Bryan Armor

Assessing the Russia – Georgia Conflict

Initial assessments of the military effectiveness of the Russian and Georgian forces are being written. Over to the blogosphere!

Robert Farley:

The Georgians did have some technical advantages, such as nightfighting gear on their tanks and attack aircraft. While this article indicates that the Georgian T-72s (with the nightfighting gear and some other technical upgrades) were superior to their Russian counterparts, I’m not convinced; the Russians seem to have been employing more modern T-80s, which were equipped with reactive armor (this explodes outwards when hit, to deflect the force of the blow), while the Georgian tanks were not. David Axe suggests that this enabled the Russian tanks to massacre their Georgian counterparts (80% losses) in open battle. However, Axe also points…

Russia v Georgia

First, a few updates.

While it is unclear yet whether there have been any major engagements between Russian and Georgia forces, some sources are reporting that the Russian armored units that crossed into South Ossetia via the Roki Tunnel yesterday are moving into Tskhinvali:

Osinform in Russian 1248 GMT 09 Aug 08
A tank attack on Tskhinvali is under way at the moment. Two Georgian tanks have been knocked out in Gafeza Street, and another tank has been knocked out in Dzhioyev Avenue, Osinform news agency reports. Russian tanks are moving toward Tskhinvali.

These forward units, likely from the 19th Motor Rifle Division out of Vladikavkaz, are being reinforced by Russian airborne elements, among them the 76th Pskov Airborne Division:

Various sources reported Russian troop…

Who Let This Guy In, Or, A Slight Deviation From the Standard Course

I’d like to first off thank my friends at Hope is Not a Foreign Policy (HINAFP) for the invitation to contribute to the blog. I’ll be joining the conversation on international affairs and foreign policy from a center-left perspective (think of the unholy lovechild of Brent Scowcroft, Samantha Power, Martin van Creveld, and Edward Luttwak), though if you’re looking for theoretical work that best encapsulates my current views, see Hulsman and Lieven’s recent book. I hope to serve as the loyal opposition hereabouts, as I dissent somewhat from the stated belief of HINAFP that “that the fundamental aim of American policymakers should be the preservation of American power.” I agree more than disagree with the tasks underlying this goal,…

© 2008 Hope is Not a Foreign Policy: Conservative commentary on foreign policy, American politics, and current events