297 KB10 KB2019Tomšič, Blažletnik:21številka:4str. 129-144DOI:10.33179/BSV.99.SVI.11.CMC.21.4.7.ISSN:2232-2825COBISSID:6303182URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-AM32UXXKslGeneralštab Slovenske vojskeSodobni vojaški izziviCrimeahybrid warfareKrimmilitary doctrinenational strategyRusijavojaške operacijevojskavojskovanjeHibridno delovanje kot metoda uresničevanja nacionalne strategije| Hybrid warfare as a metod of implementing the national strategy| primer Krima| the case of Crimea|Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014, carried out with an amazing speed and coordination of various soft and hard instruments of national power, while simultaneously using the power of protests by the local pro-Russian population, is undoubtedly one of the better examples of hybrid warfare. The brutality and simultaneous surgical precision of the operation have made it feel as if each of the instruments of national power had played its precisely defined role, which had its basis in the national security and defence documents, such as the national security strategy and military doctrine. This is a proof of adapting the Russia%s military and political strategic framework to the new global challenges of the modern world. The formerly rigid Russia using the primarily brutal military power typical of the Soviet regime, has in this case proved to be a dynamic and highly flexible force, capable of using various instruments of national power, coupled with an appropriate support of a considerably altered, but extremely effective military power instrument. In doing so, it actually shocked the Western professional and political public and opened a wide debate in professional circles, which had previously not attributed the ability of such activities to Russia. Hybrid warfare has become a constant feature of discussions in the military and political circles of the West, focusing primarily on finding solutions to effectively counter the new threat presented in Crimea by the Russian sideRuska operacija aneksije Krima leta 2014, ki je bila opravljena z neverjetno hitrostjo in uigranostjo različnih mehkih in trdih instrumentov nacionalne moči ob hkratni uporabi moči protestov lokalnega proruskega prebivalstva, je nedvomno eden boljših primerov hibridnega vojskovanja. Brutalnost in hkratna kirurška natančnost izvedbe operacije sta dajali občutek, kot da je prav vsak izmed instrumentov nacionalne moči odigral svojo vnaprej točno določeno vlogo, ki pa je, zanimivo, imela podlago v krovnih dokumentih nacionalne varnosti in obrambe, kot sta strategija nacionalne varnosti ter vojaška doktrina. To je predvsem svojevrsten dokaz prilagoditve ruskega vojaškega in političnega strateškega okvira delovanja na nove globalne izzive sodobnega sveta. Prej toga in pregovorno sovjetskemu načinu uporabe primarno brutalne vojaške moči zavezana Rusija se je v tem primeru pokazala za dinamično ter izjemno prilagodljivo silo, sposobno uporabiti različne instrumente nacionalne moči ob ustrezni podpori precej spremenjenega, a izjemno učinkovitega, vojaškega instrumenta moči. S tem je šokirala zahodno strokovno in politično javnost ter odprla velike razprave v strokovnih krogih, ki ji sposobnosti tovrstnega delovanja prej niso pripisovali. Hibridno delovanje je postalo stalnica razprav v vojaških in političnih krogih Zahoda, ki se osredotočajo predvsem na iskanje rešitev za učinkovito zoperstavljanje novi grožnji, ki jo je s Krimom predstavila ruska stranTEXTznanstveno časopisjejournalsSlovenian National E-content AggregatorNational and University Library of SloveniaMinistrstvo za obrambo RS