Alexey Malashenko

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Alexey Malashenko Alexey Malashenko Doctor of History, professor (2003), Scholar-in-Residence, “Religion, Society and Security” Program Co-Chair (Carnegie Moscow Center) Member of the editorial board of “Central Asia and the Caucasus” Member of the editorial board of “Acta Eurasica” Member of presidium of the Federation for Peace and Conciliation Professional Experience: - Professor, State University – Higher School of Economics, 2007 - date - Professor, Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO), 2000 – 2005 - Senior Scholar-in-Residence, “Religion, Society and Security” Program Co-chair, Carnegie Moscow Center, 1996 – date - Senior Associate, Institute of Oriental Studies RAN (Russian Academy of Sciences), 1999- 2001 - Head of Islamic Department, Institute of Oriental Studies RAN, 1986-1999 - Visiting Professor, Colgate University (USA), 1990 - Editor, journal "Problems of Peace and Socialism", 1982-1986 - Scholar-in-Residence, Institute of Oriental Studies, 1976-1982 - Advisor, RAN expedition (Libya), 1979-1980 - Military service (Algeria), 1974-1976 - Language practice (Egypt, Turkmenistan), 1972 Education: - Institute of Asian and African Countries, Moscow State University - Postdoctoral Degree in Political Science, 1995 - Ph.D. in History, 1978 - Diploma in History, 1974 1 Author / Co-author: - Ramzan Kadyrov. The Chechen Version of Russian Authoritarianism, ROSSPEN, Moscow, 2009 - Russia and Islam, ROSSPEN, Moscow, 2007 - The Islamic Alternative and the Islamist Project, Ves’ Mir, Moscow, 2006 - How Chechnya Voted, Carnegie Moscow Center, Moscow, 2006 - Russia's Restless Frontier: The Chechnya Factor in Post-Soviet Russia (Dmitri Trenin), Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, March 2004. - Islamic Factor in the Northern Caucasus, Carnegie Moscow Center, Moscow, 2001 - The Muslim renaissance in contemporary Russia, Carnegie Moscow Center, Moscow, 1998 - The Muslim Community of the CIS, Moscow, 1996 (Arabic translation, 1999) - Islam in Central Asia, Great Britain With L. Polonskaya , Garnet Publishing, 1994 (eng.) - The Last Red August, New York, 1993 (eng.) - The Search for Alternatives: Arab Concepts of Methods for Development, Nauka, Moscow, 1991 - The Soviet Union and the Muslim Nations With L. Polonskaya , New-Delhi, 1988 - Three Cities in Northern Africa, Nauka, Moscow, 1986 - The Official Ideology of Modern Algeria, Nauka, Moscow, 1982 Editor / Co-editor: - Twenty Years of Religious Freedom in Russia (ed. by A.V. Malashenko and S. Filatov), ROSSPEN, Moscow, 2009. - Religion and Globalization Across Eurasia (ed. by A.V. Malashenko and S. Filatov), ROSSPEN, Moscow, 2009. - Islam in Moscow (with F.A. Asadullin), Logos, Moscow, 2007 - Islam in Tatarstan (with R.M. Mukhametshin), Logos Moscow, 2007 - Islam in Bashkortostan (with A.B. Yunusova), Logos Moscow, 2007 - Islam in the Post-Soviet Newly Independent States: The View from Within, Carnegie Moscow Center, Moscow, 2001 - Islam e politica spazzio post-sovietico (with S. Filatov), Torino, 2000 - Reality of Ethnic Myths (with M.B. Olcott), Carnegie Moscow Center, Moscow, 2000 2 - Multi-Dimensional Borders of Central Asia (with M.B. Olcott), Carnegie Moscow Center, Moscow, 2000 - What Do Russia’s Regions Want? (with M.B. Olcott) Carnegie Moscow Center, Moscow, 1999 - Intolerance in Russia: Old and New Phobias (with G. Vitkovskaya), Carnegie Moscow Center, Moscow, 1999 - Ethnicity and Confessional Tradition in the Volga-Ural Region of Russia (with A.B. Yunusova), Carnegie Moscow Center, Moscow, 1998 - Conflicting Loyalties and the State in Post-Soviet Russia and Eurasia (with Michael Waller and Bruno Coppieters), Great Britain, Portland, 1998 - Islam in the CIS, Moscow 1998 - Cossack Revival: Hopes and Fears (with G. Vitkovskaya), Carnegie Moscow Center, Moscow, 1998 - Factor of Ethno-Confessional Identity in Post-Soviet Society (with M.B. Olcott), Carnegie Moscow Center, Moscow, 1998 - The Islamic Renaissance in Contemporary Russia, Carnegie Moscow Center, Moscow, 1998 - Religion and State in Modern Russia (with M.B. Olcott), Carnegie Moscow Center, Moscow, 1997 - Ecology, Society and Tradition: Social and Political Crisis in the CIS in the Context of Environmental Destruction (with M.B. Olcott), Carnegie Moscow Center, Moscow, 1997 - Ethnic and Regional Conflicts in Eurasia, 1st book Central Asia and Caucasus (with Bruno Coppieters and D. Trenin), Ves’ mir, Moscow, 1997 - Identity and Conflict in the Post-Soviet States (with M.B. Olcott and V. Tishkov), Carnegie Moscow Center, Moscow, 1997 - Muslim Countries. Religion and Politics (70-80 years) (with Y. Musikarge), Nayka, Moscow, 1991 3 .
Recommended publications
  • Russia and Turkey: a Cure for Schizophrenia
    RUSSIA AND TURKEY: A CURE FOR SCHIZOPHRENIA DMITRI TRENIN Dmitri Trenin is a senior specialist at the Carnegie Moscow Centre. Russia’s present relations with Turkey can be best described as schizophrenic. On the one hand, the Turks and the Russians have never had such amicable contacts—and on such an order of magnitude— as since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Shuttling small-retail Russian traders have turned Istanbul into a major hub of their commercial operations, whose volume rivals the official commercial turnover between the two countries. Antalya, along with other seaside resorts on the Turkish Mediterranean, has replaced the Crimea as the favourite vacation address for those Russians who can afford to go on holiday. Turkish construction workers are literally giving a new look to Moscow by building new dazzling business headquarters for Russia’s new rich—or rebuilding the seats of political power, such as the State Duma or the once-shelled White House of the government. Thousands of Russian military officers who have returned from Germany and their family members are lucky to reside in modern living quarters built for them by Turkish workers—with Bonn’s money. In a word, the Russians and the Turks have never been intermingling and co-operating so closely, and for so much mutual advantage, in the economic sphere as in the last five or six years. The opposite side of the ledger is almost as disturbing as the first one is encouraging. With the end of the Cold War, the scene appears to be set for a revival of the 400-year-old competition, and even for an advent of something which heretofore had been a marginal factor, namely, a clash of civilisations, Christian Orthodox and Moslem, with Russia and Turkey more or less assigned the mission of chefs de file for the respective sides.
    [Show full text]
  • CONGRESSIONAL PROGRAM U.S.-Russia Relations: Policy Challenges in a New Era
    CONGRESSIONAL PROGRAM U.S.-Russia Relations: Policy Challenges in a New Era May 29 – June 3, 2018 Helsinki, Finland and Tallinn, Estonia Copyright @ 2018 by The Aspen Institute The Aspen Institute 2300 N Street Northwest Washington, DC 20037 Published in the United States of America in 2018 by The Aspen Institute All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America U.S.-Russia Relations: Policy Challenges in a New Era May 29 – June 3, 2018 The Aspen Institute Congressional Program Table of Contents Rapporteur’s Summary Matthew Rojansky ....................................................................................................................................... 1 Russia 2018: Postponing the Start of the Post-Putin Era .............................................................................. 9 John Beyrle U.S.-Russian Relations: The Price of Cold War ........................................................................................ 15 Robert Legvold Managing the U.S.-Russian Confrontation Requires Realism .................................................................... 21 Dmitri Trenin Apple of Discord or a Key to Big Deal: Ukraine in U.S.-Russia Relations ................................................ 25 Vasyl Filipchuk What Does Russia Want? ............................................................................................................................ 39 Kadri Liik Russia and the West: Narratives and Prospects .........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Reading Russia Right 3
    SPECIAL EDITION 42 October 2005 SUMMARY After the fall of Communism, Reading Russia reverted to czarism. Russia Right But more importantly, Russia embraced capitalism. Although Dmitri Trenin Senior Associate, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace not democratic, Russia is largely free. Property rights are ore than twenty years after Russian leader understanding of what today’s Russia is and more deeply anchored than MMikhail Gorbachev began his policies of where it is headed. Available analyses of Russia perestroika and glasnost that led to the end of barely scratch the surface and are either too short they were five years ago, and the Cold War, a chill has entered relations sighted in their outlook or politically motivated. the once-collectivist society is between Russia and the West. Even as President These are serious and potentially dangerous Vladimir Putin prepares to assume the presi- flaws. Effective Western policies toward Russia going private. Indeed, private dency of the G-8, he is frequently criticized for demand a close, cool, and dispassionate view of consumption is the main driver taking Russia in the wrong direction. The very fundamental developments there. people who in 2000 called Putin a man with of economic growth. Russia’s whom they could do business are having second Russian Politics: Free but Not Democratic future now depends heavily on thoughts. Those once fascinated by Putin now publicly rebuke him. As they were exiting from communism in the how fast a middle class— Putin is shooting back, accusing the West of 1990s, most nations initially reached back, trying to weaken and dismember Russia.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternative Worldviews: Understanding Potential
    Research Report C O R P O R A T I O N STEPHEN WATTS, NATHAN BEAUCHAMP-MUSTAFAGA, BENJAMIN N. HARRIS, CLINT REACH Alternative Worldviews Understanding Potential Trajectories of Great-Power Ideological Competition he National Security Strategy of the United States indicates that the United States is engaged in competition with China, Russia, and other rivals. This competition is taking place not only in military and economic spheres, but also in the realms of information, ideas, and T 1 ideology. Authors of recent analyses have examined changes in the military and economic balance of power. The competition over ideas has received much less notice, reflecting the predominance of material factors in most studies of international relations. Failing to account for the role of non- material factors, however, risks overlooking a major source of change KEY FINDINGS in world affairs. It is hard to fully understand such major events as the Q State power is reflected in ideological ambitions: As states become Cold War, liberation movements and more powerful (or perceive themselves as such), their ideological decolonization, the fall of the Soviet ambitions tend to grow accordingly. Union, nationalist violence in the Q States tend to externalize their domestic forms of governance: States Balkans and elsewhere, the formation with the power to do so typically try to reproduce themselves on the of the European Union (EU), or the world stage. rise of jihadist movements without Q Divergent governing ideologies heighten threat perceptions: States any reference to ideas and ideologies. with divergent ideologies tend to perceive actions of the other as If the United States currently is more threatening than they otherwise would.
    [Show full text]
  • The End of an Era in EU-Russia Relations
    BEIJING BEIRUT BRUSSELS MOSCOW WASHINGTON THE END OF AN ERA IN EU-RUSSIA RELATIONS Dmitri Trenin, editor Maria Lipman and Alexey Malashenko Carnegie.ru MAY 2013 THE END OF AN ERA IN EU-RUSSIA RELATIONS Dmitri Trenin, editor Maria Lipman and Alexey Malashenko © 2013 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved. The Carnegie Moscow Center and the Carnegie Endowment do not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented here are the authors’ own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without permission in writing from the Carnegie Moscow Center or Carnegie Endowment. Please direct inquiries to: Carnegie Moscow Center 16/2 Tverskaya Moscow, 125009, Russia Tel. +7 495 935 8904 Fax: +7 495) 935 8906 [email protected] This publication can be downloaded at no cost at Carnegie.ru CP 183 Contents Summary 1 The Shifting EU-Russia Relationship 3 An Uneasy Calm 4 Society Still Stirs 7 Implications for Russia’s Political Future 9 Kremlin Foreign Policy 10 The EU’s Options Regarding Russia 15 Notes 19 About the Authors 21 Carnegie Moscow Center 24 Summary Russia’s approach to the European Union (EU) has changed fundamentally over the last few years. The Kremlin is no longer drawing gradually closer to crisis-stricken Europe. Instead, Russia is entering a period of domestic uncer- tainty and rebalancing its foreign policy to emphasize its Eurasian neighbors and China. Europe should take note. In order to develop an effective strategic approach toward their biggest neighbor, Europeans must deepen their under- standing of the changing realities in Russia.
    [Show full text]
  • Science and Nation After Socialism in the Novosibirsk Scientific Center, Russia
    Local Science, Global Knowledge: Science and Nation after Socialism in the Novosibirsk Scientific Center, Russia Amy Lynn Ninetto Mohnton, Pennsylvania B.A., Franklin and Marshall College, 1993 M.A., University of Virginia, 1997 A Dissertation presented to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Virginia in Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Dcpartmcn1 of Anthropology University of Virginia May 2002 11 © Copyright by Amy Lynn Ninetta All Rights Reserved May 2002 lll Abstract This dissertation explores the changing relationships between science, the state, and global capital in the Novosibirsk Scientific Center (Akademgorodok). Since the collapse of the state-sponsored Soviet "big science" establishment, Russian scientists have been engaging transnational flows of capital, knowledge, and people. While some have permanently emigrated from Russia, others travel abroad on temporary contracts; still others work for foreign firms in their home laboratories. As they participate in these transnational movements, Akademgorodok scientists confront a number of apparent contradictions. On one hand, their transnational movement is, in many respects, seen as a return to the "natural" state of science-a reintegration of former Soviet scientists into a "world science" characterized by open exchange of information and transcendence of local cultural models of reality. On the other hand, scientists' border-crossing has made them-and the state that claims them as its national resources-increasingly conscious of the borders that divide world science into national and local scientific communities with differential access to resources, prestige, and knowledge. While scientists assert a specifically Russian way of doing science, grounded in the historical relationships between Russian science and the state, they are reaching sometimes uneasy accommodations with the globalization of scientific knowledge production.
    [Show full text]
  • Russian-Baltic Relations: a Decade After Separation
    RUSSIAN-BALTIC RELATIONS: A DECADE AFTER SEPARATION Dmitri Trenin Ten years ago, in August 1989, a human chain linked the three Baltic republics of the then Soviet Union. Thousands of people were protesting on the fiftieth anniversary of the Molotov- Ribbentrop pact which "assigned" Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania to the USSR. The "singing revolution" on the eastern shores of the Baltic Sea was gathering speed. Two years later, in the wake of the failed putsch in Moscow, the three states again became de-facto and de-jure independent. Apart from bloody clashes between the pro-independence demonstrators and the Soviet army and security forces in January 1991, which left a score of people dead, liberation was achieved in a surprisingly peaceful and orderly way. What followed after that also appeared a unique success story: Moscow withdrew its military forces from Lithuania in 1993, and from the other two states in 1994; there was no ethnic tension between the Balts and the large Russian minorities; and, in economic terms, the Baltic ports continued to serve as Russia’s principal gateway to the West. Will this success story hold in the next ten years, or will it succumb to new and more serious challenges? The answer is far from obvious. This article will attempt to look at the current issues in Russian-Baltic relations and assess the inherent risks, as well as the countervailing opportunities. The general context Future historians may look at the "glorious decade" of 1989-1999 as a transition phase from a bipolar world order to an asymmetrical arrangement where there is only one truly global power wielding enormous influence in the economic, political, information, cultural and military domains.
    [Show full text]
  • Russian Strategic Intentions
    APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE Russian Strategic Intentions A Strategic Multilayer Assessment (SMA) White Paper May 2019 Contributing Authors: Dr. John Arquilla (Naval Postgraduate School), Ms. Anna Borshchevskaya (The Washington Institute for Near East Policy), Dr. Belinda Bragg (NSI, Inc.), Mr. Pavel Devyatkin (The Arctic Institute), MAJ Adam Dyet (U.S. Army, J5-Policy USCENTCOM), Dr. R. Evan Ellis (U.S. Army War College Strategic Studies Institute), Mr. Daniel J. Flynn (Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI)), Dr. Daniel Goure (Lexington Institute), Ms. Abigail C. Kamp (National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START)), Dr. Roger Kangas (National Defense University), Dr. Mark N. Katz (George Mason University, Schar School of Policy and Government), Dr. Barnett S. Koven (National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START)), Dr. Jeremy W. Lamoreaux (Brigham Young University- Idaho), Dr. Marlene Laruelle (George Washington University), Dr. Christopher Marsh (Special Operations Research Association), Dr. Robert Person (United States Military Academy, West Point), Mr. Roman “Comrade” Pyatkov (HAF/A3K CHECKMATE), Dr. John Schindler (The Locarno Group), Ms. Malin Severin (UK Ministry of Defence Development, Concepts and Doctrine Centre (DCDC)), Dr. Thomas Sherlock (United States Military Academy, West Point), Dr. Joseph Siegle (Africa Center for Strategic Studies, National Defense University), Dr. Robert Spalding III (U.S. Air Force), Dr. Richard Weitz (Center for Political-Military Analysis at the Hudson Institute), Mr. Jason Werchan (USEUCOM Strategy Division & Russia Strategic Initiative (RSI)) Prefaces Provided By: RDML Jeffrey J. Czerewko (Joint Staff, J39), Mr. Jason Werchan (USEUCOM Strategy Division & Russia Strategic Initiative (RSI)) Editor: Ms.
    [Show full text]
  • NATO-Russia Crisis Brief
    NATO-Russia Crisis Brief December 2020 About the Nuclear Crisis Group In response to the rise of geopolitical tensions involving nuclear-armed states and their allies, Global Zero launched the Nuclear Crisis Group (NCG)—an international group of esteemed former senior-level military officials, diplomats, and national security experts—to provide analysis and develop steps nuclear-armed countries can take to reduce the risk of conflict and possible escalation to nuclear weapons use. It operates by broadcasting objective assessments of nuclear dangers that risk being ignored, misunderstood, or mis- managed with a strategic focus on four nuclear flashpoints: (1) U.S./NATO-Russia; (2) India-Pakistan; (3) the Korean Peninsula; and (4) U.S.-China. NCG continues to identify concepts and proposals that can reduce the risks of nuclear use and the incidents that exacerbate them, and encourage authorities within nuclear-armed countries to pursue risk reduction and lay the groundwork for the longer-term goal of eliminating nuclear weapons worldwide. Copyright © 2020 by Global Zero. We welcome redistribution and reuse with attribution for widest possible dissemination. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. Table of Contents Author Biographies II Introduction V Jon Wolfsthal Reducing Tension in Russia-NATO Relations: A Two-Part 1 Act Sarah Bidgood Military Measures to Stabilize the Situation in the Baltic 5 Region Lt. Gen. (ret.) Evgeny Buzhinsky Possible Options for NATO-Russia Crisis Reduction 8 Hon. Madelyn R. Creedon COVID-19 Nuclear Lesson: First Regenerate Trust 12 RAdm (ret.) John Gower, CB OBE Reducing Tensions and the Risk of Conflict in 16 NATO-Russia Relations Łukasz Kulesa Turn the NATO-Russia Council into an Incident-Preven- 20 tion and Information-Exchange Mechanism Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict: Obstacles and Opportunities for a Settlement
    The Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict: Obstacles and Opportunities for a Settlement Chanda Allana Leckie Thesis submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Arts In Political Science Charles Taylor, Chair Scott Nelson Edward Weisband May 04, 2005 Blacksburg, Virginia Keywords: OSCE Minsk Group, geopolitics, conflict settlement The Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict: Obstacles and Opportunities for a Settlement Chanda Allana Leckie Abstract----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Out of the violent conflicts in the former Soviet Union, the war over Nagorno- Karabakh is the most threatening to the future development of the region, both economically and politically, as it is no closer to a solution than when the fighting ended in 1994. This is regrettable as there are some opportunities that provide the warring parties enough flexibility to move forward in the negotiation process. This thesis analyzes the evolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict under the aegis of the OSCE Minsk Group from 1992 to the present. It discusses not only the history of the Nagorno- Karabakh conflict and what went wrong with the Minsk Group’s attempts to find a fair and objective solution to the conflict, but also the obstacles and opportunities for a settlement. From this discussion, suggestions to improve the Minsk Group’s performance are presented, and future predictions of a peaceful settlement to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict will also be discussed. Acknowledgements------------------------------------------------------------------------- I wish to thank my committee chair Dr. Charles Taylor for his guidance, support, and collaboration on this thesis and throughout my time at Virginia Tech.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapaev and His Comrades War and the Russian Literary Hero Across the Twentieth Century Cultural Revolutions: Russia in the Twentieth Century
    Chapaev and His Comrades War and the Russian Literary Hero across the Twentieth Century Cultural Revolutions: Russia in the Twentieth Century Editorial Board: Anthony Anemone (Th e New School) Robert Bird (Th e University of Chicago) Eliot Borenstein (New York University) Angela Brintlinger (Th e Ohio State University) Karen Evans-Romaine (Ohio University) Jochen Hellbeck (Rutgers University) Lilya Kaganovsky (University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign) Christina Kiaer (Northwestern University) Alaina Lemon (University of Michigan) Simon Morrison (Princeton University) Eric Naiman (University of California, Berkeley) Joan Neuberger (University of Texas, Austin) Ludmila Parts (McGill University) Ethan Pollock (Brown University) Cathy Popkin (Columbia University) Stephanie Sandler (Harvard University) Boris Wolfson (Amherst College), Series Editor Chapaev and His Comrades War and the Russian Literary Hero across the Twentieth Century Angela Brintlinger Boston 2012 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data: a bibliographic record for this title is available from the Library of Congress. Copyright © 2012 Academic Studies Press All rights reserved ISBN - 978-1-61811-202-6, Hardback ISBN - 978-1-61811-203-3, Electronic Cover design by Ivan Grave On the cover: “Zatishie na perednem krae,” 1942, photograph by Max Alpert. Published by Academic Studies Press in 2012 28 Montfern Avenue Brighton, MA 02135, USA [email protected] www.academicstudiespress.com Effective December 12th, 2017, this book will be subject to a CC-BY-NC license. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. Other than as provided by these licenses, no part of this book may be reproduced, transmitted, or displayed by any electronic or mechanical means without permission from the publisher or as permitted by law.
    [Show full text]
  • Russia's Limit of Advance: Analysis of Russian Ground Force Deployment Capabilities and Limitations
    C O R P O R A T I O N BEN CONNABLE, ABBY DOLL, ALYSSA DEMUS, DARA MASSICOT, CLINT REACH, ANTHONY ATLER, WILLIAM MACKENZIE, MATTHEW POVLOCK, LAUREN SKRABALA Russia’s Limit of Advance Analysis of Russian Ground Force Deployment Capabilities and Limitations For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR2563 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-1-9774-0241-7 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2020 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org Preface This report documents research and analysis conducted as part of the project Defeating Rus- sian Deployed Joint Forces, sponsored by the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-3/5/7, U.S.
    [Show full text]