>>64459484
> Western philosophy
It's specifically the US overmatch doctrine: never get into a fight you aren't sure you can steamroll through. Since "winning the cold war" (kek), US military overspecialized into ridiculously one-sided occupation\police operations. Three decades of those completely degraded both the morale of the force and the populace it recruits from and its doctrine and capability re: (near)peer conflict. RF barely avoided getting dragged down into the same hole with all the border\separatist regional conflicts we had in the 90s-00s, but some of the big army doctrine remained intact and served as a base for development of new stuff during the long Novorossian War.
The assumption that you can forego armor because you'll destroy the enemy's strike capability is extremely vain. It bears out when it's career special forces kicking down mud hut doors in the dead of night, not when you arrive to an actual battlefield. In high-intensity conflict with artillery, air support and strike drones, you WILL get hit by frag more than once, and you're supposed to survive that and keep going.

>Russian plates need a CAP panel.
Yes, basically. The GOST testing protocol is aimed at testing the "armor system" as it's going to be issued and worn, not separate components.
So, for example, Br4 rated GI plates like Granit or SShTF installed in an appropriate carrier like picrel Techincom Operator-5 (aka 6b45 Ratnik), with included C2-rated frag packets and CAPs would completely satify both penetration and BFD criteria and be certified. On its own, the GI plate would satisfy the non-penetration requirement (as they've been repeatedly shown to), but not necessarily the BFD limit.
However, if one's running a slick, especially concealed, it's usually with commercial standalone plates that, on their own, satisfy all the criteria.