DOCSLIB.ORG

Foreign Military Bases in Eurasia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Foreign Military Bases in Eurasia Foreign Military Bases in Eurasia SIPRI Policy Paper No. 18 Zdzislaw Lachowski Stockholm International Peace Research Institute June 2007 © SIPRI, 2007 ISSN 1652-0432 (print) ISSN 1653-7548 (online) Printed in Sweden by CM Gruppen, Bromma Contents Preface iv Abbreviations and acronyms v Map of British, French, Soviet and US troops based abroad in Eurasia, 1990 vi Map of Russian, US and other troops based abroad in Eurasia, 2006–2007 vii 1. Introduction 1 A historical overview 2 2. Reconfiguring US foreign bases 5 Background 5 The changing policy of US foreign base alignment 6 The new US global posture 12 US domestic criticism 16 Table 2.1. Major NATO and US military bases in Eurasia 8 3. Repositioning NATO and US bases in Europe 20 Germany 23 South-Eastern Europe: the Black Sea bases 24 Central Europe 27 The Eastern Mediterranean region 29 4. South-West and North-East Asia 31 South-West Asia 31 East Asia and the Indian Ocean region 36 5. Russia and the near abroad: from retreat to recapture 43 Central Asia: replaying the ‘Great Game’? 46 Russia’s southern perimeter 56 Belarus: facing NATO’s advance 62 Table 5.1. Major Russian foreign military bases and installations in Eurasia 46 6. Conclusions 63 About the author 69 Preface The basing of military forces on foreign territory, at locations leased from or co-occupied with the local authorities (or, rarely, held extraterritorially), is a prac- tice almost as old as warfare itself. Bases can have an economic, political or demonstrative rationale but in all periods their pattern has been linked with the strategic dictates and relationships of the time. Observing changes in the way they are placed, owned and used can provide many clues to the most significant trends of security evolution. This paper examines what has been happening in basing practices in Eurasia since the end of the cold war. Up to 1989–90, bases were used by the Soviet Union, the United States and their military alliances in an essentially symmetrical way. Each side clustered its for- ward bases in the heart of Europe to block and deter the other, while the larger powers competed for extra-European bases that could serve their global mobility or give an edge in regional conflicts. That pattern has been replaced by a less symmet- ric and possibly transitional situation. In places such as Central Asia, the South Caucasus and the eastern edge of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), Russia and the USA are still engaged in a mutual balancing game. More broadly, however, US basing policy has been transformed by the demands of the global campaign against new (including non-state) threats and of operations in Afghani- stan and Iraq; while Russia’s overall basing pattern has drawn inwards to provide a defensive cordon around its territory and to pin down its remaining allies. Neither great power has found the process simple, and the USA in particular has run into sensitive disputes with friendly host countries as well as suspicions and protests from Russia. US basing has also become a more nationally driven policy, with new examples of NATO’s collective use of facilities limited to the new theatres of conflict outside Europe. Emerging powers like China and India are barely starting to join in the basing game but seem likely to have such ambitions in future. Zdzislaw Lachowski tells the story of Euro-Asian basing changes in meticulous detail in this paper, bringing together a collection of facts and lessons that has not been easily accessible in one place before. His conclusions raise interesting ques- tions about the rationality and viability of current basing strategies, hinting that further changes might be in store as a result of global policy reassessment by future US administrations and further shifts in political relationships and the nature of regimes in the post-Soviet sphere. This analysis should be of equal value to mili- tary and political observers and to those interested in tracking the strategies of the major powers. I am grateful to Zdzislaw Lachowski for his original and thorough research, to Jetta Gilligan Borg and Caspar Trimmer for the editing, and to David Cruickshank for the maps. Alyson J. K. Bailes Director, SIPRI June 2007 Abbreviations and acronyms AWACS Airborne warning and control system BRAC Base Realignment and Closure CBO Congressional Budget Office CFE Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (Treaty) CIA Central Intelligence Agency CIS Commonwealth of Independent States CRS Congressional Research Service CSL Cooperative security location CSTO Collective Security Treaty Organization DOD Department of Defense EETF Eastern European Task Force EFI Efficient Facilities Initiative ERI En route infrastructure (base) EU European Union EUFOR European Union Forces in Bosnia and Herzegovina FOB Forward operating base FOS Forward operating site GUAM Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan and Moldova IGPBS Integrated Global Presence and Basing Strategy ISAF International Security Assistance Force K-2 Karshi–Khanabad (base) km kilometre KFOR Kosovo Force MOB Main operating base NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization OBC Overseas Basing Commission OSCE Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe PAC Patriot Advanced Capability (missile) QDR Quadrennial Defense Review SACEUR Supreme Allied Commander Europe SFOR Stabilization Force in Bosnia and Herzegovina SCO Shanghai Cooperation Organization UN United Nations WTO Warsaw Treaty Organization 380 240 73 3 Iceland 70 56 65 40 55 28 Nether- lands UK 3 50 3 E. Poland Belgium W. Czechoslovakia Germany 43 Hungary Mongolia 15 9 Italy Portugal 2 5 Spain 3 Turkey Greece South Japan Korea US personnel British personnel French personnel Soviet personnel 17 5 3 Figures are thousands of personnel Viet Nam deployed Guam Philippines (USA) British, French, Soviet and US troops based abroad in Eurasia, 1990 150 72 Nether- 10 lands UK Germany 13 Belgium 1 Ukraine 1 35 16 Moldova 12 37 Kosovo 29 3 Georgia Italy 1 Kyrgyzstan 3 2 Armenia 8 Spain Tajikistan Greece Japan 12 South Korea 12 Afghanistan Iraq Bahrain 1 Qatar US personnel Russian personnel Other personnel Figures are thousands of personnel 3 deployed Guam (USA) Russian, US and other troops based abroad in Eurasia, 2006–2007 1. Introduction On 16 August 2004 the President of the United States, George W. Bush, announced that some 60 000–70 000 US troops stationed in Asia and Europe would be returned to the USA over the coming decade. This realignment of forces signals a major change in US global and regional policies that will affect the struc- ture of US and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) base deployment (referred to as ‘basing’ or ‘forward basing’ by the military) throughout the world.1 In the 1990s Russia had begun pulling out of its cold war spheres of influence, but it either halted or began to reverse its base withdrawal process at almost the same time as Bush’s plan was made known. Large numbers of foreign military bases are located in Eurasia.2 Most of them are the legacy of the cold war and are situated at places that were possible points of engagement between NATO and the Warsaw Treaty Organization (WTO). When the cold war ended, the rationale for this pattern of military basing ceased to be valid. However, concepts change more rapidly than practices, and the USA took almost 15 years to develop a new policy for alignment of forces that could respond rapidly and flexibly to the changed situation. Base realignment is the central elem- ent of a larger transformation of the US global defence posture by updating the type, location, number and capability of the US military forces, and the nature of US alliances. The major stimulus for this realignment was the launch of the so-called ‘global war on terrorism’ following the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks on the USA. The key threats to the USA were redefined as growing religious extremism and other asymmetric threats (e.g. unconventional warfare, crime, and the threat of the proliferation of weapons and technologies of mass destruction). The US ‘global war on terrorism’ focuses on sources of instability in the crisis-prone regions of Asia and the greater Middle East3 and the problem of access to energy resources. 1 In this paper the term ‘base’ is used for a location from which operations are launched or sup- ported, or an area or location containing installations or facilities that provide logistical or other sup- port. See e.g. US Department of Defense, DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, URL <http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/doddict/>. Historically, the term base implies unrestricted access and freedom of operation for the user state both at the base and from it. Nowadays, a foreign base is defined as a facility where the user state’s access is restricted (e.g. through status of forces agree- ments). Robert H. Harkavy has proposed using ‘foreign military presence’ for both bases and facil- ities. See Harkavy, R. H., SIPRI, Bases Abroad: The Global Foreign Military Presence (Oxford Uni- versity Press: Oxford, 1989), pp. 7–8. Forward basing pre-positions military personnel or equipment at strategic foreign locations so that they can be used in time of crisis or combat with minimum delay. 2 Eurasia is defined here as the landmass of Europe and Asia, except the Middle East. 3 This paper uses Rosemary Hollis’s definition of the greater Middle East: ‘bounded by Turkey in the north and the Arabian Peninsula state of Yemen to the south, and stretching from Egypt, Israel and Lebanon in the west to Afghanistan in the east’. Hollis, R., ‘The greater Middle East’, SIPRI Yearbook 2005: Armaments, Disarmament and International Security (Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2005), p.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Abu Ghraib Convictions: a Miscarriage of Justice
    Buffalo Public Interest Law Journal Volume 32 Article 4 9-1-2013 The Abu Ghraib Convictions: A Miscarriage of Justice Robert Bejesky Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/bpilj Part of the Human Rights Law Commons, and the Military, War, and Peace Commons Recommended Citation Robert Bejesky, The Abu Ghraib Convictions: A Miscarriage of Justice, 32 Buff. Envtl. L.J. 103 (2013). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/bpilj/vol32/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at Digital Commons @ University at Buffalo School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Buffalo Public Interest Law Journal by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ University at Buffalo School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE ABU GHRAIB CONVICTIONS: A MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE ROBERT BEJESKYt I. INTRODUCTION ..................... ..... 104 II. IRAQI DETENTIONS ...............................107 A. Dragnet Detentions During the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq.........................107 B. Legal Authority to Detain .............. ..... 111 C. The Abuse at Abu Ghraib .................... 116 D. Chain of Command at Abu Ghraib ..... ........ 119 III. BASIS FOR CRIMINAL CULPABILITY ..... ..... 138 A. Chain of Command ....................... 138 B. Systemic Influences ....................... 140 C. Reduced Rights of Military Personnel and Obedience to Authority ................ ..... 143 D. Interrogator Directives ................ ....
    [Show full text]
  • Jsp 800 Defence Movements and Transportation Regulations
    JSP 800 DEFENCE MOVEMENTS AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATIONS VOLUME 2 PASSENGER TRAVEL INSTRUCTIONS Third Edition By Command of the Defence Council MINISTRY OF DEFENCE January 2010 FOREWORD This document outlines the Joint Service Policy for movement of passengers and provides guidance to formations and units. This volume of JSP 800 is a ‘live’ publication and will be subject to amendment in order to keep it relevant. The travel instructions in this manual replace those formally published in the following areas: a. The previous edition of JSP 800 which should now be destroyed. b. Instructions previously covered in Defence Council Instructions (DCIs) and those DINs which expire on issue of this edition. Personal contact details of junior staff redacted under section 40 of the Freedom of Information Act The Sponsor of JSP 800 Volume 2 is the Deputy Head, SCM. Each Chapter of this volume has a Chapter Sponsor, identified in the contents list, and who is responsible for the maintenance of and update of the content via the process undertaken by the Defence Passenger Policy Committee and associated Working Groups . Chapter Sponsors should review their chapters, to ensure accuracy and relevance, and pass proposed amendments to the Technical Author who will aim to publish amendments to the intranet as a minimum on an annual basis. This volume will contain some reference to DCIs and DINs. It must be noted that these were the latest edition at the time of printing and may have been superseded. Some duplication necessarily exists between these instructions and those contained in other volumes of JSP 800 although this has been minimised.
    [Show full text]
  • Nikolai Saychuk, Ph.D. in History, Board Member of the Ukrainian Association for American Studies
    Євген Пінак, магістр правознавства, член правління громадської організації «Українська Асоціація Американістики» БІЙ В БУХТІ ОРМОК 3 ГРУДНЯ 1944 Р. – ОСТАННЯ ПЕРЕМОГА ЯПОНСЬКИХ НАДВОДНИХ КОРАБЛІВ Анотація. В статті розглянута остання перемога надводних кораблів Японського імперського флоту над надводними кораблями Військово-морських сил США, що відбулась в бухті Ормок 3 грудня 1944 р. Через помилки під час підготовки та проведення бою переважаючі сили американців не змогли знищити японський конвой та були змушені відступити. Метою статті є дослідження дій надводних кораблів Військово-морських сил США проти надводних кораблів противника в бухті Ормок 3 грудня 1944 р. та аналіз причин їх невдачі. Битво в бухті Ормок є показовим прикладом незалежних дій незначних наземних сил армії США за відсутності підтримки з боку авіації. Вона стала демонстрацією того, що переважаючий потенціал бойових суден та добре підготовлений екіпаж на стали запорукою перемоги у зв’язку з цілою низкою факторів, які автор описує в статті. Не зважаючи на те, що ця порівняно невелика битва майже не змінила результати битви біля Лейте і не внесла чогось нового в теорію військово-морських операцій її хід став підтвердженням неможливості надводних військово-морських суден США здійснювати ефективні операції без повітряної підтримки. Цей бій, також, підтвердив надзвичайну важливість планування, лідерських якостях та точних рішеннях командування військово-морських операцій. Ключові слова: Тихоокеанський театр воєнних дій Другої світової війни; битва біля Лейте; Битва в бухті Ормок; Бойові операції надводних сил; ВМС США під час Другої світової війни. УДК 94(73) Nikolai Saychuk, Ph.D. in History, Board member of the Ukrainian Association for American Studies THE OPERATIONAL PLANNING AND PREPARATION OF SOVIET LANDING IN THE BLACK SEA STRAITS Abstract.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents Item Transcript
    DIGITAL COLLECTIONS ITEM TRANSCRIPT Gregory Fein. Full, unedited interview, 2009 ID LA008.interview PERMALINK http://n2t.net/ark:/86084/b41h6r ITEM TYPE VIDEO ORIGINAL LANGUAGE RUSSIAN TABLE OF CONTENTS ITEM TRANSCRIPT ENGLISH TRANSLATION 2 CITATION & RIGHTS 13 2021 © BLAVATNIK ARCHIVE FOUNDATION PG 1/13 BLAVATNIKARCHIVE.ORG DIGITAL COLLECTIONS ITEM TRANSCRIPT Gregory Fein. Full, unedited interview, 2009 ID LA008.interview PERMALINK http://n2t.net/ark:/86084/b41h6r ITEM TYPE VIDEO ORIGINAL LANGUAGE RUSSIAN TRANSCRIPT ENGLISH TRANSLATION —Today is March 17, 2009. We are in Los Angeles, meeting a veteran of the Great Patriotic War. Please introduce yourself and tell us about your life before the war. What was your family like, what did your parents do, what sort of school did you attend? How did the war begin for you and what did you do during the war? My name is Gregory Fein and I was born on April 18, 1921, in Propolsk [Prapoisk], which was later renamed Slavgorod [Slawharad], Mahilyow Region, Belarus. My father was an artisan bootmaker. We lived Propolsk until 1929. That year my family moved to Krasnapolle, a nearby town in the same region. We moved because my father had to work in an artel. In order for his children to have an education, he had to join an artisan cooperative rather than work alone. His skills were in demand in Kransopole [Krasnapolle], so we moved there, because there was a cooperative there. There were five children in the family and I was the youngest. My eldest sister Raya worked as a labor and delivery nurse her entire life.
    [Show full text]
  • Rebuilding Iraqi Television: a Personal Account
    Rebuilding Iraqi Television: A Personal Account By Gordon Robison Senior Fellow USC Annenberg School of Communication October, 2004 A Project of the USC Center on Public Diplomacy Middle East Media Project USC Center on Public Diplomacy 3502 Watt Way, Suite 103 Los Angeles, CA 90089-0281 www.uscpublicdiplomacy.org USC Center on Public Diplomacy – Middle East Media Project Rebuilding Iraqi Television: A Personal Account By Gordon Robison Senior Fellow, USC Annenberg School of Communication October 27, 2003 was the first day of Ramadan. It was also my first day at a new job as a contractor with the Coalition Provisional Authority, the American-led administration in Occupied Iraq. I had been hired to oversee the news department at Iraqi television. I had been at the station barely an hour when news of a major attack broke: at 8:30am a car bomb had leveled the Red Cross headquarters. The blast was enormous, and was heard across half the city. When the pictures began to come in soon afterwards they were horrific. The death toll began to mount. Then came word of more explosions: car bombs destroying three Iraqi police stations. A fourth police station was targeted but the bomber was intercepted in route. At times like this the atmosphere in the newsroom at CNN, the BBC or even a local television station is focused, if somewhat chaotic. Most news operations have a plan for dealing with big, breaking stories. Things in the newsroom move quickly, and they can get very stressful, but things do happen. Also, this was hardly the first time an atrocity like this had taken place.
    [Show full text]
  • Fifth Progress Report on the Implementation of the Common Set of Proposals Endorsed by EU and NATO Councils on 6 December 2016 and 5 December 2017
    Fifth progress report on the implementation of the common set of proposals endorsed by EU and NATO Councils on 6 December 2016 and 5 December 2017 16 June 2020 On 6 December 2016 and on 5 December 2017, EU and NATO Councils endorsed, in parallel processes, a common set of 74 proposals for the implementation of the Joint Declaration signed in Warsaw on 8 July 2016 by the President of the European Council, the President of the European Commission and the Secretary General of NATO. Responding to the taskings by the Ministers of both organizations, regular progress reports on implementation were submitted to the respective Councils in June and December 2017, in June 2018, as well as in June 2019. The present, fifth, report covers the period between June 2019 and June 2020. It elaborates on progress achieved in the implementation of the 74 common proposals by showcasing tangible deliverables in all areas of cooperation. In particular, the following elements can be highlighted: - Political dialogue has further intensified at all levels and settings, including in virtual formats, while maintaining the positive trend of mutual and reciprocal cross-briefings. It remains an essential and indispensable instrument for strengthening mutual understanding, building confidence and ensuring reciprocal transparency vis-à-vis the NATO Allies and the EU Member States, as well as their strong engagement. - The Structured Dialogue on military mobility at staff level continues to contribute to information sharing in the key areas of military requirements, transport infrastructure, transport of dangerous goods, customs and cross border movement permissions. - In the area of strategic communications, cooperation focused on strengthening mutual alerting on disinformation incidents and hostile information activities, as well as improving capacities related to detection, analysis and exposure to disinformation.
    [Show full text]
  • In the Shadow of General Marshall-Old Soldiers in The
    In The Shadow of General Marshall: Old Soldiers in the Executive Branch Ryan Edward Guiberson Anaconda, Montana Bachelor of Science, United States Air Force Academy, 1992 Master of Arts-Political Science, University of Florida, 1994 A Dissertation presented to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Virginia in Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Politics University of Virginia August, 2013 2 Abstract: The usurpation of political authority by tyrannical military figures is a theme that pervades the history of politics. The United States has avoided such an occurrence and the prospect of a military coup d’etat rarely registers as a realistic concern in American politics. Despite the unlikelihood of this classic form of military usurpation, other more insidious forms lurk and must be guarded against to protect civilian control of the military. One potential manifestation has been referred to as a military colonization of the executive branch. This form implies that retired senior military officers increasingly pursue executive branch positions and unduly promote the interests of the active duty military, its leaders, and military solutions to national security issues. This work addresses military colonization claims by examining the number of retired senior military officers that have served in executive branch positions, trends in where they participate, and their political behavior in these positions. It also uses interviews with retired senior military officers to gain their perspectives on the incentives and disincentives of executive branch service. The study concludes that in the post-Cold War period, participation rates of retired senior military officers in key executive branch positions do not diverge significantly from broader post-World War II patterns.
    [Show full text]
  • Dodsenior Leadership Compiled by June Lee, Editorial Associate
    DODSenior Leadership Compiled by June Lee, Editorial Associate KEY: ADUSD Assistant Deputy Undersecretary of Defense ASD Assistant Secretary of Defense ATSD Assistant to the Secretary of Defense DASD Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense DATSD Deputy Assistant to the Secretary of Defense DUSD Deputy Undersecretary of Defense PADUSD Principal Assistant Deputy Undersecretary of Defense PDASD Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense PDATSD Principal Deputy Assistant to the Secretary of Defense PDUSD Principal Deputy Undersecretary of Defense USD Undersecretary of Defense Secretary of Defense Deputy Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates Gordon England ASD, Legislative Affairs ASD, Networks & Information ASD, Public Affairs ATSD, Intelligence Robert Wilkie Integration & Chief Information Officer Vacant Oversight John G. Grimes William Dugan (acting) PDASD, Legislative Affairs DASD, PA (Media) Robert R. Hood PDASD, NII Bryan Whitman DASD, Senate Affairs Cheryl J. Roby DASD, PA (Internal Communications Robert Taylor DASD, Information Management, & Public Liaison) Allison Barber DASD, House Affairs Integration, & Technology Virginia Johnson David M. Wennergren DASD, C3 Policies, Programs, & Space Programs Ron Jost DASD, Resources Bonnie Hammersley (acting) DASD, C3ISR & IT Acquisition Tim Harp (acting) DASD, Information & Identity Assurance Robert Lentz Dir., Administration & Dir., Operational Dir., Program Analysis General Counsel Inspector General Management Test & Evaluation & Evaluation William J. Haynes II Claude M. Kicklighter Michael B. Donley Charles E. McQueary Bradley M. Berkson 50 AIR FORCE Magazine / March 2008 Acquisition, Technology, & Logistics Dir., Acquisition, Resources & Analysis DUSD, Installations & Environment Nancy L. Spruill Alex A. Beehler (acting) Dir., International Cooperation ADUSD, Installations Alfred D. Volkman John C. Williams Dir., Special Programs ADUSD, Environment, Safety, & Occupational Brig. Gen. Paul G.
    [Show full text]
  • Disjointed War: Military Operations in Kosovo, 1999
    Disjointed War Military Operations in Kosovo, 1999 Bruce R. Nardulli, Walter L. Perry, Bruce Pirnie John Gordon IV, John G. McGinn Prepared for the United States Army Approved for public release; distribution unlimited R Arroyo Center The research described in this report was sponsored by the United States Army under contract number DASW01-01-C-0003. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Disjointed war : military operations in Kosovo, 1999 / Bruce R. Nardulli ... [et al.]. p. cm. “MR-1406.” Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-8330-3096-5 1. Kosovo (Serbia)—History—Civil War, 1998—Campaigns. 2. North Atlantic Treaty Organization—Armed Forces—Yugoslavia. I. Nardulli, Bruce R. DR2087.5 .D57 2002 949.703—dc21 2002024817 Cover photos courtesy of U.S. Air Force Link (B2) at www.af.mil, and NATO Media Library (Round table Meeting) at www.nato.int. RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND® is a registered trademark. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions or policies of its research sponsors. Cover design by Stephen Bloodsworth © Copyright 2002 RAND All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from RAND. Published 2002 by RAND 1700 Main Street, P.O. Box 2138, Santa Monica, CA 90407-2138 1200 South Hayes Street, Arlington, VA 22202-5050 201 North Craig Street, Suite 102, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 RAND URL: http://www.rand.org/ To order RAND documents or to obtain additional information, contact Distribution Services: Telephone: (310) 451-7002; Fax: (310) 451-6915; Email: [email protected] PREFACE Following the 1999 Kosovo conflict, the Army asked RAND Arroyo Center to prepare an authoritative and detailed account of military operations with a focus on ground operations, especially Task Force Hawk.
    [Show full text]
  • OCS Compete Series Errata
    OCS Compete Series Errata Table of Contents Page OCS v4.0 Clarifications & Errata page 2 OCS v4.3/v4.2/v4.1a Clarifications & Errata page 3 Dean’s Gamey/Not Gamey List page 4 4-02 Enemy at the Gates page 5 4-03 Tunisia page 6 4-04 Hube's Pocket page 7 4-05 DAK I & II page 8-9 4-06 Burma I & II page 10-11 4-07 Sicily page 12 4-08 Guderian’s Blitzkrieg II page 13-14 4-09 Korea I & II page 15 4-10 Case Blue page 16-19 4-11 Baltic Gap page 20-21 4-12 The Blitzkrieg Legend page 22-23 4-13 Reluctant Enemies page 24 4-14 Beyond the Rhine page 25 4-15 Tunisia II page 26 4-16 Sicily II page 26 4-17 Smolensk page 27 4-18 Hungarian Rhapsody page 28-30 4-19 The Third Winter page 31-32 Notes: 1. Second edition rulebooks that incorporate latest errata and clarifications are available on Gamers Archive. 2. Gamers Archive: http://www.gamersarchive.net 3. Items in blue indicate changes made in 2018. 4. Errata often mentions upgrading a game to v3 or v4; unless otherwise specified, same errata will apply to current rules (currently v4.2). 5. House Rule Options should be thought of as more options available to players who want to tweak the game rules. 6. All OCS games (excepting the orphaned Guderian’s Blitzkrieg from 1992) can and should be played with the latest version of the series rules.
    [Show full text]
  • Moscow Defense Brief 1/2008
    CONTENTS International Policy #1 (11), 2008 Ukraine, NATO and Russia 2 PUBLISHER Towards a Military Doctrine for Russia 5 Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Russian Army Technologies Serdyukov Cleans Up the Arbat 7 CAST Director & Publisher Ruslan Pukhov Reform of Military Education in Russia 10 Editor-in-Chief Towards the Restoration of Russian Air Power 13 Mikhail Barabanov Short Term Rearmament Prospects Advisory Editors Konstantin Makienko of Russia’s Armored Forces 17 Alexey Pokolyavin Researchers Ruslan Aliev Arms Trade Sergey Denisentsev Crisis: Algeria Refuses Delivery of MiG-29SMT Fighters 19 Polina Temerina Dmitry Vasiliev Facts & Figures Editorial Office 3 Tverskaya-Yamskaya, 24, office 5, Export Deliveries of Armoured Vehicles Moscow, Russia 125047 from Russian Plants 1992–2007 21 phone: +7 495 251 9069 fax: +7 495 775 0418 Contracts on Export http://www.mdb.cast.ru/ of Russian SAM Systems 1992–2007 22 To subscribe contact phone: +7 495 251 9069 23 or e-mail: [email protected] Our Authors Moscow Defense Brief is published by the Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or photocopying, recording or otherwise, without reference to Moscow Defense Brief. Please note that, while the Publisher has taken all reasonable care in the compilation of this publication, the Publisher cannot accept responsibility for any errors or omissions in this publication or for any loss arising therefrom. Authors’ opinions do not necessary reflect those of the Publisher or Editor Computer design & pre-press: ZEBRA-GROUP www.zebra-group.ru Cover Photo: Russian Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov during his trip to the 201st Motorized Rifle Division in Dushanbe, Tajikistan.
    [Show full text]
  • Joint Task Force East and Shared Military Basing in Romania and Bulgaria
    Occasional Paper Series STUDIES SECURITY MARSHALL FOR C. CENTER Joint Task Force East and Shared Military Basing in Romania and Bulgaria By Dorinel Moldovan, Plamen Pantev, and Matthew Rhodes GEORGE EUROPEAN No. 21 August 2009 ISSN 1863-6020 The George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies The George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies is a leading transatlantic defense educational and security studies institution. It is bilaterally supported by the U.S. and German governments and dedicated to the creation of a more stable security environment by advancing democratic defense institutions and relationships; promoting active, peaceful engagement; and enhancing enduring partnerships among the nations of North America, Europe, and Eurasia. The Marshall Center Occasional Paper Series The Marshall Center Occasional Paper Series seeks to further the legacy of the Center's namesake, General George C. Marshall, by disseminating scholarly essays that contribute to his ideal of ensuring that Europe and Eurasia are democratic, free, undivided, and at peace. Papers selected for this series are meant to identify, discuss, and influence current defense related security issues. The Marshall Center Occasional Paper Series focus is on comparative and interdisciplinary topics, including international security and democratic defense management, civil-military relations, strategy formulation, terrorism studies, defense planning, arms control, peacekeeping, crisis management, regional and cooperative security. The Marshall Center Occasional Papers are written by Marshall Center faculty and staff, Marshall Center alumni, or by individual, invited contributors, and are disseminated online and in a paper version. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the George C.
    [Show full text]