This is a visual explainer based on the Wikipedia article on Power Projection. Read the full source article here. (opens in new tab)

The Reach of Nations

An in-depth analysis of how states extend their influence and military capabilities across vast distances, shaping international relations and strategic landscapes.

What is Power Projection? 👇 Explore Capabilities 🚀

Dive in with Flashcard Learning!


When you are ready...
🎮 Play the Wiki2Web Clarity Challenge Game🎮

Defining Power Projection

Global Reach and Influence

Power projection, also known as force or strength projection, refers to a state's intrinsic capacity to deploy and sustain its military forces beyond its sovereign territory. This capability is not merely about possessing military assets but about the logistical and strategic prowess to effectively utilize them at a distance. It serves as a potent diplomatic instrument, influencing the decision-making of other states and acting as a significant deterrent against undesirable actions.[1][2][3][4][5]

A Cornerstone of State Power

The ability to project power is a fundamental component of a state's overall influence in the international system. Any state capable of directing forces beyond its borders technically possesses some level of power projection, but the term is most commonly associated with militaries demonstrating a truly global reach. Even nations with substantial hard power assets, such as large standing armies, may find their regional influence limited if they lack the sophisticated means to project that power globally. Overcoming the inherent logistical complexities of deploying and managing a modern, mechanized military force across vast distances is a challenge few states can master independently.[6][7] Strategic alliances and partnerships can, however, distribute and share this burden, enhancing collective power projection capabilities.[8][9][10] A critical metric for assessing this capacity is the "loss-of-strength gradient," which measures the diminishing effectiveness of force as distance from home base increases, leading to a potential culminating point in an operation.

Beyond Direct Conflict

Power projection extends beyond overt military engagement. It encompasses a spectrum of activities, from "gray zone" competition—actions just below the threshold of armed conflict—to the exercise of soft power.[11][12] While traditional analyses often emphasize hard power assets like tanks, aircraft, and naval vessels, soft power demonstrates that power projection does not always necessitate active combat, but only potentially.[13] The potential for military force, rather than its direct application, can be a powerful tool. Furthermore, power projection assets frequently serve dual purposes, as exemplified by the deployment of various national militaries in humanitarian responses, such as the aftermath of the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake, showcasing their utility in non-combat roles.

Historical Trajectories

Ancient Foundations

Early manifestations of power projection are evident in ancient civilizations. The Roman Empire, for instance, achieved dominance across Europe and the Mediterranean through its remarkable ability to innovate and integrate these innovations into its military strategy. Roman engineering marvels, including pile drivers, concrete, aqueducts, and advanced road networks, fueled an economic engine that supported an unparalleled military. A notable example is Julius Caesar's construction of the Rhine bridge in just ten days, a powerful demonstration of his capacity to move 40,000 troops at will. This act of overcoming natural barriers caused local inhabitants, who relied on the river for protection, to flee, illustrating how extraordinary military innovation can summarily terminate conflicts through a clear signal of power.[14]

Maritime Expeditions

The 15th-century Ming treasure voyages represent another significant historical instance of power projection. The Chinese treasure fleet was heavily militarized, enabling it to assert influence across the Indian Ocean and advance Chinese interests through a formidable presence.[15] This maritime capability underscored the importance of naval strength in extending state power over long distances.

Industrial Revolution's Impact

The modern capacity for global power projection is intrinsically linked to the Industrial Revolution. Innovations in technology, communications, finance, and bureaucracy allowed states to generate unprecedented wealth and efficiently mobilize resources for distant power exertion.[16] Britain, as the birthplace of industrialization, leveraged this advantage to expand its global empire throughout the 19th century. The Royal Navy was central to this, supported by a worldwide network of naval bases and coaling stations, a vast logistical bureaucracy for shipbuilding and supply, and an industrial base for continuous technological advancement of its fleet. This enabled British expeditionary forces, such as the one in the First Opium War (1839–1842), to operate successfully 6,000 miles from home.[17] The British Expedition to Abyssinia in 1868 further showcased this, involving the deployment of over 30,000 troops from British India via a fleet of 280 steamships, supported by engineers building ports and railways, culminating in the capitulation of Magdala.[18][19]

Evolving Global Dynamics

The Russo-Japanese War (1904–1905) highlighted Imperial Russia's inability to project force effectively in the Far East, diminishing its diplomatic standing and revealing organizational flaws in its western armies. More recent examples include the United Kingdom's successful power projection during the Falklands War, the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, and the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia. The sustained global deployment capabilities of the U.S., British, and French navies are prime examples of modern power projection. Historian Max Ostrovsky posits that the globalization of power projection, often overlooked in economic globalization studies, has expanded exponentially since prehistory, with contemporary transportation and communication speeds enabling a projection potential far exceeding Earth's physical dimensions.[20][21][22]

Constituent Elements

A Holistic National Capability

The U.S. Department of Defense defines power projection as a nation's ability to apply all or some of its elements of national power—political, economic, informational, or military—to rapidly and effectively deploy and sustain forces in and from multiple dispersed locations. This comprehensive approach aims to respond to crises, contribute to deterrence, and enhance regional stability.[23][24] It underscores that military might is but one facet of a broader national strategy for influence.

Command, Control, and Technology

A significant challenge in power projection is maintaining effective command and control over forces operating at great distances from headquarters. Modern advancements in high-tech communications and information technology are crucial in overcoming these difficulties, a phenomenon often referred to as the "Revolution in Military Affairs." While certain long-range weapons, such as intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and unmanned combat aerial vehicles (drones), possess inherent force projection capabilities, the bedrock of effective power projection lies in robust military logistics. The seamless integration of naval, air, and land forces in joint warfare operations is paramount, with airlift and sealift capabilities being indispensable for deploying personnel and materiel to distant theaters of conflict.

Platforms and Forward Presence

Key platforms designed for power projection include aircraft carrier strike groups, strategic bombers, ballistic missile submarines, and strategic airlifters. These assets provide the means to deliver significant force rapidly and decisively. Furthermore, military units engineered for mobility and agility, such as airborne forces (paratroopers and air assault units) and amphibious assault forces, are vital components. Another critical strategy is forward basing, which involves pre-positioning military units or stockpiles of arms at strategically located military bases outside a nation's territory. This significantly reduces the time and distance required for mobilization, enabling quicker response times and sustained operations in critical regions.

Categorizing Projection

A Spectrum of Engagement

Scholarly analysis disaggregates military power projection into nine distinct categories, differentiated by their political objectives and the intensity of force employed. These categories span a continuum from "soft" military power, focused on non-coercive or supportive roles, to "hard" military power, which involves direct application or credible threat of force.[25] This spectrum highlights the multifaceted nature of power projection, adapting to various international relations contexts and strategic imperatives.

Soft Power Applications

Soft power projection leverages military capabilities in ways that build trust and cooperation, often without direct combat. Examples include:

  • Securing Sea Lanes of Communication: Protecting vital shipping routes from state-sponsored threats or irregular actors, ensuring global commerce and stability.
  • Non-Combatant Evacuation Operations (NEO): Rapidly evacuating citizens or friendly foreign nationals from dangerous situations abroad, such as war zones or civil unrest.
  • Humanitarian Response: Deploying military forces to provide aid and support in the aftermath of natural disasters, demonstrating goodwill and capability.
  • Peacekeeping: Engaging in military operations to support diplomatic efforts, aiming to achieve long-term political settlements in ongoing disputes, often under international mandates.[4][26][27]
  • Establishing Trust: Building confidence and fostering cooperation among allies and partners, reinforcing a rules-based international order.[28][29]

Hard Power Applications

Hard power projection involves the direct application or credible threat of military force to achieve strategic objectives. These applications include:

  • Showing the Flag: A symbolic deployment of military forces to a region to signal political interest, demonstrate resolve, or indicate a willingness to escalate military action if necessary.
  • Compulsion/Deterrence: Utilizing the threat of military force to either compel another state into a specific policy action or deter it from pursuing an undesirable course. This functions as a critical diplomatic tool to influence foreign actors' decision-making.[264][265][266][267][268]
  • Punishment: Employing punitive force against a state in direct response to its actions or policies, aiming to impose costs and alter behavior.[13]
  • Armed Intervention: Deploying military forces into another nation's territory to influence its internal affairs, stopping short of outright conquest but asserting significant external pressure.[125][269][270][271][128]
  • Conquest: The offensive use of military assets to forcibly occupy territory controlled or claimed by another state, representing the most direct and aggressive form of hard power projection.[127][272][273][274][275][276][277][278]

Gray Zone Competition

The Evolving Landscape of Conflict

The "gray zone" represents an expanded operational space between overt cooperation and direct armed conflict, characterized by continuous competition in power projection capabilities among global armies and economic powers.[13][30][31][32][33][34] This environment demands sophisticated strategies that blur the traditional distinctions between peace and war, requiring nations to engage in persistent, multi-domain competition to secure their interests and influence.[57] The strategic landscape is further complicated by the ongoing debate and posture regarding nuclear weapons. While the US, Russia, China, Britain, and France have publicly renounced the use of nuclear weapons in 2022,[36] NATO maintains approximately 100 B61 nuclear bombs in Europe,[39][40][41][42][43][44] and certain F-35A aircraft were certified to carry these bombs in October 2023, underscoring a complex deterrence strategy.[45]

British Strategic Innovations

The British Army is actively exploring innovations such as robots and drones,[46] with significant funding from the £800 million (US$1 billion) Defence Innovation Fund launched in 2016.[47] These technologies are being integrated into surveillance, long-range precision targeting, enhanced mobility, force resupply, urban warfare, and situational awareness.[48] Despite a planned reduction of approximately 10,000 troops by 2025,[49] the British Army is developing an Integrated Operating Concept for "gray zone" operations across various domains, utilizing synthetic operating environments and maintaining repeatable hard and soft strike capabilities.[50] Concurrently, the UK, Germany, and France have established specialized space commands (United Kingdom Space Command, Space Situational Awareness Centre, and Commandement de l’espace, respectively) to address emerging challenges in the space domain.[51][52] In response to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, NATO members are also implementing new guidelines for replenishing their arsenals,[53][54] reflecting a heightened focus on readiness and logistical resilience.

Russian Strategic Posture

Russia's power projection in the gray zone includes sophisticated electronic warfare, such as jamming GPS signals during NATO exercises in 2018,[63][64][65] highlighting a perceived loss of dominance in the electromagnetic spectrum by the US.[77] General Valery Gerasimov advocates for hybrid warfare, integrating political, economic, and military power against adversaries,[80] exemplified by the annexation of Crimea without direct combat.[83] Russia has also tested anti-satellite systems, notably destroying its Kosmos 1408 satellite in 2021, posing risks to low Earth orbit assets.[86][87] Cyber attacks, such as those on the US government via the SolarWinds Orion Platform in 2020,[91][92] and mapping of undersea communication cables,[93][94] further illustrate Russia's multi-domain approach. The ongoing standoff with Ukraine, characterized by troop buildups,[98][99][100][101][102][103] cyber attacks,[130][131] and the potential weaponization of energy supplies (e.g., Nord Stream 2),[118][119] demonstrates a complex interplay of military pressure and economic leverage. Russia's military modernization includes unmanned ground combat vehicles (UGCVs) like the Uran-9,[152] hypersonic missiles (Tsirkon,[158] Kinzhal),[160] and nuclear-capable cruise missiles (9M729),[159] alongside large-scale exercises like Zapad 2021[148][149] and Vostok 2022.[161] Despite these advancements, logistical limitations, particularly reliance on railroads, could hinder large-scale land grabs, potentially leading to prolonged conflicts and anti-war movements, as seen in past engagements.[134][135]

Chinese Global Ambitions

China's power projection strategy is characterized by rapid military modernization and economic influence. RAND simulations indicate potential challenges for adversaries in conflicts with China.[167] By 2019, six of the top 15 global defense companies were Chinese, reflecting significant industrial growth.[168] China aims for military parity with the US by 2027 and dominant military power in Asia by 2049,[173][174] as outlined in its 14th five-year plan.[176] However, demographic shifts, including a shrinking working-age population, may pose future challenges.[179][180] China leads in industrial robotics, controlling nearly half of the world's industrial robots in 2020.[192] Its National Intelligence Law of 2017 mandates companies to support state intelligence gathering.[194] China's militarization of the South China Sea and frequent incursions into Taiwan's Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) demonstrate its assertive regional posture.[216] The completion of the BeiDou-3 satellite navigation system in 2020[197] and the construction of numerous missile silos near Yumen[201] signal a significant expansion of its strategic capabilities, with projections of doubling its nuclear arsenal in the 2020s.[203][204] China also controls 80% of global rare earth mineral production, leveraging this economic power.[207] Recent cyber attacks against Russia[212] and a strict zero-Covid policy that led to widespread protests highlight internal and external dynamics influencing its power projection. Diplomatic solutions are being sought amidst these escalating competitions.[189]

Indian and Japanese Dynamics

India, a significant regional power, faces complex geopolitical challenges, particularly with Pakistan, which is acquiring advanced drones from Turkey.[246] China's deployment of troops in Gilgit near Kashmir further complicates India's security landscape.[247] In response, Japan and India have agreed to enhance bilateral defense cooperation.[248] Japan, facing threats from North Korea,[249] is developing its own F-X fighter program[250] and focusing on interoperable materiel with US allies. Japan's commitment to defense is underscored by its Cooperative Engagement Capability, demonstrated by successfully detecting, tracking, and shooting down a ballistic missile in a joint test.[255] Both nations are navigating a dynamic security environment, emphasizing technological advancement and strategic partnerships to project influence and ensure regional stability.

Strategic Applications

Global Economic Scenarios

The Texas National Security Review outlines five potential scenarios for the future of the global economy, each with profound implications for power projection:[256]

  1. Reglobalization: A return to the trends of increased global integration observed in the 1980s.
  2. Deglobalization: A reversal of the globalization trends prevalent in the 2000s, leading to more localized economies.[257][258]
  3. Globalization with Chinese Characteristics: A model where China's economic and political influence shapes global integration, potentially through initiatives like the Belt and Road.[166]
  4. Regional Blocs with Partially Closed Trading: The emergence of distinct economic blocs with limited trade between them, fostering regional self-reliance.[127][13][166][258][260][263][264]
  5. Shared Strategic Interests and Common Political Values: A scenario, particularly favored by the Western bloc, where power projection is guided by collective values and mutual security objectives.[256]

These scenarios highlight how economic structures and alliances directly influence a state's capacity and motivation for projecting power globally.

Power Projection Capabilities

The following table provides an overview of selected nations' power projection capabilities, considering their maritime force, aircraft/helicopter carriers, overseas military bases, deployed troops, and nuclear deterrence status.

Country Bloc/Group Maritime Carriers (Helicopter / Aircraft) Overseas Bases Troops Deployed Abroad Nuclear
Australia G20/MIKTA/FVEY/Commonwealth/APEC/ANZUS/MNNA/QUAD/AUKUS Green-water navy 2 / 0 1 2900[294] ❌
Argentina G20/UNASUR/UFC/Mercosur/MNNA/Rio Green-water navy 0 2 1050[295] ❌
Bangladesh D-8/BIMSTEC/SAARC/IMCTC/Commonwealth 0 1 6417[296] ❌
Belgium EU/NATO 0 0 710[295] Nuclear sharing
Brazil G20/G4/BRICS/UNASUR/Mercosur/MNNA/Rio Green-water navy 1 / 0 0 273[297] ❌
Canada G20/G7/NATO/APEC/FVEY/OIF/Commonwealth/UFC Green-water navy 0 0 3600[298] ❌
China P5/G20/BRICS/APEC/SCO Blue-water navy 2 / 2 1 11,775[295][299] ✅
Egypt African Union/Arab League/D-8/MNNA 2 / 0 0 3760[297] ❌
France P5/G20/G7/EU/NATO/Quint Blue-water navy 3 / 1 10 10,300[300] ✅
Germany G20/G7/G4/EU/NATO/Quint Green-water navy 0 1 3597[301] Nuclear sharing
India G20/BRICS/G4/Commonwealth/SAARC/SCO/QUAD Blue-water navy 2 / 2 6 6430[297] ✅
Iran ECO/OPEC/GECF/SCO/BRICS/D-8 Green-water navy 0 3 ❌
Indonesia G20/ASEAN/APEC/MIKTA/BRICS/D-8/NAM/EAS/OIC 0 0 3064[297] ❌
Italy G20/G7/UFC/EU/NATO/Quint Blue-water navy 1 / 2 2 6000[302] Nuclear sharing
Japan G20/G7/G4/APEC/MNNA/QUAD Green-water navy 2 / 2 1 278[295] ❌
Mexico G20/MIKTA/APEC/UFC 0 0 ❌
Netherlands EU/NATO Green-water navy 0 0 650[295] Nuclear sharing
Nigeria African Union/OPEC/Commonwealth/D-8 0 0 2190[295] ❌
Pakistan D-8/UFC/SCO/MNNA/SAARC/IMCTC/Commonwealth 0 1 5264[297] ✅
Poland EU/NATO 0 0 2600[303] Nuclear sharing
Russia P5/G20/BRICS/SCO Blue-water navy 1 / 1 10 10,000[304] ✅
Saudi Arabia G20/Arab League/OPEC/OIC/GCC/IMCTC 0 0 ❌
South Africa G20/BRICS/African Union/Commonwealth/NAM 0 0 1900[305] ❌
South Korea G20/MIKTA/APEC/MNNA Green-water navy 1 / 0 0 1000[306] ❌
Spain EU/NATO Blue-water navy 1 / 0 0 2500[307] ❌
Turkey G20/NATO/MIKTA/D-8/OIC Green-water navy 1 / 0 1 3000[308] ❌
United Kingdom P5/G20/G7/EU/NATO/Quint/FVEY/Commonwealth Blue-water navy 2 / 2 15 11,000[309] ✅
United States P5/G20/G7/NATO/Quint/APEC/FVEY/MNNA/QUAD/AUKUS Blue-water navy 9 / 11 750 200,000[310] ✅

Teacher's Corner

Edit and Print this course in the Wiki2Web Teacher Studio

Edit and Print Materials from this study in the wiki2web studio
Click here to open the "Power Projection" Wiki2Web Studio curriculum kit

Use the free Wiki2web Studio to generate printable flashcards, worksheets, exams, and export your materials as a web page or an interactive game.

True or False?

Test Your Knowledge!

Gamer's Corner

Are you ready for the Wiki2Web Clarity Challenge?

Learn about power_projection while playing the wiki2web Clarity Challenge game.
Unlock the mystery image and prove your knowledge by earning trophies. This simple game is addictively fun and is a great way to learn!

Play now

Explore More Topics

Discover other topics to study!

megadiverse countries
    
hawaii islanders
    
eldar ryazanov
    
sumidagawa fireworks festival
    
moses ibn ezra
    
touch judge
    
sacrament
    
aristocrat records
    
proclamation of neutrality
    
gatehouse
    

References

References

  1.  Reuters (February 1, 2022) Factbox-How Ukraine's armed forces shape up against Russia's
  2.  Paul Kirby (23 Feb 2022) Why is Russia ordering troops into Ukraine and what does Putin want?
  3.  Ian Ward (23 Feb 2022) Joe Biden's Secret Constitutional Weapon
  4.  Matthew Brown (February 1, 2022) Putin says US, NATO have 'ignored' Russia's security demands on Ukraine: What we know
  5.  Russia Insight (February 1, 2022) BREAKING! Putin: USA Is Using Ukraine As ‘Tool’ To Contain Russia 8:01 Video clip, English closed captions
  6.  Shashank Joshi (29 Jan 2022) The technology of seeing and shooting your enemies
  7.  Ostrovsky 2018: p 270, https://archive.org/details/military-globalization/page/269/mode/2up?view=theater
  8.  Ostrovsky 2018: p I-II, https://archive.org/details/military-globalization/page/I/mode/2up?view=theater
  9.  Ostrovsky 2018: p 273-274, https://archive.org/details/military-globalization/page/273/mode/2up?view=theater
  10.  Zachary B. Wolf, Curt Merrill and Ji Min Lee, CNN (16 Mar 2022) Zelensky's address to Congress, annotated
  11.  E. John Teichert (24 Mar 2022) The Hard Power of Security Cooperation
  12.  James Graham Military Power vs Economic Power in History Compares nations
  13.  James Graham Military Power vs Economic Power in History (Part 2) "[I]t is economic power that allows military power to be built up in the first place".
  14.  Reuters (25 Apr 2022) Russia's Lavrov: Do not underestimate threat of nuclear war
  15.  Dan Zak (25 March 2022) Meet the nuke the U.S. keeps in Europe, just waiting to not be used
  16.  Robbin Laird (11 Apr 2022) Time to relearn nuclear escalation management for the 21st century
  17.  Reuters (30 Apr 2022) Russia says risks of nuclear war must be kept to minimum -TASS
  18.  Michael Marrow (8 Mar 2024) EXCLUSIVE: F-35A officially certified to carry nuclear bomb B61-12
  19.  Vivienne Machi (13 Jul 2021) Germany establishes new military space command
  20.  Defender-Europe 20 videos, images and stories
  21.  Greg Norman (22 Feb 2020) The 5 most powerful armies in the world
  22.  Jen Judson (23 Mar 2022) Multidomain operations concept will become doctrine this summer
  23.  Sydney J. Freedberg Jr. (6 June 2019) Army Fields Anti-Jam GPS In Germany This Fall
  24.  Russia has figured out how to jam U.S. drones in Syria, officials say
  25.  Not What You Think (25 Mar 2022) Are Tanks Obsolete? The Future of Warfare
  26.  Rob Picheta and Jack Guy, CNN (8 Mar 2022) Ukraine claims Russian general has been killed in Kharkiv
  27.  MSNBC Morning Joe (28 Mar 2022) 'Astounding' Number Of Casualties: Why The Invasion Is Proving Deadly For Russia
  28.  Andrew E. Kramer (2 March 2019) Russian General Pitches ‘Information’ Operations as a Form of War
  29.  Paul McCleary (30 May 2019) Dunford: Leaders Mull First NATO Strategy In Decades
  30.  Sydney J. Freedberg Jr. (21 April 2020) COVID-19: Army Futures Command Takes Wargames Online
  31.  Aaron Bateman (22 May 2020) As Russia stalks US satellites, a space arms race may be heating up
  32.  Specialist website Russian Space Web (25 Nov 2021) Russia launches classified military satellite
  33.  Jacob Gronholt-Pedersen and Gwladys Fouche, Reuters (16 Nov 2022) NATO allies wake up to Russian supremacy in the Arctic
  34.  John Christianson (5 Dec 2022) FIGHTING AND WINNING IN THE ELECTROMAGNETIC SPECTRUM (EMS)
  35.  Robert Burns (19 Jan 2022) Explainer: What are US military options to help Ukraine?
  36.  Paul McLeary (7 May 2021) Jamming Strikes OSCE Drones Tracking Russian Forces
  37.  New York Times Ukraine map (7 Jan 2022) How Russia's Military is Positioned To Threaten Ukraine
  38.  Jeff Schogol, Paul Szoldra (21 Feb 2022) Moscow orders Russian troops into Ukraine
  39.  Reuters (22 February 2022) Putin gets green light to deploy troops to eastern Ukraine
  40.  Charles Riley (22 February 2022) The sanctions that could really hurt Russia
  41.  Charles Riley (22 February 2022) Russia is already paying a hefty financial price for its aggression
  42.  Andrei Illarionov (30 April 2021) Putin was not ready to launch a war in the Spring
  43.  Charles Riley (26 Jan 2022) What is SWIFT and why it might be the weapon Russia fears most
  44.  Christian Datoc (15 July 2021) US lifted Nord Stream 2 sanctions to gain German cooperation in safeguarding Ukraine, Biden says
  45.  Alexander Ratz and Pavel Polityuk (17 Jan 2022) Germany says Russia will pay price if it moves on Ukraine
  46.  Rob Picheta (29 Jan 2022) How a Russian invasion of Ukraine would reverberate around the world
  47.  Michael Kofman (Apr 2019) Drivers of Russian Grand Strategy
  48.  CaspianReport (29 Jan 2022) What a Russian assault on Ukraine would look like video clip 14:41
  49.  Frida Ghitis (13 Jan 2022) Putin's big miscalculation
  50.  Richard Galant (23 Jan 2022) Putin confronts the mud of Ukraine
  51.  Joe Gould (21 Nov 2022) Weapons shortages spark tough choices for Ukraine’s allies
  52.  Helene Cooper (14 Jan 2022) U.S. Considers Backing an Insurgency if Russia Invades Ukraine
  53.  Sebastien Roblin (21 Jan 2022) The ‘Georgia Model’: Russia's Plan For Invading Ukraine?
  54.  Sergey Radchenko (22 February 2022) Moscow Musings on Brinksmanship From Stalin to Putin
  55.  Anton Troianovski (10 Sep 2021) Russia and Belarus inch closer to a full-blown merger
  56.  Michael Kofman (8 Sep 2021) Zapad-2021: What to Expect From Russia's Strategic Military Exercise
  57.  James Stavridis (11 Apr 2022) What the U.S. Military Needs to Learn from the Ukraine War
  58.  Combat Approved (13 Feb 2021) Episode 44. The Uran-9 Russia's First Combat Robot
  59.  Sebastien Roblin (21 October 2019) This Is the Robot Tank Russia Used in Syria
  60.  Axx (14 Sep 2021) Russia one step ahead, Why Russia's strike robots is scary enough
  61.  Army Technology.com (2016) Uran-9 Unmanned Ground Combat Vehicle
  62.  The Moscow Times (1 September 2022) Russia Stages Scaled-down War Games With China, India
  63.  Ukrayinska Pravda (15 Mar 2023) Russian army to be replenished with 400,000 new contract service personnel starting 1 Apr 2023
  64.  Defense News (July 2019) Top 100 for 2019
  65.  David Kirton (30 Sep 2021) China's high-end military technology touted at biggest air show Airshow China in Zhuhai
  66.  Dean Cheng (19 May 2021) How China's Thinking About The Next War Proposed doctrine: brigade-based, joint MDO
  67.  Deutsche Welle (21 May 2021) China releases population census with enormous implications for the country's future
  68.  Evelyn Cheng (17 Jan 2023) China's Population Drops For the First Time In Decades in 2022
  69.  60 Minutes (19 Mar 2023) Is the Navy ready? How the U.S. is preparing amid a naval buildup in China USS Nimitz
  70.  Michael C Horowitz (19 Nov 2021) War by Timeframe: Responding to China's Pacing Challenge
  71.  CNN (16 November 2022) Pentagon gives update after missile hits Poland 4 hour Ukraine Defense Contact Group meeting with 50 nations 47:21
  72.  Jim Garamone, DOD News (7 Dec 2022) U.S., U.K. Military Chiefs Discuss Ukraine, China
  73.  Fareed Zakaria, GPS (14 Sep 2023) On GPS: Gen. Mark Milley on estimating China's military power
  74.  Roopinder Tara (22 Sep 2022) Almost Half of Industrial Robots Are in China
  75.  Reuters World News (27 June 2017) China passes tough new intelligence law National Intelligence Law
  76.  Defense updates (30 Apr 2020) 3 Reasons Chinese Liaoning Will Not Last an Hour Against USS Ronald Reagan Protecting Japan!
  77.  P.W. Singer and Taylor A. Lee (31 March 2020) China's version of GPS is almost complete. Here's what that means.
  78.  Elizabeth Howell (16 June 2020) China postpones launch of Beidou global navigation satellite
  79.  James Anderson (31 July 2020) China's troubling nuclear buildup The New York Times Op-Ed p. A25. —James Anderson is Acting undersecretary of defense for policy
  80.  Daniel L. Davis (6 Aug 2021): Defense Priorities fellow Daniel Davis BBC to discuss Afghanistan withdrawal
  81.  Fergus Ryan (26 Aug 2021) China Takes on Its Tech Leaders
  82.  Bloomberg (30 Aug 2021) China To Cleanse Online Content That 'Bad-Mouths' Its Economy
  83.  Colin Clark (4 Oct 2021) 149 Chinese Fighters, Bombers Sweep Across Taiwan ADIZ In 4 Days
  84.  Covert Cabal (10 Oct 2021) Can Taiwan Stop a Chinese Invasion?
  85.  Military Aviation History (4 Feb 2018) Air Superiority 2030 - How America Wants To Retain Dominance Encapsulates the factors for 2030
  86.  Oren Liebermann, CNN (24 Feb 2023) US plans to expand training of Taiwanese forces
  87.  THOMAS CORBETT and PETER W. SINGER (3 Apr 2023) China Is Eating Russia's Lunch in the Defense Market
  88.  Mike Rogers (4 Mar 2022) China is watching Ukraine closely, the US should watch China
  89.  Jaspreet Gill (14 Jan 2022) Army ‘well on its way’ to first OCONUS cloud in Indo-Pacific
  90.  Alternative PNT & Area Protection DAPS
  91.  MDAA (24 Jul 2020) Lower Tier Air and Missile Defense Sensor (LTAMDS)
  92.  Jen Judson (13 Jan 2022) Army readies to deliver first set of Strykers with 50-kilowatt laser weapons
  93.  Brian Yang (2 December 2022) China Set To Green-Light First mRNA Vaccine
  94.  Bloomberg (4 Dec 2022) China's Covid Pivot Accelerates as Cities Ease Testing Rules
  95.  Deutsche Welle DW News (16 Aug 2021) Taliban back in power: What does it mean for the Indo-Pacific region?
  96.  Russia Insight (26 December 2019) Putin Stunned By Words Of Japanese Journalist: What Are You Talking About!? Video clip: 6:51
  97.  Reuters (25 Dec 2021) Japan to pay companies to keep sensitive patents secret- Nikkei
  98.  The Changing Order (9 Feb 2022) —Peter Zeihan: How Deglobalization Works, Full Webinar video 58:24
  99.  Anna Cooban (24 March 2022) BlackRock says Russia’s war in Ukraine is the end of globalization
  100.  Akhil Ramesh ( Are we witnessing the beginning of de-dollarization?
  101.  JackCarrUSA video 1:01:50 Peter Zeihan (June 2022): The End of the World Is Just the Beginning hardcover
  102.  (26 Jan 2022) Will There Be a War Over Ukraine? 13 Putin Watchers Weigh In
  103.  David M. Herszenhorn and Paul McLeary (8 Apr 2022) Ukraine's 'iron general' is a hero, but he's no star ala SoF
  104.  Sebastian Sprenger (17 Feb 2022) Ukraine, UK, Poland announce security pact amid heightened tensions
  105.  Douglas London, Foreign Affairs (11 Apr 2022) A Shadow War Against Putin
  106.  Sergey Radchenko (22 Feb 2022) MOSCOW MUSINGS ON BRINKSMANSHIP FROM STALIN TO PUTIN
  107.  Jack Watling and Nick Reynolds (22 Apr 2022) Operation Z: The Death Throes of an Imperial Delusion 26 pages
  108.  Reuben Johnson (19 May 2022) Russian attempts to restock its military may be doomed to failure
  109.  Michael Kofman (24 Jan 2022) Putin's Wager in Russia's Standoff With the West
  110.  The New York Times (24 Feb 2022) Maps: Tracking the Russian Invasion of Ukraine
  111.  Frontline (Mar 15, 2022) Putin's Road to War (full documentary) 53:18
  112.  Francis P. Sempa (7 Feb 2023) Alexander Vindman and the Road to World War III
  113.  Providing for Peacekeeping: Country Profiles
A full list of references for this article are available at the Power projection Wikipedia page

Feedback & Support

To report an issue with this page, or to find out ways to support the mission, please click here.

Disclaimer

Important Notice

This page was generated by an Artificial Intelligence and is intended for informational and educational purposes only. The content is based on a snapshot of publicly available data from Wikipedia and may not be entirely accurate, complete, or up-to-date.

This is not professional strategic or military advice. The information provided on this website is not a substitute for expert analysis in international relations, military strategy, or geopolitical assessment. Always refer to official government reports, academic research, and consult with qualified professionals for specific strategic planning, defense policy, or international relations analysis. Never disregard professional advice because of something you have read on this website.

The creators of this page are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for any actions taken based on the information provided herein.