NATO weak link: who and why is the ballast of a military bloc


There are many countries in the structure of the North Atlantic Alliance that give it more trouble than real benefits. We can distinguish two groups of such countries and this is why.


In general, a situation is typical for modern Europe when some of the larger, richer and technologically advanced countries, in the name of a certain pan-European integration, are pulling other countries. This is happening in the European Union, this is happening in NATO. But the EU is still an economic and political structure, and NATO is a military-political bloc and the presence of a weak link in it only contributes to a reduction in its power and problems for stronger members.

We can distinguish two groups of countries participating in the North Atlantic Alliance, which can rightfully be called the weak link of NATO. The first group consists of two Slavic and Orthodox countries of the Balkan Peninsula. You guessed it, we are talking about Montenegro and Northern Macedonia. These countries are small and poor, with very limited financial and military capabilities.

For example, Northern Macedonia has an armed forces of only 8 thousand people, but their maintenance without external assistance is impossible. The Montenegrin armed forces are even smaller - just a little over 2 thousand people. What operational tasks can such armies solve?


But in this case, not even this circumstance makes them a weak link. After all, Luxembourg or Belgium can also hardly be called militarily strong countries, but no one doubts their usefulness to the alliance. Here we see a different situation: Montenegro and Northern Macedonia have a Slavic population of Orthodox culture, which is generally positively inclined towards Russia and Russians.

No matter how the Montenegrin and Macedonian elites behave, the bulk of ordinary citizens in these countries sympathize with Russia. That was and will be, because culture itself is such, and Russia has made a very big contribution to their liberation from Ottoman oppression. In these countries there will always be very influential political forces of a pro-Russian sense.

The second group of countries that can be attributed to NATO's weakest link are the three “Baltic sisters” that we all love. Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania are very small states with tiny armies and military budgets. They can also pay their military expenses only thanks to subsidies from the USA and the European Union. To secure funding for their defense and security, the Baltic states are constantly forced to inflate the danger of the mythical Russian threat. But it is not this fact that makes the Baltic republics the second weak link.


Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia are on the far periphery of NATO. It is not they who protect the eastern frontiers of the alliance, but the alliance is forced to hold consolidated battalions with the rotational principle of manning to protect them. A good soldier who needs extra soldiers to defend!

At the same time, the Baltic republics are also a constant source of image losses - they will either hold a parade of surviving SS men or arrange political discrimination on ethnic grounds. One system of discrimination of the Russian-speaking population in Latvia is worth it! In the framework of solidarity, the European Union and NATO have to constantly cover up the crazy tricks of the nationalist-minded Baltic elites.

Recall another important point. In the same Latvia, the Russian and Russian-speaking population is 30%, that is, a third of the country's population. A lot of Russians live in Estonia, in Lithuania. Is it worth it, for all the attitude that they meet on the part of the authorities and right-wing political parties in the Baltic republics, to expect loyalty from them in a critical situation? But 30% is not 3% or even 10%. This is a third of the population, every third resident of the country! Most Russians and Russian speakers sympathize with Russia, and if something happens that is most afraid of in Riga, Tallinn or Vilnius, it is clear who they will support.

Thus, the NATO bloc would not be amiss to change its strategy. Fighting for the number of members of the alliance, trying to drive all of Europe into it (and even Serbia is literally dragged there by force!), Only means worsening its quality, making NATO weaker and more divided. But it is their choice.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

28 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. AlexVas44 April 29 2020 11: 12 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    What operational tasks can such armies solve?

    Well, for example, to create a beautiful surroundings at ceremonial receptions ...
    1. Vend April 29 2020 11: 17 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: AlexVas44
      What operational tasks can such armies solve?

      Well, for example, to create a beautiful surroundings at ceremonial receptions ...

      NATO itself is ballast laughing
      1. To be or not to be April 29 2020 14: 45 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Wend (Anatoly) Today, 11:17 AM NEW
        + 2NATO itself ballast laughing "" "
        NATO - American shackles in Europe ....

        According to the announcement of small NATO countries of the Baltic countries. Macedonia and Montenegro
        - it’s important for NATO not the size of their armies, but their geographical location
      2. knn54 April 29 2020 15: 53 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        NATO is not a ballast, but a buyer of American weapons.
        1. Vend April 29 2020 18: 43 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: knn54
          NATO is not a ballast, but a buyer of American weapons.

          What difference does it make that NATO is for the USA, for other countries it is ballast.
    2. DemikSPb April 29 2020 14: 39 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      They can be the organizational basis for the creation of a local headquarters and the deployment of an external group of troops. In fact, the finished occupation administration.
  2. Kostadinov April 29 2020 11: 24 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    The first group consists of two Slavic and Orthodox countries of the Balkan Peninsula. You guessed it, we are talking about Montenegro and Northern Macedonia. These countries are small and poor, with very limited financial and military capabilities.

    If Bulgaria is added, everything will be for sure.
    1. Bagatur April 29 2020 19: 14 New
      • 0
      • 4
      -4
      And Russia is rich, right? Look at your salaries and pensions ... Isn't it strange for you with all the resources you live so poorly? We do not have hydrocarbons, gold, diamonds, etc. And the income is not less than yours!
      1. mole April 29 2020 21: 37 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: bagatura
        And Russia is rich, right? Look at your salaries and pensions ... Isn't it strange for you with all the resources you live so poorly? We do not have hydrocarbons, gold, diamonds, etc. And the income is not less than yours!

        You still have a lot to do. In this case, it is not about money or a good life.
        The point is your defense as a NATO country. Therefore, live beautifully and continue to dream of another occupation, bro.
      2. Sidor Amenpodestovich April 30 2020 10: 30 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Russia lives on its own, and you live on handouts from the master's table. If these handouts stop, what will happen to your salaries and pensions?
        1. Bagatur 1 May 2020 12: 27 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          Yeah ... And my question is: Why didn’t Russia become a rich and prosperous country like Japan and Germany? Didn’t they be destroyed to the ground? One Korea look where it is, where vy? How much will one pipe cost? How has China in 40 years become a world power, a factory of the world? What prevented Russia from repeating UTB after 91 years? You have everything you need but one - a strategy for 50 years and patience! Golden hydrocarbon rain spent on what? Iron for the sun, the Olympics, Mondial, corruption on all the fields in the country. Does the oligarchy have yachts and planes more than new ships for the Navy?
          1. Sidor Amenpodestovich 1 May 2020 13: 20 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: bagatura
            Why didn’t Russia become a rich and prosperous country like Japan and Germany?

            Because Germany and Japan were restored by all of Europe, led by the United States. But the Union was forced to rebuild itself, rebuild the Warsaw Pact countries, and hastily develop atomic weapons and an intercontinental delivery vehicle.
            How has China in 40 years become a world power, a factory of the world?

            Thanks to Western investment of hundreds of billions of dollars and Western technology transferred to the Chinese side under the terms of the agreement.
            Iron for the Sun, Olympics, Mondial,

            This is all hundreds of thousands of jobs, salaries, taxes. And if you personally do not need stadiums, this does not mean that no one needs them at all, and they do not need to be built.
            For example, I don’t drink and don’t smoke. Let's stop producing and selling alcohol and cigarettes, do I need them?
            Does the oligarchy have yachts and planes more than new ships for the Navy?

            Corruption and oligarchs are everywhere, always have been and always will be.
            1. Bagatur 1 May 2020 13: 51 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              Who started the Cold War the question is ambiguous ... But the fact that no one begged the USSR "give us your communism" is for sure! They painted Eastern Europe red, the empire wanted ... well, you have to pay for it!
              1. Sidor Amenpodestovich 1 May 2020 14: 23 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                If the countries of the Warsaw Pact did not take the Union, the Americans would take them, which meant for the Union a significant weakening of positions in Europe. Small countries do not control their fate, and will always be a bargaining chip for large powers.
                1. Bagatur 1 May 2020 15: 51 New
                  • 0
                  • 1
                  -1
                  So think vy ... But let's just say that. The USSR and Russia today could not offer anything in return for the high status of these countries! Poverty and dictatorship are clothed with beautiful words ...
    2. Unmer April 29 2020 23: 04 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      And Romania .. * Bronzletka! the soldier yelled joyfully. Siguranza damned, thought Ostap. * Romanian special forces are a terrible force ..
  3. Pete mitchell April 29 2020 11: 55 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    I don’t think that someone in their right mind thinks Nata will really “fit in” for the Baltic states and the Visegrad group countries. Nata achieved its goals in the same Baltic region by contributing to the introduction of modern airspace surveillance systems and integrating this information into Western European air defense. They, the countries of old Europe, created at someone else’s expense a sort of early warning system, and more they do not need these countries
  4. rocket757 April 29 2020 12: 24 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Well then, Temko, I’m looking for some kind of weak link.
    We need to develop strength-strong ourselves, then we will not have to look for any weak link.
  5. iouris April 29 2020 12: 43 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Who is the addressee of these good advice from the former Soviet Union?
  6. Pvi1206 April 29 2020 12: 45 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    The countries of the former socialist "camp" are accepted into the EU and NATO (as you call a steamer, it will sail) ... there is only one goal - if only they would not turn to Russia again ... they let everyone in, but the reverse process is problematic ... the power of these countries are buying up on the vine..and before - they cover up ...
  7. Sergej1972 April 29 2020 13: 11 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Belgium for its size and population is still not quite a militarily weak country.
  8. Alexga April 29 2020 13: 42 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Let’s look at NATO from this side. In NATO there is only one state that determines the essence of the activity of this structure, this is the USA, France, Germany and the UK can not be taken into account, they are too small compared to the United States. With the increase in the number of NATO member countries, the territory in which the US Armed Forces may end up is expanding, here are the Baltic states and the Balkans. After all, they simply couldn’t be there before. And one more thing, the transition to NATO standards, about these are confident orders for armaments for the US military industry, which are made, by the way, for the loans of the same USA. Just a business and nothing personal. Well, such a moment, to cover up as far as possible countries in their bloody affairs- Yugoslavia, Iraq, Syria, Libya .... Something like this.
  9. Uncle Izya April 29 2020 15: 10 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Recall another important point. In the same Latvia, the Russian and Russian-speaking population is 30%, that is, a third of the country's population.
    Not the fact that they patronize Russia, they have a better standard of living
    1. Oyo Sarkazmi April 29 2020 22: 23 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Uncle Izya
      Not the fact that they patronize Russia, they have a better standard of living

      Who is richer, Lithuanian or Mongol? The Lithuanian has a salary of 800 euros and an apartment. Which was given by the Soviet government. The Mongol has 200 horses, at a price of $ 20 a piece, and a yurt with zero cost. The Lithuanian lives on 10 thousand euros a year, the Mongol - barely a thousand.
      Who is richer? Mongol. For he does not pay for anything - neither for an apartment, nor for roads, nor for food, nor for electricity. And has 200 horses. The Lithuanian, after paying utility bills and taxes, barely scratches at food. And he has nothing more.
  10. Olddetractor April 29 2020 15: 51 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Yes, all of this is praised by NATO as a market for the states. All the politics of the bloc are nothing more than the color of the fence of this "little market". Here's how to work with potential buyers of weapons, create a bloc, “support democracy” for those who join it and drive them into debt, stealing along the way
  11. NF68 April 29 2020 17: 32 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    All the same, NATO will not do without Mosek. If something serious enough happens, then cannon fodder should always be at hand.
  12. NordUral 1 May 2020 17: 47 New
    • 0
    • 2
    -2
    The maintenance of these targets is the rent for direct access to our borders.
  13. Pavel57 4 May 2020 13: 10 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Ballast is needed to simulate unity.