Kost Elisevich

For those who think that Vladimir Putin’s Russia and his war in Ukraine have little to do with the domestic situation in the United States (U.S.) and who likewise pay little attention to the influence his regime exerts in the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America because it seems of little consequence for themselves or the world at large, it is more than time to reconsider.

Since the end of World War II, Russia has been in a state of conflict with the U.S., vying for global advantage both militarily and geopolitically. The dissolution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) in 1991 brought this to a temporary halt until Putin came to power in 2000. What followed was the reestablishment of an authoritarian regime with the intention of recreating some facsimile of a Russian empire of the past. In the process, Putin has gained for himself the reputation of an indicted international criminal and demonstrated to the world his disregard for the rule of law and human welfare.

Putin’s conduct on the world stage has amounted to a series of atrocities committed within his own Russia, the Republic of Chechnya and the nations of Georgia, Syria, and now Ukraine. Assassinations carried out on Putin’s behalf have gone unpunished by a judiciary that remains subservient to his regime, and those killings perpetrated on foreign soil are met with only a muted response by Russia’s government and its state media. Putin’s private paramilitary force, the Wagner mercenary group, has continued to commit atrocities not only by engagement in wars within Syria and Ukraine but in conflicts throughout central and northern Africa where its criminal conduct has been documented in the commission of mass murders, rape, and torture of civilians. It has been conducting strategic activities oriented against the U.S. within Latin America, specifically in alliance with authoritarian regimes in Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua. Before getting to the latter problem, a brief review of a number of Russia’s activities elsewhere creates background to its current interests in the Western Hemisphere.

For some time, Russia has engaged in a number of malign activities which have not gone unnoticed although have not been readily recognized in all cases by the public. They come in the form of hybrid warfare by which methods are undertaken to weaken the resolve of the opponent. This is achieved by manipulating public opinion through disinformation, introducing extrinsic pressures that seem to threaten a nation’s economic security, all for the purpose of lessening the credibility of its government and creating disunity among its alliances. The approach has become an aspect of Putin’s military strategy and appears to have taken on a life of its own for the extraordinary benefits it provides to his efforts worldwide. The methods are varied and sometimes take the form of what has been termed, “multi-vector hybrid warfare,” when applied combinatorially or sequentially. They have the added benefit of remaining elusive because they have no clearly defined time horizons and, importantly, avoid retaliation as the perpetrator may easily claim plausible deniability.

We are witness to these on the home front in the U.S. and Canada with the recruitment of Russia’s “useful idiots,” the homegrown societal extremist elements that sponsor rallies calling for the denial of aid to Ukraine, the dismantling of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and mouthing bizarre accusations that the West was responsible for instigating the Russian war of aggression in Ukraine. Russian propagandist media outlets such as Russia Today (RT) and Sputnik, both state-funded agencies, provide a global distribution of disinformation in support of its foreign policy, particularly as it may relate to its justification of the war in Ukraine and to amplify any needed messaging from Russian intelligence to its paid online trolls in the global community. Russia’s self-serving interference in the political affairs of other nations has become recognized globally and was made most noteworthy in the 2016 U.S. presidential election by the Mueller Report. Over the past eight years, Russia has attempted to influence politicians and other government officials not by openly declared means but through covert operations using front organizations to funnel money to select pro-Russian entities in more than 24 nations for the purpose of gaining support for its regime’s actions.

Russia’s Wagner Group, in its official capacity, is designated a private paramilitary force that functions as an accessory armed force for Putin’s regime. It is deployed in a manner that provides Putin with his familiar “plausible” deniability while it engages in overtly criminal actions. The group has earned its designation as a transnational criminal organization by the U.S. Department of the Treasury and as a terrorist organization by the United Kingdom. Bipartisan support in both chambers of the U.S. Congress have also put forward legislation designating the Wagner Group as a foreign terrorist organization. It is contracted globally by authoritarian regimes or rebel entities to provide security, add additional force to insurrection or to undertake military campaigns, at times alongside conventional Russian forces. In return, they are given direct payment or provided acquisition of certain resources or commodities such as gold in Sudan and the Central African Republic, as well as oil and gas in Syria. Of further benefit for the group and for Putin has been the opportunity to establish strategic military bases in the Middle East and Africa and to forge military relationships in Latin America, specifically in Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua.

The manipulation of or collaboration with other extremist global elements for one’s own purpose may be considered yet another suitable hybrid warfare option. As the sole owner of his own terrorist organization, one might not find it so unusual for Putin to associate with other acknowledged terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah. One may certainly argue that, in these cases, Middle East peace and a variety of humanitarian concerns have been topics for discussion. This latter sentiment appeals to our better natures as human beings but detracts from the contextual reality of what Putin has wrought upon the world with his brand of criminality. This behavior has been on display over the past two decades since his inauguration as Russia’s leader. It is not unlike what has now been perpetrated by Hamas in Israel, seven months following a meeting of its leaders in Moscow. Putin’s relations with Hamas has more to do with armament issues and promotion of violence rather than Middle East peace. One can only speculate as to whether Russia was given any forewarning of Hamas’ intended strike upon Israel with its potential for global instability, particularly when it has provided considerable distraction from his own war. The terrorist action has already fueled argument among Congressional Republicans regarding U.S. involvement in support of Ukraine with a number of far-right House representatives and one senator advocating for the redirection of funding from Ukraine to Israel in the foolish belief that Russia’s own war in Ukraine is inconsequential for the U.S.

Another of the more egregious and acknowledged hybrid warfare applications for which Russia has been accused is that of the promotion of transnational mass migration, particularly along the European Union’s (EU) eastern and southern borders. The acuity of such events is meant to overwhelm a particular target nation’s ability to effectively manage affairs in a manner that affords adequate welfare for migrants while attempting to maintain its national security. The intention is to raise internal discord over nationalist xenophobic sentiments and threaten democratic values, to strain the nation’s economy, and ultimately to destabilize society and its governance while depleting funds and resources for other immediate purposes. Early examples of such actions were demonstrated with Russia’s 2014 illegal incursion into Ukraine with its escalation of military conflict in the eastern region as well as its direct military involvement in Syria’s civil war in 2015 where it initiated aerial bombing of urban areas and, specifically, medical facilities as one of its war strategies. This prompted mass migration from each of the two nations predominantly into Europe that peaked in 2014-15 and 2015-16, respectively. These episodes could be seen as derivative effects of Putin’s aggression in each nation but the lessons learned were undoubtedly quite clear. The border chaos that ensues with the weaponization of migration plays into the hands of anti-democratic, far-right elements who then conflate the problem with their own prejudicial grievances on social media platforms to inflame public sentiment. The tactic emboldens extremists to react in the short term and serves to undermine democratic values in the long term. In the process, the EU loses its moral authority and, perhaps more importantly, the normative power of its democratic values on the world stage.

A more intentional mass migration episode appeared to have unfolded in late 2021 on the eve of Putin’s invasion of Ukraine when his close ally, Belarusian dictator, Alexander Lukashenko, opened his nation as a transit corridor into Europe allowing passage of Iraqi Kurdish migrants and other smaller groups from the Middle East and North Africa. Without warning given to Belarus’ neighboring nations, he fraudulently promoted unhindered passage into Poland, Lithuania, and Latvia without providing any guarantees for cross-border passage apart from covert measures. The Polish government would later accuse both the Russian and Belarusian secret service of intentionally orchestrating the trafficking of migrants and warned of the border crisis as a prelude of something worse to come. And it did. The massive Russian military presence on Ukraine’s northern border with Belarus and its eastern border with Russia suddenly loomed as more of the threat of invasion it appeared to be.

Belarus’ engineered mass migration plan fell short of creating the intended influx of migrants into Europe although it did create a crisis requiring a great deal of governmental action on the part of EU countries. This involved the deployment of security forces, enhancement of barriers against trespassing and the taking of measures to avoid a humanitarian catastrophe. The matter was brought to a close in December 2021 when migrants began to be repatriated from Belarus. The timing of resolution of the crisis by year-end appeared to merge seamlessly with the launch of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in late February 2022 raising suspicion that Lukashenko was aware of the pending Russian plan. The absence of a direct Russian border with eastern Europe makes Belarus a useful partner for Putin to instigate border crises when needed and to provide for the deployment of Russian troops in preparation for the invasion of Ukraine and, likewise, a number of other nations.

The southern coastline of Europe presents a second vulnerability for mass migration and another opportunity for Putin to threaten the stability of the EU. Russia’s Wagner Group has been entrenched in the Central African Republic (CAR), Mali, Libya and Sudan on the pretext of providing security for an authoritarian regime or aiding an insurrectionist rebel force. It is actively engaged in extending its reach into neighboring nations such as Burkina Faso and Chad. The group has been recognized for its brutal conduct among civilian populations more than adequately documented by several sources in Libya, CAR, Mali, and Sudan, and for promoting considerable unrest in an already troubled environment. This has caused many to flee to the north, to Libya and Tunisia, where Russians are engaged with Arab smugglers and trafficking gangs to push migrants across the Mediterranean Sea toward Italy, Europe’s nearest available coastline. With thousands of migrants descending upon Italy’s coast, its intelligence service has warned that Wagner mercenaries are attempting to destabilize the country. The right-wing Italian government under Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has called upon its NATO allies to aid in establishing greater security against such tactics.

Addressing this problem inevitably will involve the expulsion of the Wagner Group from Africa, a result which is more effectively achieved by eliminating the regime which conceived its creation and continues to sponsor it. The EU itself remains an attractive destination for migrants as its component liberal democracies typically afford an improved, more secure lifestyle and generally a better economic outlook than most of the repressive and unstable authoritarian regimes from which they are fleeing. Such a circumstance requires the EU to consider a more stringent policy of deterrence against illegal border crossing by mass migration hybrid warfare instigated by bad actors. At the same time, an acceptable means of controlled entry and a path toward citizenship must remain, in keeping with the EU’s declared moral authority and its democratic values.

A very similar but recurrent problem has manifested at the U.S. southwest border with Mexico at a time when the question of further aid to Ukraine has arisen. Border crossing has been a contentious issue that has remained unresolved through several U.S. government administrations and presents a prime political concern for the priority it is given in the public mind. It has been characterized by sporadic waves of mass migration largely attributed to escalations of violence, economic hardship, weather extremes and governmental instability. The Trump administration instituted Title 42 in March 2020 during the COVID-19 crisis. The policy severely restricted migrant entry into the U.S. resulting in more than 2.8 million expulsions at the border. The program expired in May 2023 despite attempts by congressional Republicans to extend it. In anticipation of the inevitable lifting of Title 42, the Biden-Harris administration took preemptive measures to mitigate the issue in June 2022 with the launch of the Los Angeles (LA) Declaration on Migration and Protection by securing long-term commitments from 21 nations within the Western Hemisphere to expand multinational pathways for migration and to better distribute any surge of migrants.    

However, something new had been occurring to the south that would affect the border crossing into the U.S. and potentially complicate the situation surrounding the elimination of the Title 42 restrictions. In recent years, considerable numbers of displaced Venezuelans entered the migrational stream with surges of asylum-seekers accounting for increases of 133% to 914% entering South and Central American countries. Serious problems had arisen during the socialist administration of Venezuelan president, Hugo Chavez, which had overseen the nationalization of key industries and launched his nation’s socioeconomic decline. Chavez’ death in 2013 brought his vice president, Nicolas Maduro, to the presidency. Maduro went on to assume dictatorial credentials through constitutional reform and questionable electoral practices. During the time of Venezuela’s socialist reform over the course of about 17 years, Putin’s regime took an extraordinarily keen interest in the country, selling it more than $11.4 billion of military armament including fighter jets, attack helicopters, missile and air defense systems, and small arms, more than enough now for Maduro to maintain his control and to be in a position to intimidate Venezuela’s neighbors. Wagner mercenaries entered Venezuela in early 2019 to provide the Maduro regime added security after national protests mounted over its legitimacy and defections appeared to be increasing in the military. The group has extended its reach into the commercial realm by providing protection to Venezuela’s oil refineries and assuming control of the mining of gold and thorium, a now well-practiced pattern of extracting wealth and strategic commodities from other countries. In the process, further human rights abuses and environmental damage has ensued, not unlike the African experience, adding to the despair of Venezuelans and the desire to escape the poverty and repression in a nation increasingly under the influence of an untrustworthy foreign entity.

The Russian media outlet RT became increasingly active in targeting Latino populations through Spanish-language social media, promoting the notion that relaxation of U.S. border policies was to occur under the new Biden-Harris administration when it assumed office in 2020. This messaging served to enhance efforts by human smugglers to guide migrants in the direction of the U.S. In the month of December 2021 alone, at the time when the Belarusian immigration debacle had effectively ended and immediately preceding Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, U.S. immigration officials encountered nearly 25,000 Venezuelan nationals at its border with Mexico, a 29-fold increase from December 2020. Immediately prior to the demise of Title 42 in 2023, more than 10,000 migrants were attempting to cross the border daily, still among them, 2,400 from Venezuela. A resumption of the pre-pandemic Title 8 policy would soon reintroduce more punitive measures including expedited removal without a hearing, border exclusion for five years, and criminal charges for attempted re-entry. The latter helped to temporarily stem immigration to 3,000 to 4,400 migrants daily but other factors remain that will continue to create insecurities for the border as regards to migrant flow from Mexico, Central America and South America. An inescapable irony in this story of migrant pressures at the southwest border has been the appearance of several thousands of Russians seeking asylum in the U.S., many escaping conscription and political persecution. They are wealthier than their Latino counterparts and have used Russian smuggling networks in Turkey and Latin America, flying into Mexico and renting lodgings in the northern border regions to await assessment at the border. This represented a quadrupling of Russian nationals appearing in 2022 compared to the year prior to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. As of March 2023, they accounted for 30,500 migrant encounters, a remarkable increase from the 467 who arrived in 2020.

Russia’s engagement in the Western Hemisphere has been robust and pointedly unfriendly toward the U.S. There are many facets to this, varying from conventional spying operations, support of authoritarian regimes and the well-known electoral meddling to establishment of military bases and more insidious engagement in drug and human trafficking. Russia’s largest espionage operations facility in Latin America remains in Mexico City at present. Since 2018, the leftist Mexican government of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador has been critical of U.S. foreign policy and openly opposed to U.S. support of Ukraine. Soon after being named president, he canceled a purchase of U.S. military helicopters and followed this up with plans to consider the purchase of Russian helicopters instead.

Before its involvement in Venezuela, during the Soviet era, Russia provided arms to Cuba and Nicaragua and continues to have close relations with both not only militarily but in the technology domain. Russian military personnel in Nicaragua participate in regular joint exercises and ostensibly provide anti-narcotics training although the latter may be seen to be more a coordinated effort to further promote drug trafficking into the U.S. Nicaraguan dictator, Daniel Ortega, has agreed to have Russian military forces engaged in the country semiannually to develop cooperation of some sort in the area of law enforcement. Other than military, relations with Argentina and Brazil have facilitated a degree of economic dependency on Russia in the agricultural sector with the provision of considerable quantities of much needed fertilizer to both nations. A similar dependency upon this vital commodity will involve other nations on the continent, most notably, Venezuela.  

The introduction of Russian information and communication technology in a number of South American nations may ultimately provide Russia digital access and interference capability of vital distribution networks, electoral processes and security. Colombia has had a longstanding democratic alliance with the U.S. over the course of five previous U.S. administrations and a strong security partnership with NATO. It was consequently targeted by Russia in attempts to undo its public’s faith in democratic institutions. A Russian disinformation campaign was launched in Colombia’s 2023 presidential election in favor of pro-Russian socialist candidate, Gustavo Petro, helping him to attain office. The recent accelerated pace of pro-Russian sentiment in South and Central America and even Mexico is fueled by a continuous campaign of disinformation that attempts to obscure Russia’s illegal actions and promotes the fallacy of victimization despite clear evidence of its atrocities committed not only in Ukraine and Syria but in Africa. It is the same messaging that has promoted the flow of Latino migrants northward toward the U.S.

The Hydra, the many-headed serpent of Greek and Roman mythology that occupied the lake entrance to the Underworld, disposed of its victims by poisoned breath and had the tiresome ability to regenerate two heads for each that was chopped. Putin’s Russia deploys its terror upon the many parts of the world rendered susceptible to its will and exerts its influence, otherwise, by the more insidious route of hybrid warfare globally. It will continue its criminal agenda until it is confronted directly. This can never be effectively accomplished at its multi-headed periphery but rather at its heart on the fields of Ukraine where it has chosen to commit itself openly. It is for the West to understand this and to decide whether it wishes to chase the Hydra around the world at limitless expense or to end the misery that is Putin by the hand of Ukraine in the current conflict.

Copyright @Kost Elisevich, MD, PhD 2023. All rights reserved. Any illegal reproduction of this content will result in immediate legal action.