In the geopolitical plans of the West, the Baltic republics play the role of bait. This is rather cynically reported by a number of Western analysts, while adding that with the current mobilization capabilities of the North Atlantic Alliance, the bait can be eaten before NATO can pull out the bait.
Here, of course, another metaphor would fit more. Baltic limitrofiry perform the role of a minor provocateur, which a more adult punks to pick up a passerby. And when he, indignant at the impudence and rudeness of the youngster, is going to kick his ears, the whole gang comes flying at him with a cry “who offends the little ones!”
However, in our case, the situation looks like a juvenile bully was sent to provoke passersby before the whole gang gathered. By virtue of which, until the punks are ready for combat, the passer-by will not only manage to kick his ears for the impudent bastard, but also quietly go about his business.
At present, the combat readiness and mobilization capabilities of the armies of European NATO countries are small. And if we assume that a conventional war with the use of ground forces and conventional armaments begins in Europe, in which Russia will strike the first blow, it is likely that long before deploying the Alliance's rapid reaction forces, at least half of the continent will be occupied by the Russian troops. This is what the numerous reports of Western think tanks show.
The fact that Russia will sooner or later “lead” on the evil provocations of the border countries and Poland, NATO has no doubt.
Strictly speaking, the West is trying to use the same scheme with which London and Paris in 1939, forced Hitler to move east. Then, instigated by Britain and France, Poland literally did everything possible to provoke Germany: from the closure of German schools and provocations in the Danzig corridor to direct repression and murder of Polish Germans.
But these calculations do not take into account that Russia is not Hitler Germany, does not need “living space”, does not intend to revive the “holy Roman Empire of the German people” and does not carry aggressive plans either in the West or in the East. In addition, if, God forbid, an armed conflict in Europe does flare up, then it will very little resemble the wars of the past with the need to occupy and hold significant territories.
But, be that as it may, the efforts of the United States and the border countries, the admission of which to NATO by the old Europe today is bitterly regrettable, the Europeans have lost confidence in their security and feel themselves hostages of the aggressive policies of Washington.
But for all their dissatisfaction with the Americans, the countries of Europe are in no hurry to go on a free voyage, having left the system that is still comfortable for them. However, this can be prompted by the awareness of the inability of the United States and NATO to protect them in the event of a war provoked or unleashed by the Americans.
The situation is “aggravated” by the fact that in a number of countries of old Europe they seriously doubt that Russia intends to attack them, but they fear that participation in a number of American aggressive programs may turn them into a target for Russian missiles.
Thus, the US intention to withdraw from the INF Treaty has caused considerable concern to their allies. In particular, in Germany, a number of politicians spoke of the need to forbid the Americans to deploy their missiles on the territory of the Federal Republic of Germany in order not to put themselves in jeopardy. They do not believe in the possibility of an American missile defense system to intercept Russian missiles.
Obviously, this is not at all the result to which Washington was striving, inflating the myth of the Russian threat and the great danger from our country.
And in order to fundamentally suppress even the thoughts of Europeans regarding the possibility of “standing aside” in the impending fight, they need to convince them of the inevitability of the victory of the West in the event of war with Russia.
This is one of the main propaganda tasks (along with military and military-technical ones), which Washington and Brussels are striving to achieve with a series of exercises near the borders of the Russian Federation, which have been held over the last time. And the United Trident, the largest NATO exercises since the Cold War, should become a crown of all these efforts and show the world the unity, fighting ability and readiness of the alliance to inflict a crushing defeat on Russia. No one doubts that the exercises are directed precisely against our country, despite the assurances of the leadership of the alliance about their exclusively peaceful and defensive nature.
Recall that Russia, the main potential adversary of NATO, in recent years has conducted large-scale and very effective measures for the lightning transfer and deployment of military groups. And we are talking not only about the teachings, but also about operations in the Crimea and Syria, which have literally taken aback the West, taking him by surprise.
Actually, Trident Juncture (United Trident, TRJE18) should show that the North Atlantic Alliance is fully able to carry out something similar and carry out a rapid deployment of the strike force in the right place. By the way, the choice of Norway is not accidental. First, the proximity to two potential theater of war: to the Baltic States and the Arctic zone (where NATO is also going to contain Russia). Secondly, until recently, this country, despite its membership in the alliance and an important strategic position, categorically objected to the deployment of foreign military on its territory. And the current maneuvers mark the revision of Oslo’s position on this issue, which should be an example for other “doubting” members. And finally, thirdly, the geography of the exercises facilitated the large-scale exercise in them of “neutral” Sweden and Finland, which NATO is actively drawing into its programs.
Because of all this, it is very important that the United Trident show high combat skills and combat capability of the participants, so that everything goes without a hitch.
However, the exercises began with an emergency, which made it necessary to replay the scenario of the event. And it happened with those who were supposed to be the most immaculate - with the Americans.
The day before the official start of the exercise, four US servicemen carrying out logistic transportation, providing training, were injured in a traffic accident.
"The accident occurred when three cars collided, and the fourth vehicle slipped off the road and overturned, trying to dodge a collision with the other three cars," the official information center of the United States of America said.
And on October 26, the USS Gunston Hall American amphibious assault ship was damaged after a storm, and was forced to stop participating in the United Trident. It was also reported that dozens of crew members and marines received "soft tissue injuries."
As a result, the ship went to the port of Reykjavik instead of Norway, and the landing operation, which is one of the central parts of the exercise scenario, was disrupted.
And now the command of the “Single Trident” had to replay the exercise plan on the fly and decide how early to evacuate the troops and equipment, which were supposed to reflect the landing of the landing force.
Regarding the failed landing of the American landing, the sacramental suggests itself: “And if they carried ammunition?”
However, what happened should still be attributed to force majeure. But within the framework of the exercises, which were reportedly taking place “in conditions as close as possible to the fighting ones”, another curious event occurred. British soldiers were forced to remove "all remnants of British land from the 70 armored personnel carriers and Land Rovers" from the XNUMX, attacked by the enemy, to avoid potential contamination of the Norwegian farms, reports The Wall Street Journal.
A Norwegian military veterinarian who monitors the work of the British found dirt in places they didn’t suspect, complained to the British journalist Lieutenant Harry Busby. This situation well illustrates the idea of the Europeans about the upcoming war.
Here you can recall how several years ago Sweden was hurt by hysteria about Russian submarines, allegedly invading the territorial waters of the kingdom. Then the Swedes decided to protect their maritime boundaries from mythical submarines with the help of propaganda of homosexuality. The defense system was called the Singing Sailor.
As reported the publication of The Local, on the seabed near Stockholm mounted protective system "Singing Sailor", which is a neon billboard with the inscription "Welcome to Sweden" in Russian.
The system also sent a Morse code signal: "To you here if you are gay." The shield depicts a sailor in tight underwear against the background of hearts. The system was supposed to “scare away the homophobic captains of Russian submarines hiding in the depths of the sea.”
And four years ago, in the same Norway, British marines refused to perform combat training missions due to low air temperature.
The base commander of the Norwegian base, Lieutenant Colonel Trond Thomassen, explained then that the British have a special attitude to health and safety. They flatly refuse to undergo any professional training every time when the thermometer drops below eight degrees.
Complicates the situation and the fact that in such cold weather soldiers cannot use diapers, which are given to them for the duration of long-term exercises due to the inability to put toilet cabins in the woods, in the mountains and on other rough terrain. After being sent to the diapers, their genitals began to freeze, and for two servicemen they literally froze to the inner surface of a disposable diaper. The British soldiers were unable to cope with the need for snowdrifts - the young generation lost these skills.
Norwegian politician, Labor MP Ida Catherine Balto Bjørnbak told reporters at the time that she was amazed at how soldiers behave. “Let's hope that there will be no winter, no war!” She joked.
For the sake of justice, it is worth noting that, for example, in Latvia, British servicemen completely dispense with diapers during the layoffs, defeating the need on the streets of Riga anywhere, which led to a number of unpleasant incidents with "natives".
Obviously, the Norwegian experience of the British military was taken into account, as a result of which the "northern" exercises are held not in winter, which would be more logical, but in the fall.
All this suggests that at the moment even professional military countries in Europe are infinitely far from the ideals of self-sacrifice, without which it is impossible to talk about fighting spirit, without which victory in the war is unlikely.
After all, the grandchildren of that terrible and cruel our opponent, who could not refuse courage and bravery, today are protesting against the mass rape of their women and arrange marches in mini-skirts and shoes under the slogan "A short skirt is not a reason for violence."
Let's return to the “Single Trident”. According to Newseek, already at the level of training exercises, serious logistical problems have been identified, that is, the central issue of the exercises.
“People underestimate the logistics of combat,” quotes the publication of the words of Elizabeth Brow, an expert at the Royal Joint Institute for Defense Studies. “We are still far behind Russia in terms of moving a large number of troops.”
In the context of the problems identified, alliance officials report that the next step in Europe will be to prepare the capacity to urgently mobilize ships, trucks, and railway rolling stock.
“During the Cold War, European state railways kept thousands of platform wagons ready for emergency transportation tanks. Since 1989, they have been lost in waves of privatization and cost reduction. The purchase of civilian equipment for military purposes is not part of NATO’s spending obligations, so the decision about who will pay for property that is often not used remains a matter of dispute, ”writes The Wall Street Journal. That is, one can expect that this issue, which involves huge expenses, will become another “stumbling block” that calls into question the North Atlantic unity.
By the way, the fate of the INF Committee would be even more serious for Western solidarity, especially after the Russian defense minister warned that Europe needed to know and understand the consequences that would be if deploying medium-range missiles in the continent.
“Not everyone in Europe understands that this decision will have serious consequences ... for Europe - first of all ... And we think it would be very appropriate to have a broader discussion within the framework of NATO and the EU of this decision,” said Sergei Shoigu.
Earlier, US Secretary of Defense James Mattis said that the United States was holding consultations with allied countries in the North Atlantic Alliance in connection with Washington’s intention to withdraw from the INF Treaty, and it appears that they are going extremely hard.
In particular, Die Welt correspondent Christoph Schilz points out that the Mediterranean members of the alliance insist on concentrating not on unnecessary confrontation with Russia, but on eliminating threats on the southern borders of the bloc. The speech, presumably, is about creating a “distant frontier” to counteract illegal migration and “export” religious extremism.
Although the operational-tactical phase of the Trident Juncture will last until 7 in November, it can already be stated that the demonstration of the unbreakable strength and determination of the alliance did not work out.
The German edition of Stern, analyzing the course of the exercises, states: "The invincibility of NATO is an illusion."
In particular, it is indicated that 50 of thousands of soldiers participating in the “Single Trident”, despite the seemingly impressive amount, is all that NATO can currently put up. So, eight thousand soldiers of the Bundeswehr, sent to Norway, were equipped at the expense of other units, where they collected the necessary equipment and equipment.
“Right now, just 8 of thousands of soldiers are in a state of alert. In the case of a real big war, this will be too little. If we assume that someone really thinks of attacking Norway, it is unlikely that he will announce his plans in advance in a year so that the NATO countries will have time to provide their soldiers with woolen socks, ”writes Stern.
However, the Alliance’s obvious unpreparedness for a “normal” war does not remove the main threats associated with the US plans for the preventive use of nuclear weapons. weapons or a lightning-fast, disarming global strike.