Overextending and Unbalancing Russia

The U.S. non-profit organization Research and Development Corporation (RAND Corporation, or in Russian: Research and Development) works on behalf of the U.S. government, its military and related organizations. In other words, it is a think tank (one of the existing ones) for U.S. government organizations.

The main activity of the RAND Center is to promote scientific, educational and charitable activities in the interests of U.S. national security, to develop and identify new methods of analysis of strategic problems and new strategic concepts.

The result of one of these developments was a report on the options for solving the problem: «How to shake Russia», a short version of which was published by RAND on its official website.

In our current work, we will briefly explain what brain centers are needed for, give our assessments of the report and give a retelling of it.

"What is RAND?"

RAND is a think tank for U.S. government agencies, which solves the tasks set to identify the best options for managing the impact. In order to achieve its selfish interests, the U.S. government regularly faces certain tasks (problems), the solution of which should be of high quality. On the scale of such a large state, the decisions made will affect other countries and peoples, but history shows that the U.S. government thinks more about its security and stability than about the security and stability of the planet Earth.

The problem that the U.S. government is aware of and which has launched the next study, in the current version is as follows: "the existence of Russia on planet Earth.

The U.S. government delegates the task to a think tank, then receives the results and takes action based on the results. The division of labour takes place at the level of elaboration of options and making a concrete decision.

• The RAND report under consideration (hereinafter referred to as the "report") on the analysis of the options of impact on Russia in order to undermine the stability of the state in general and the economic sphere in particular, is just a response to the request. It does not mean at all that it is a "plan to destroy Russia". 
• The report is an analysis of the options for action that can most likely achieve the desired outcome for the U.S. Whether or not to take concrete action is the responsibility of the U.S. government. 

Especially interesting is the point in the report when it is proposed to use public organizations inside Russia to discredit the government and the state at the expense of American funding and in order to achieve the goals of the U.S. government.  (After such frank statements by RAND analysts, it will be very interesting for Russian citizens to watch TV, because it will be immediately clear for whose interests this or that "political scientist" works).


The majority of the RAND options considered in the report consider ineffective, which indicates that the current Russian situation is stable and will not be immediately shaken. Therefore, RAND proposes to act for the long term.

Among the various options aimed at undermining the situation in Russia and destabilizing the economy, the RAND gave more preference to actions aimed at increasing military expenditures. Let us paraphrase this idea through the priorities of the generalized means of management.

In order to influence Russia, the RAND proposes to use the economic priority of governance (the fourth priority), and to achieve this priority with the help of weapons used in hot wars (the sixth priority).

• Economic (4) priority slower than military (6). 
• Economic priority over military priority. 
• Military priority is more expensive.

Let's explain the thesis a little bit. The production of weapons requires resources, resources must be taken somewhere. In the current world order, resources are bought on the "market" (both domestic and foreign), and the purchase is made mainly for money. The logic is simple, there is money - there is a possibility to borrow arms, there is no money - there is no arms.

The speed of use of the already paid army is very high, and the speed of change in financial flows on a national scale is much slower. It follows that a fast army is completely dependent on slow money. Whoever controls the money flows controls the state weapons in the traditional sense of the word.

These theses are implicitly present in the RAND report, which indicates that its authors understand how other societies manage (weapons) (at least to the third priority).

However, the analysis on the first three priorities is absent in the report, although they are crucial for the differences in governance between countries. Russia is significantly different from the U.S., and Russia is also significantly different from the USSR.  The RAND report is based on a concept developed during the Cold War (about 1972).

Therefore, the methods by which the USSR state was destroyed will not work in relation to Russia, as time has changed and Russia has changed over this time.

RAND analysts still cannot understand that Russia, although it is the successor to the USSR, has long since begun the process of internal transformation of the state.

The report also makes a fundamental mistake. This is the idea that:

«the Russian government is united and struggling to maintain its regime.»

And this categorically incorrect judgment leads to incorrect interpretations of the possible behavior of the Russian government, and ultimately affects the essence of the entire report.
Let's repeat once again.

• The report is not the truth in the last instance. 
• The report only considers options. 

The implementation of this or that option lies with the U.S. government. And we know that the future is multi-variant, and to achieve this or that option we need to spend a certain amount of resources (including intellectual ones).


Russia does not sit still, it develops itself and develops interstate cooperation on a global scale. Russia has a different mission and concept of governance on the basis of justice, laid down by historical circumstances over many centuries in the people, and born in lexical forms shortly before the collapse of the Soviet Union, and therefore Russia has other ways to achieve its goals.

As long as Russia's society does not rise to a new management level in accordance with a fair and comprehensive concept of governance, it will continue to operate on an autopilot governed from above, in spite of the policy pursued in the interests of the West in relation to Russia. In turn, the West will receive only the effect of a "monkey's paw" in return.

The U.S. government may be listening to the RAND report to achieve its plans to undermine Russia in the long run, but this is unlikely because time is working for those who support the creative process, not the destructive one.


Instead of concluding, we suggest that you read the RAND report to form images of how American analysts see further "cooperation" with Russia.