Those who are seriously interested in military history, certainly found an interesting correlation: the closer to the present, the more difficult for the aggressor to wage war. In the distant past wars were much less ambitious, but more rapid and catastrophic consequences for the defeated. There was no League of Nations, the UN, the media and the Internet, so the winner had unlimited opportunities to declare all the “who is who” and to partake of the fruits of victory. It’s simple: kill your enemies in the toilet, and then Rob and naselniki indefinitely. And lie what you want.
It’s not that simple: not only to win, we must also convince others that your victory to everyone’s liking. One “cause”? It came down to the fact that the party having absolute superiority over the enemy, throwing everything to hell and gone home. Classic example: the war in Vietnam. Went home first the French and then the Americans. The same thing happened in Afghanistan: USSR 9 long years trying to convince everyone that doing the right thing. Not convinced and went home. All these wars, carefully organized using the latest achievements of science, engineering and the military art was meaningless and, in fact, lost obviously weaker opponent.
To the fore more and more beyond the struggle for the minds of people. Surprisingly, winning the information war weak can cause significant and sometimes fatal damage strong. Remember when the British Empire was at the summit of power, a handful of American separatists raised a brazen, seemed doomed to a quick defeat of the insurgency. And what we have today? Proud but sad the Brits sit on their island, remembering past greatness, and “separable” became a mighty Empire, dictating its will even overseas Nations. It is curious, however, that the Americans are hard to step on the same rake. They are waging war technically, taking the lines and paragraphs, but not minds. Half the world hates the US today. You see this in America? Rhetorical question…
The war that arose on the ruins of the Soviet Union, demonstrate the same algorithm. Little Abkhazia strayed from the great Georgia, Transnistria from Moldova, and Nagorno-Karabakh from Azerbaijan, from Ukraine’s Donbass. Why Chechnya fought Russia? The Chechen war is particularly interesting for military historians. The first war began in 1994, was extremely unpopular, because the Russians considered the aggressors. And then the Chechens fought because won the battle for the minds. And the huge Russian was forced to go into the world with tiny Chechnya. And the second time could not have lost this battle, because they were the aggressors, having attacked in 1999 in Dagestan. Ask any Russian: you need Chechnya? He will say, Yes… necessary, but we won Chechen right, so let them sit and not rock the boat. And they do not rock the boat, they even climb to fight for Russia, about how!
It would seem, who now interfere to recover their territory? All West of it (at least in words), and, if desired, a multi-million Ukraine could easily put a million soldiers. The problem is that the majority of Ukrainians are patriots only in the Internet, and in my mind they are well aware that Eastern and Western Ukraine are two big differences. And to die FOR THAT? Ne treba… Better to go live in Europe or to the “aggressors” in Russia.
The conclusion is quite obvious: the main thing is to win the minds of people, then you’re a real winner, as the Soviet soldiers
