some level of competition with Russia is inevitable, RAND researchers conducted a qualitative assessment of “cost-imposing options” that could unbalance and overextend Russia. Such cost-imposing options could place new burdens on Russia, ideally heavier burdens than would be imposed on the United States for pursuing those options.”

To this end several groups of measures can be undertaken:

  1. Economic Cost-Imposing Measures, these include:
  • Expanding U.S. energy production, which would stress Russia’s economy, by adopting policies that expand world supply and depress global prices, the United States can limit Russian revenue. There is little cost and risk involved and could leverage secondary benefits to the US, and it is ideal since it doesn’t need multilateral acceptance;
  • Imposing deeper trade and financial sanctions, which strongly depends on other countries’ willingness to partake. “But sanctions come with costs and, depending on their severity, considerable risks.”
  • Increasing Europe’s ability to import gas from suppliers other than Russia could economically extend Russia and buffer Europe “against Russian energy coercion.” Europe is allegedly slow moving in the direction, but a strong pressure in this direction would require LNG markets to become more flexible and LNG would also need to get more competitive in terms of price with Russia’s natural gas;
  • Encouraging the emigration from Russia of skilled labor and well-educated youth has few costs or risks and could help the United States and other receiving countries and hurt Russia. It would take a long while to understand any benefits and there is little possibility of overextending Russia.
RAND Corporation Releases Own Roadmap To Russia's Dissolution

Click to see full-size image

  1. Geopolitical Cost-Imposing Measures:
  • Providing lethal aid to Ukraine would exploit Russia’s greatest point of external vulnerability. Any increase in US military arms and advice to Ukraine needs to be “carefully calculated” so that Russia’s costs of sustaining its existing commitment would be increased, but without it escalating to a larger conflict;
  • Increasing support to the Syrian rebels could jeopardize other U.S. policy priorities, such as combating radical Islamic terrorism, and could risk further destabilizing the entire region. According to RAND, this could be difficult since the Syrian opposition is quite fragmented and radicalized, as well as on the decline;
  • Promoting liberalization in Belarus likely would not succeed and could provoke a strong Russian response;
  • Expanding ties in the South Caucasus to be an economical competitor of Russia but geographically and historically it would not be feasible;
  • Reducing Russian influence in Central Asia would be very difficult and could prove costly. It would overextend the US more than it would do so for Russia;
  • Flip Transnistria and expel the Russian troops from the region would allegedly be a blow to Russian prestige, but would actually benefit Moscow because it would reduce overextension and would be more costly for US and Co.
RAND Corporation Releases Own Roadmap To Russia's Dissolution

Click to see full-size image

  1. Ideological and Informational Cost-Imposing Measures:
  • Diminishing faith in the Russian electoral system would be difficult because of state control over most media sources;
  • Creating the perception that the regime is not pursuing the public interest could focus on widespread, large-scale corruption and further challenge the legitimacy of the state;
  • Encouraging domestic protests and other nonviolent resistance would focus on distracting or destabilizing the Russian regime and reducing the likelihood that it would pursue aggressive actions abroad. Very difficult since it ensues meddling in Russia’s internal affairs by Western governments and carries very high risk;
  • Undermining Russia’s image abroad would focus on diminishing Russian standing and influence, thus undercutting regime claims of restoring Russia to its former glory. It is unclear how effective that would be, since that’s been an on-going trend for years.
RAND Corporation Releases Own Roadmap To Russia's Dissolution

Click to see full-size image

Regardless, “while none of these measures has a high probability of success, any or all of them would prey on the Russian regime’s deepest anxieties and might be employed as a deterrent threat to diminish Russia’s active disinformation and subversion campaigns abroad.” These are essentially aimed at hurting the Russian top brass’ feelings.

  1. Air and Space Cost-Imposing Measures:
  • Reposturing bombers within easy striking range of key Russian strategic targets has a high likelihood of success and would certainly get Moscow’s attention and raise Russian anxieties. Placements such as in the Baltic states or in the UK, as in the case of the recent deployment of B-52 bombers. Low risk if out of range of Russian missiles;
  • Reposturing fighters so that they are closer to their targets than bombers as a way to achieve higher sortie rates to compensate for their smaller payloads would likely concern Moscow even more than reposturing bombers, but the likelihood of success is low and risks are high;
  • Deploying additional tactical nuclear weapons to locations in Europe and Asia could heighten Russia’s anxiety enough to significantly increase investments in its air defenses;
  • Repositioning U.S. and allied ballistic missile defense systems to better engage Russian ballistic missiles would also alarm Moscow, but it would cause less financial stress because Russia could just saturate with existing systems;
  • There are also ways to get Russia to extend itself in strategic competition. These include developing new strategic bombers and other arms and systems. This is risky since Russia could counter these measures by investing in cheaper alternatives that do the job just fine;
  • Finally, The United States might goad Russia into a costly arms race by breaking out of the nuclear arms control regime, but the benefits are unlikely to outweigh U.S. costs.
RAND Corporation Releases Own Roadmap To Russia's Dissolution

Click to see full-size image

RAND Corporation Releases Own Roadmap To Russia's Dissolution

Click to see full-size image

  1. Maritime Cost-Imposing Measures:
  • Increasing U.S. and allied naval force posture and presence in Russia’s operating areas could force Russia to increase its naval investments, diverting investments from potentially more dangerous areas;
  • Increasing naval R&D efforts would focus on developing new weapons that allow U.S. submarines to threaten a broader set of targets or enhance their ability to threaten Russian nuclear ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs), which could impose anti-submarine warfare costs on Russia;
  • Shifting nuclear posture toward SSBNs would entail increasing the percentage of the U.S. nuclear triad assigned to SSBNs by increasing the size of that fleet;
  • Checking the Black Sea buildup would involve deploying strengthened NATO anti-access and area denial over the Black Sea—perhaps in the form of long-range, land-based anti-ship missiles—to drive up the cost of defending Russian bases in Crimea and lower the benefit to Russia of having seized this area.
RAND Corporation Releases Own Roadmap To Russia's Dissolution

Click to see full-size image

  1. Land and Multidomain Cost-Imposing Measures:
  • Increasing U.S. forces in Europe, increasing European NATO member ground capabilities, and deploying a large number of NATO forces on the Russian border would likely have only limited effects on extending Russia. All the options would enhance deterrence, but the risks vary;
  • Increasing the size and frequency of NATO exercises in Europe may help to enhance readiness and deterrence, but it is unlikely to prompt a costly Russian response unless the exercises also send risky signals;
  • Developing but not deploying an intermediate-range missile could bring Russia back into conformity with the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty but could also prompt an acceleration of Russian missile programs;
  • Incremental investments in new technologies to counter Russian air defenses and increase U.S. long-range fires could significantly improve defense and deterrence while compelling increased Russian investment in countermeasures.
RAND Corporation Releases Own Roadmap To Russia's Dissolution

Click to see full-size image

RAND Corporation Releases Own Roadmap To Russia's Dissolution

Click to see full-size image

This, in its own stead would force the US army to “rebuild its linguistic and analytical expertise on Russia. Because Russia does pose a long-term threat, the Army needs to develop the human capital to engage in this strategic competition.”

The army doesn’t need to directly take part in overextending and unbalancing Russia, but it would play a large role in countering any possible blowbacks.

Finally, the report reaches the following conclusion:

“The most-promising options to “extend Russia” are those that directly address its vulnerabilities, anxieties, and strengths, exploiting areas of weakness while undermining Russia’s current advantages. In that regard, Russia’s greatest vulnerability, in any competition with the United States, is its economy, which is comparatively small and highly dependent on energy exports.”

Following is the table with the most promising measures in order of their respective benefits and risks weighed:

RAND Corporation Releases Own Roadmap To Russia's Dissolution

Click to see full-size image

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • John

    lol

  • James

    Typical imperialist American’s. Ahh well…..will be good to see Russia rub it in their faces.

  • goingbrokes

    “Recognizing that some level of competition with Russia is inevitable, RAND researchers…” Who writes crap like that? A zionist think tank in the Washington swamp.
    So a purportedly serious “think tank” feels they must recognise Russia is a competitor!!! They still haven’t come to terms with the fact that RUSSIA IS BACK!
    They still haven’t come to terms with the fact that US imperial ways don’t work anymore.
    They still haven’t come to terms with the fact that the Apocalypse (“unveiling”) has happened already, and that we know now that jewish oligarchs are behind all of US machinations. And behind these think tanks!

    • FlorianGeyer

      It appears that the muppets working for the Rand Corporation have far to much time on their hands.

      Perhaps they should consider more useful employment in Starbucks coffee shops ?

  • Peter Bozich

    More pathetic rhetoric from the neocon think tanks. Their analysis is based on the here and now, and the current setup in having the reserve currency shitty dollar enables the U.S to finance their war machine. All they do is suck up the world’s saving, in return for crappy greenbacks.
    There is no way in the world this will last forever, just look at the countries steering away from the greenback.
    Maybe Rand should do an evaluation on the risks to its own country, once the curtain comes down on the U.S dollar.
    Who is going to finance the U.S anymore, that is, if the U.S remains as is in its current union.

  • Nosferatu

    Russia can only be defeated if Russian elite betray Russia. Putin will not do that. West will loose this time.

    • 1691

      Russia can not be defeated.

      • Nosferatu

        I wish you were right. But even mighty Soviet Russia with the strongest army in the world was defeated in 1991 because its elite betrayed Soviet Russia. But this will not be repeated anytime soon…..

        • 1691

          In 1991 Russia was hurt badly but not mortally. Russia overcame that victoriously.

          • Nosferatu

            That is right, but in some ways it can be said it was defeated. Especially the ideology of social and just world without expoitation of the poor by the rich was defeated.

          • Tudor Miron

            Idea of social and just world didn’t die. Yes, they try hard to ruin it – using every tool in their disposal – media, movies, books, religion but this idea is coming back effortlessly without external “help”. I would think that this idea is interwoven in land itself. That’s the difference between Western, Eastern and Russian civilisation – western is based on individual success above all. Eastern seeks that “middle way of balance” and Russian civilisational idea is “fairness”. That’s on “genetic” level and again I will say that it is interwoven in Russia’s land and air itself. And yes, it is infectious. If someone stays here long enough (~ 7 years without leaving) it will resonate within him. It does resonate with many people of this world – because deep inside we humans feel that this world order is unjust and is against the Creator’s will.

        • Harry Smith

          Moscow is the 3d Rome and it has to stand until the end.

        • Tudor Miron

          History shows that Russia can be hurt but so far collective west didn’t manage to swallow itdespite trying for hundreds of years. Yes, sometimes it looks like it’s over but in short time Russia rises from ashes and here we are again. We don’t know what happens next but there’s enough sons and doughters of Russia who are willing to stand for her in a way that is incomprehensible to western mind.
          Do you know why west and many slavs hate us – because we refuse to surrender. That’s what angers the west and puts many slavs to shame (and it angers them).

          • Nosferatu

            I am from Slovakia. We are your friends, we love Russia. Even if many of our politicians are bought by the west, our army will certainly refuse an order to attack Russia if such order comes.

  • Assad must stay (gr8rambino)

    How nice of them to release their plans so Russia can study it and avoid this from happening :)

    • Zionism is EVIL

      Yeah, what kind of dumb arseholes publish their plans to destroy Russian in advance?

  • Rhodium 10

    Russia also have his game cards in case of inminent threat….to supply Iran and NK with advance weapons in spite of UN embargo, to deploy troops and AD system( or even MIG 31 armed with Hipersonic weapons) in Venezuela and Cuba..deploy some MIG 31 armed with Khinzal in east Indian ocean ( Myanmar or cambodia)….

  • Balázs Jávorszky

    I can’t decide whether this is bullshit, propaganda, or serious. Most of the points are really delusional. If this is serious, the problem is very-very big.

    Ramping up US energy production has been tried, very likely intentionally. The enormously costly and environmentally harmful fracking has very low yields. They somehow coerced the Saudis to increase production. etc. The US was successful in depressing oil prices for a few years but it’s unclear whether this has harmed Russia to a great extent. For the US, this was clearly harmful, a short term measure.

    Sanctions nowadays are synonymous with jokes. The US imposed sanctions have the ever increasing unintended effect of putting the US into irrelevance.

    ETC.

  • Dušan Mirić

    Well, what about fragmenting of the USA and imposing of Cuban governor of Florida? Nice?

  • dutchnational

    Trying to bring more instability into the world is not a good idea.

    • Tudor Miron

      How dare you! Obey to your masters :) they know better than you. lol

  • RichardD
    • AM Hants

      First thought that comes to mind, with regards your question, before viewing the link.

      AsheNAZI Khazarians?

      • RichardD

        AshkeNAZI I agree with. From the genetic research that I’ve seen, I question the Khazar part.

        • AM Hants

          Ditto. What jumped out at me, when I started looking around and finding out more, was how they had NAZI in the name. I swear to God, they are not the brightest bulbs in the box. Just, like to brag about who and what they are, covertly and then scream anti-semetics, when you put two and two together. Nomadic Turkic Tribes, who learnt Hebrew and adopted Christianity, Islam and Judea, over 2,000 years ago. Funnily enough, Judea was an outpost of the Roman Empire, way back then.

  • AM Hants

    Who is behind the Rand Corp?

    I am reading a book on the ‘Black Water Mercenaries’, which is interesting to say the least. Especially, how Washington DC is spending $billion on private contractors, yet, the average Forces, end up on food stamps, and physical and mental issues, concerning frontline duties, which the Government ignore.

    What I have found interesting, with regards the book, it goes back to Dick Chenie, finding a niche for Haliburton, which he invested heavily in and the formation of private military outsourcing. Roll forward, to 1997, when the US was investing heavily, spending $billions on private military outsourcing, and how it benefitted Haliburton, amongst others. Then have a look at what went on in 1997, with both the Ukraine Russia Friendship Agreement, which Porkie tore up. Now does that leave Ukraine and Russian borders, where they were back prior to 1917? Owing to them never ratifying their borders, since the fall of the Soviet Union, back in 1991?

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a22f5706995b448f222110da2826cef6d66de99759c1eaf36ff2c64c39ab60d6.jpg

    They were only recognised, whilst Ukraine and Russia were part of the CIS.

    Together with 1997, Clinton ignoring the promises to Gorbechev, from James Baker, the Secretary of State, who promised they would not move an inch into Eastern Europe. 1999, the NATO move into Eastern Europe started and as of today, there are now 13 or is it 14 NATO bases in Eastern Europe. 1997, when Clinton and Blair thought it was a good idea to bomb Kosovo. By the time things got going in Iraq, the private military industry, was seriously up and running, plus, $billions of US tax payers money was spent on it.

    The same crowd involved then as today. Did we learn nothing? Funnily enough, pushed by the same old ‘Think Tanks’, which are so desperate to control Russia’s natural resources.

    Remember the Rand Corporation list of instruction to Porkie, when he first became President of Ukraine? Instructing the genocide and ethnic cleansing, of the Russian speaking population of Ukraine.

    President Poroshenko Uses RAND Corporation “Action Plan” for Eastern Ukraine including Ground Assaults and Air Strikes… https://www.globalresearch.ca/president-poroshenko-uses-rand-corporation-action-plan-for-eastern-ukraine-including-ground-assaults-and-air-strikes/5389795

    Soros guidelines to regime change.

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/6208e1f6574ea7bc111d59a0a82c39b32fa8950650fb4aadad9b502733b23e17.png

    Reminds me of 2014, when Obama and Saudi were trying to manipulate the oil market, in order to take Russia down. They so got it wrong. Believing Russian GDP was reliant on 50% oil and gas GDP. However, the ‘Think Tanks’ forgot to look at the Russian GDP Budget. Where 16% of the GDP Budget was focused on oil and gas revenue, not 50%. How many US oil and gas companies went bankrupt, owing to the miscalculation? How many other nations energy industries went bankrupt? Russia could produce a barrel of oil, excluding transport cost for around $4, owing to production costs being in ruble and exports in $US. The US could produce a barrel of oil, back then, for around $50 or more and yet, it was being sold for $30-40, I believe. Profit for Russia, devastation for the US.

    The only problem Russia has with the Rand Corp ‘Think Tank’ guidelines, is allowing the Council of Europe and the 5th Columns, to try and take control of the education agenda and playing with young minds.

    Top Russian Politician Zhirinovsky Brilliantly Exposes Western Propaganda Against Russia… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OVaz-JdLEE

    • AM Hants

      Army Virtue-Tweet Backfires: 1000s Expose “Heartbreaking” Horrors Of War… https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-05-26/army-virtue-tweet-backfires-1000s-expose-heartbreaking-horrors-war

      How much does the US spend on the Private Military Industry and how do they control them?

    • IanSeed

      The other problem with the US crashing oil prices to hurt Russia (also Iran / Venezuela) is that it also hurts their ally Saudi

      But it REALLY helps China who have lots of lovely cheap oil with which to continue their economic juggernaut.

      • AM Hants

        So true. China did seriously well out of it all, both then and now.

      • Sinbad2

        When Obama tried crashing oil prices to crash Russia, he made Russia stronger, and has mortally wounded the American oil companies and the US economy.

        Because crashing oil prices and terror attacks destroyed the Soviet Union, the US thought they would do it again to Russia. But those damn sneaky Russians were prepared this time.

        The US needs oil above 65 dollars, that’s 5 bucks above the cost of production. Russia only needs 45 bucks, and the Saudis 20 bucks, if they stopped supporting the US.

        China is cleaning up, they pay only half the price of America, you can’t compete in manufacturing if your competition only pays half your cost for energy.

  • Tudor Miron

    Is South front hopeful to ge a piece of that bufget thrown against Russia? :) Cmon guys.
    One thing that comes to mind when I read such articles. Degradation of education systems is showing :) What’s even more amusing is that someone is paying such imbeciles who come up with such risk/reward assessments :)

  • chortovadooshina

    So, the US is waging war on Russia already…trying to provoke it to do something..that will justify starting the shooting war. Going to us all killed. Thanks a lot

  • Brother Thomas

    This report is more interesting if read not as ‘what could be done to destabilise Russia’, but if the headings are read as ‘what the US should stop doing to restabilise itself’ and slow its own decline.

    These in turn can be summed up as 1). Reducing the military budget and stopping wasteful wars, 2). Investing at home in health, education and physical infrastructure.

    A useful third point would be to stop putting sanctions on and threatening other countries with regime change, while projecting US domestic law extraterritorially. It tends to piss off friends and create new enemies.

  • Ashok Varma

    Russia’s immense wealth has always been a target for the west and Jews.

  • Zionism is EVIL

    Jew parasites want to suck the life out of Russia now.