Military Review

Confrontation between Russia and NATO in the new FOI report

36

The Swedish Defense Research Institute (Totalförsvarets forskningsinstitut, FOI) has once again turned to the topic of military-political confrontation in Eastern Europe. A new report entitled "Western Military Capability in Northern Europe 2020" examines the current threats and challenges in the region, primarily the notorious Russian aggression. Also, Swedish specialists studied the balance of forces in a hypothetical conflict, the advantages and problems of its potential participants.


Political situation


In 2017, the FOI released a previous analysis of the strategic situation in Europe and the specifics of the confrontation between Russia and NATO. Much has changed over the years, both politically, diplomatically and militarily. The new report looks at the current state of affairs, and also suggests ways to solve current problems.

The changing "security landscape" remains the main background for current events. The world is becoming multipolar, large countries are increasing their influence, and the potential of international organizations is shrinking. These processes threaten European countries, and they are forced to hastily modernize their armed forces, as well as develop international military cooperation.

The Russian "authoritarian regime" seeks to regain the status of a great power and includes neighboring countries in the sphere of its interests. The "Russian threat" worries European states. At the same time, not all of them are confident in possible assistance from the main NATO ally - from the United States. The lack of guarantees from the American authorities, according to the FOI, is viewed by Russia as an additional opportunity to expand its spheres of interests.


In recent years, despite the presence of strategic threats, not all European countries have increased their defense budgets at an adequate pace. The ongoing pandemic has hit the European economy - and this will prevent an increase in defense spending.

The FOI believes that in the current situation, only Russia cannot be considered a threat. In recent years, China has taken various measures to expand its political and economic presence in the European region. China's "authoritarian regime" is also seen as a threat to European security and therefore needs to be taken into account in subsequent military planning.

Advantages and disadvantages


The report examines the key indicators of the armed forces of Russia and NATO, as well as political and economic characteristics. From these data, general trends are deduced that affect the balance of forces and the situation. FOI experts note that both sides of a hypothetical armed conflict have their own advantages over each other. Their competent use can affect the outcome of the alleged war.

In terms of military, political and economic power, the combined European forces are superior to Russia or China. However, such superiority can be obtained only with the correct coordination of actions of all countries and in the absence of disagreements. Taking this into account, the Russian and Chinese "regimes" seek to undermine the contours of interaction between the countries-potential adversaries.


The strengths of Russia are called a unified management system, consistent strategies and the ability to quickly complete assigned tasks. At the same time, the Russian economy is weak, social discontent is growing, and state structures rely on the personality of one leader.

The exact plans of the high command of the Russian armed forces remain unknown. However, in recent years, significant measures have been taken in the construction, planning and use of troops. The FOI believes that the Russian army is capable of quickly transferring large groupings of troops and supporting their activities; there are developed and effective control loops, etc. These factors give advantages in combat work on the territory of Russia and in the nearest regions of Europe.

Since the summit in 2014, NATO has been implementing various programs to modernize its European grouping. Plans for the transfer and deployment of troops are drawn up and updated, new agreements on cooperation are concluded and new guidelines are introduced. However, there are some gaps in the current planning. The exact composition of the command structures has not been determined. There are no clear plans for the deployment and use of troops in certain situations, etc.

Russia's clear advantage is its numerous and well-equipped ground forces with considerable experience. In the shortest possible time, strike groups can be assembled for an offensive in the given areas. NATO countries can assemble a similar contingent only through joint efforts. There is also a lag in logistics and support processes.

One of NATO's main problems is the dispersal of military forces across Europe. The gathering of groupings of several armies in one direction is a rather complicated and lengthy operation. Its progress and results can also be affected by the low level of combat readiness maintained by the European armies.


NATO has advantages in the air and naval realms. The alliance can gather aviation and naval groupings superior in quantity and quality to the Russian Air Force and Navy. However, advantages in these areas are guaranteed only on condition of US participation and the rapid arrival of its ships and aircraft on the theater of operations.

Hypothetical surgery


The balance of forces and capabilities of Russia and NATO is considered on the example of a hypothetical conflict in Eastern Europe, started by the Russian side. According to the FOI scenario, the Russian army begins an offensive into the Baltic States from its own and Belarusian territory. The purpose of such an offensive is to quickly seize territory and destroy local NATO forces.

It is assumed that at the operational-tactical level, the course and results of such a conflict will be determined mainly by the ground forces. The rapid transfer of tactical aviation allows NATO countries to count on the defeat of the Russian air defense system and the subsequent active influence on ground strike formations. The possibility of using nuclear weapons.

The FOI suggests that during the first few days of the conflict, Russia will be able to use its advantages in the land sphere and develop an offensive. However, then NATO will be able to assemble a sufficient air force, and the advantage will go to the side of the Alliance. The further course of the conflict depends on various factors.

It is noted that not only the Baltics are a potential theater of operations. Conflicts may start in other regions as well, and NATO should prepare for this. At the same time, it is necessary to take into account not only the risks of the outbreak of war, but also threats of a different nature.


Six steps


To increase NATO's potential in Europe and more effectively counter potential adversaries, the FOI proposes to take a number of measures. The implementation of six key proposals will significantly increase the combat effectiveness of both individual armies and NATO as a whole.

First of all, FOI calls on NATO countries not to confine themselves to confrontation only with Russia. It is necessary to pay attention to other threats, such as China, other "unreliable countries" and terrorism. At the same time, the emergence of coalitions within the Alliance is not excluded, which is associated with the large number of its participants and the presence of their own interests.

The second proposal concerns the development of a new flexible response strategy capable of deterring and actively countering the adversary. It is necessary to cover the entire spectrum of threats, from subtle impact on individual allied countries to full-scale nuclear war.

The third idea is to abandon the desire for leadership in all areas. European countries do not have to ensure superiority over Russia in all directions. All that is needed is those measures that will deprive the Russian command of confidence in a quick and easy victory. This will save money, but provide effective containment - or losses unacceptable for Russia in the event of a conflict.

The fourth proposal from FOI provides for the creation of the most flexible multicomponent forces. Capacities should be built in all areas, from cyberspace to space; conventional and nuclear forces. Such a force will be more effective than just a large army of the classic model.


The fifth measure is called the simplest, cheapest and most effective. It is proposed to continue the processes of building, training and coordination of forces. In parallel with this, a sixth step is needed - planning with an eye to the near and long perspective. Long-term investments are necessary and obligatory, but with their help it will not be possible to solve urgent problems. Therefore, programs for the rapid modernization of armies are needed. At the same time, plans for the distant future should be drawn up taking into account the risks of reduced funding and reduced support from the population.

Standoff continues


The report "Western Military Capability in Northern Europe 2020" from the Institute for Defense Studies shows one of the existing points of view on the current political-military situation in Europe. He reviews the current state of affairs, points out the potential and characteristics of the opposing sides, and also suggests steps to improve the capabilities of one of them.

It is obvious that the situation in Europe will not change for the better in the near future. Moreover, the emergence of new challenges and threats is possible. In this regard, FOI proposes a number of measures to improve the defense capabilities of European countries and NATO as a whole. However, the prospects for such proposals are dubious. NATO has its own analytical and planning structures, and their views on key issues may differ from the conclusions of the FOI report. At the same time, the final decisions will remain with the state and NATO structures.
Author:
Photos used:
Russian Ministry of Defense, US Department of Defense
36 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Cottodraton
    Cottodraton 31 March 2021 04: 22
    +8
    And who will give them "to realize the advantage in aviation"? And let him collect it? It seemed to me that airfields were the number one goal ... In addition, if the guys from NATO do not exclude the use of yao, then what kind of "advantage" can we talk about? They will apply it, we will apply it and that's it ... then, for a couple of hundred / thousand years, everyone will have no time for advantages ...
    1. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 31 March 2021 04: 26
      -1
      Quote: Cottodraton
      They will apply it, we will apply it

      We will simply have to use nuclear weapons in Europe.
      1. aleksejkabanets
        aleksejkabanets 31 March 2021 07: 27
        +1
        Quote: Vladimir_2U
        We will simply have to use nuclear weapons in Europe.

        The economy, the blood of war, and on this front we have absolutely nasty things, that's what to think about and what needs to be developed.
        1. ABC-schütze
          ABC-schütze 31 March 2021 10: 45
          +6
          "The economy, the blood of war, and on this front we have absolutely nasty things, that's what to think about and what needs to be developed." And the dialectic is necessary. a prerequisite for competent analytics. The teacher tells us so ... Your remark is true for "all occasions." For this, "think" about the development of the economy and without war is necessary. But, excuse me, who told you that NATO's "economy", in the case of the conflict considered by the Swedes, will be less accessible to Russian strike assets than NATO's airfields, communications, etc. "logistics"? .. the weakness "of the Russian economy will become the factor that will objectively force Russia to solve at least TWO problems. The first is NOT TO LET the enemy gather forces and assets for active, retaliatory offensive actions. The second is to REDUCE as much as possible the time phase of a possible conflict in order to avoid our own economic "exhaustion". That, objectively assumes a DECISIVE and MASSIVE impact on the ENTIRE RESOURCE base of the enemy. That is, - "equalizing the chances" by a sharp destruction of the economic potential of the opposing side directly involved in the conflict. AND RESOLUTIONARY warning to ALL the so-called. "neutrals", with the latter's proposal to calmly "stand on the sidelines" BEFORE the conflict ends, refusing ANY (direct and indirect, military and "non-military") interaction with the opposing side of Russia. If ignored, consider them as the enemy's side, and influence their economic potential as well. And Russia ALREADY HAS POTENTIAL for this TODAY ... The Swedes, engaged in armchair theorizing, do not "understand" this? .. Or is it just that they "do not want to believe"? ..
          1. aleksejkabanets
            aleksejkabanets 31 March 2021 11: 15
            0
            Quote: ABC-schütze
            The second is to maximally REDUCE the time phase of a possible conflict,

            We will not be able to make a "blitzkrieg", too large resources will be involved on both sides. And in all world wars, those who counted on blitzkrieg always lost.
            Quote: ABC-schütze
            AND RESOLUTIONARY warning to ALL the so-called. "neutrals", with the proposal of the latter to calmly "stand on the sidelines", BEFORE THE OUTCOME of the conflict,

            And it is impossible the same, for 300% of the profit the capitalist will take any risk.
            1. ABC-schütze
              ABC-schütze 31 March 2021 11: 41
              0
              1. In the middle of the 20th century, it still would not have worked ... But in today's conditions it will already work out. Moreover, not only on "one" direction of parrying a military threat, but on several at the same time. And Russia already has a sufficient, combat-ready strike potential (strategic and "non-strategic") for the aforementioned massive impact on the "near" and "distant" rear of the enemy (OA). 2. And the dead have a "profit" of even 300% unnecessarily. Moreover, if its hypothetical sources, after the destruction of their economic potential (that is, understand, the main liquid assets ...), if they can "pay" with what, then only with "cut paper" with watermarks. Signs, the liquidity of which is unlikely will be great ... If you quote the classics, then do not forget about dialectics. Anyway, they highly recommended it.
              1. Civil
                Civil 31 March 2021 13: 59
                0
                Quote: ABC-schütze
                And in today's conditions it will already work out

                And what is the meaning of this war? Why should the Russians die? And here and there are capitalists. For their wonderful interests? Already such idiocy in the First World War was and ended with a revolution.
                Ok, we captured Sweden, so what? Will ordinary soldiers get something? Medal and plywood cross?
                1. ABC-schütze
                  ABC-schütze 31 March 2021 14: 49
                  0
                  Your question is at the wrong place. If it does not make it difficult, forward it to the NATO guys in Mons, or to the "neutral" Swedish "analyst" boys from the FOI ... Kill Russian soldiers (and not only soldiers ...) in the event of a NATO attack on Russia, in any of its hypostasis (capitalist or communist) will have to in any case. Any other option ("refusal") from setting the task of actively and quickly repelling aggression and the complete, military-economic destruction of the enemy's potential (without setting the goal of his "conquest", of course), in CURRENT conditions, will ALREADY be fraught with destruction of the UNIQUE potential of SELF-SUFFICIENCY created by it at the moment. Which, for today, DOES NOT POSSESS, ANY STATE of the planet. (This is a separate topic, I am not going to develop it on this thread). And with it, the COMPLETE and irreversible loss of statehood, as such. Whether "catitalistic" or "red". Really for MANY CENTURIES they did not understand that the so-called. To the "civilized West", Russia interferes with the very FACT of the UNIQUE possibility of its sovereign existence and its DEVELOPMENT (yes, even with awesome difficulties and obstacles), and not at all with its "color" ("white" or "red"). We read the REAL, VALID Russian NSS 2020 DOCUMENTS, the Military Doctrine, etc. Where it says that Russia is going to "attack" someone or otherwise "restore" the so-called. "historical justice"? .. The task is to ensure the readiness and ability to REFLECT the military threat in the event of aggression and PROTECT national interests on the principles of international law, mutual consideration of interests and parity ... For this, I just have a question ... Guys from Mons, the Pentagogue and the FOI, working out the "scenarios" of the so-called. "Russian invasions" on adjacent territories, what are the military, political and economic OBJECTIVES before Russia "set"? ..
            2. Machito
              Machito 31 March 2021 21: 55
              0
              Quote: aleksejkabanets
              Quote: ABC-schütze
              The second is to maximally REDUCE the time phase of a possible conflict,

              We will not be able to make a "blitzkrieg", too large resources will be involved on both sides. And in all world wars, those who counted on blitzkrieg always lost.
              Quote: ABC-schütze
              AND RESOLUTIONARY warning to ALL the so-called. "neutrals", with the proposal of the latter to calmly "stand on the sidelines", BEFORE THE OUTCOME of the conflict,

              And it is impossible the same, for 300% of the profit the capitalist will take any risk.

              Blitzkrieg can be done in a couple of hours: cut off the supply of energy to Europe via pipelines and flood the trough in Suez across the fairway.
              And if the Swedes want to fight like that, then specifically at the request of those who wish, it is possible to strengthen the grouping of cruise missiles with nuclear warheads in Kaliningrad to protect against the aggressive DPRK.
              1. Zvonarev
                Zvonarev April 5 2021 14: 15
                0
                And you can also float navigation buoys to the Swedish coast "downstream". Let our submarines be looking for a couple of years, it will be more useful than writing something like that.
    2. Civil
      Civil 31 March 2021 09: 31
      -4
      The PRC has refused to conclude a military alliance with Russia, officially. Https://rossaprimavera.ru/news/85dc01a4
      And there is no reason for this:
      1. Different political systems.
      2. Different horizons of strategic planning.
      3. The difference in economic potential.
      Communists and feudal capitalists are unlikely to find a common positive agenda. Some work for the prospects of the people, others exactly the opposite.
      1. FIR FIR
        FIR FIR 31 March 2021 10: 02
        +5
        Quote: Civil
        The communists

        With the "communists" you turned it down. What are the communists in China? There capitalism is worse than the state capitalism, only with national characteristics.
        Quote: Civil
        2. Different horizons of strategic planning.
        3. The difference in economic potential.

        And here to the point. Plans for the future are really different. Some have a goal - to dominate and make money, while others - to grab and "dump on the Canary Islands."
        1. Civil
          Civil 31 March 2021 10: 21
          -5
          Quote: FIR FIR
          With the "communists" you turned it down. What are the communists in China? There capitalism is worse than the state capitalism, only with national characteristics.

          Just don't fall for bourgeois propaganda, the normal communists there - during the lifetime of one generation, the country was raised to the leading countries of the world. As befits the communists.
          1. FIR FIR
            FIR FIR 31 March 2021 10: 55
            +5
            And where does the propaganda?
            A country that ranks second in the world in the number of dollar billionaires and has several hundred million poor and almost disenfranchised citizens, in which there is almost no pension support, and medicine and education are paid, the language will not turn to call it "communist."
        2. aleksejkabanets
          aleksejkabanets 31 March 2021 11: 19
          -2
          Quote: FIR FIR
          With the "communists" you turned it down. What are the communists in China? There capitalism is worse than the state capitalism, only with national characteristics.

          Over the past 36 years, the real incomes of the entire population of Russia have increased by 34%, in China by 831%, so I would not write the Chinese communists as renegades.
          1. FIR FIR
            FIR FIR 31 March 2021 11: 31
            +1
            Quote: aleksejkabanets

            Over the past 36 years, the real incomes of the entire population of Russia have increased by 34%, in China by 831%, so I would not write the Chinese communists as renegades.

            They are not renegades, but capitalists. Only not such as overseas (without a homeland), but "national capitalists". Little is left of real communism.
            1. aleksejkabanets
              aleksejkabanets 31 March 2021 12: 29
              -1
              Quote: FIR FIR
              Little is left of real communism.

              Everything is relative.))))
      2. ABC-schütze
        ABC-schütze 31 March 2021 10: 49
        +4
        And when did Russia offer the Celestial Empire to conclude a military alliance? ..
    3. Vol4ara
      Vol4ara April 3 2021 11: 28
      0
      Quote: Cottodraton
      And who will give them "to realize the advantage in aviation"? And let him collect it? It seemed to me that airfields were the number one goal ... In addition, if the guys from NATO do not exclude the use of yao, then what kind of "advantage" can we talk about? They will apply it, we will apply it and that's it ... then, for a couple of hundred / thousand years, everyone will have no time for advantages ...
  2. Free wind
    Free wind 31 March 2021 05: 03
    +1
    This institute, it seems, does not exist since 2001; it was previously housed in a toilet-type room. And enough already to be measured with pipirkas, As in Guinea. The one who is longer is the main Papuan! wassat
  3. Vadim valentinov
    Vadim valentinov 31 March 2021 07: 14
    +3
    The NATO strategy "4 to 30" will be turned into a utopia by the Southern Military District alone on the third day. It takes 50 hours for the troops of the Southern Military District to oppose in any part of their zone of responsibility a grouping that is one and a half times larger than the offensive power block of the NATO aggressor, designated by the "4 to 30" strategy. Thus, 50 battalion tactical groups, 50 squadrons of operational-tactical, assault and army aviation and 50 warships will not allow implementing the plans of the anti-Russian strategy in the remaining 47 days. Reconnaissance and strike systems will also help to destroy NATO's aggressive plans, as part of which they will perform missions intended for 50 MFA divisions of missile systems, including coastal anti-ship missiles, and rocket artillery installations, as well as high-power artillery. groups (electronic warfare and air defense) to combat UAVs, 50 sniper groups, 50 batteries of the "Chrysanthemum" ATGM and a cherry on the cake - a 50-kilometer zone of continuous destruction from the state border in the direction of the aggressor country.
    It turns out against the NATO 4 to 30 we put 10 to 50, which means against four thirty-gram drinks in any way our half a liter will be cooler.
    1. Lara Croft
      Lara Croft 31 March 2021 12: 25
      -3
      Quote: Vadim Valentinov
      In this way, 50 battalion tactical groups, 50 squadrons of operational-tactical, assault and army aviation and 50 warships

      Where did you find such forces in the Southern Military District, you are our storyteller?
  4. Alien From
    Alien From 31 March 2021 08: 53
    +3
    All the same strange people are people, instead of living and making good money, they want to control each other in the most sophisticated ways ...
    1. ABC-schütze
      ABC-schütze 31 March 2021 10: 52
      0
      Well, if you live in a fairy tale, then your truth. But in real life - if you want peace - get ready for war! This is objectively a necessary prerequisite for any "living and making good" ...
  5. Knell wardenheart
    Knell wardenheart 31 March 2021 11: 42
    +4
    Neither the Baltic States nor Poland today can become "the object of our aggression", because our economy has no prerequisites for gaining from such an occupation, we do not have an attractive model for influencing at least part of the society of the occupied territories, potential sanctions, military and the problems associated with the retention and control of these territories lead us to a tough "-" and not a plus. The populations of these countries and their infrastructure will be largely useless to us in the short to medium term. Such a large-scale aggression would inevitably help curtail extremely profitable deals with those of our partners in the EU, with whom a positive balance has been maintained for many years.
    In short, all this is a big hemorrhoid and almost no profit. Following this, even if militarily the West "chews" it, there will be an unambiguous economic collapse and we will have to curtail many programs that are already in no good condition. The painting shortly after the occupation would resemble the 90s.

    So everyone who fears such an occupation is mostly either sick people, or big dreamers, or chopping cabbage on HYIP, or sawing grants.
    1. Machito
      Machito 31 March 2021 22: 00
      0
      Yes, they are not afraid of any occupation. They dream of occupying us. But, scary. The Russian threat is pure Psaking.
      1. Knell wardenheart
        Knell wardenheart 31 March 2021 22: 20
        0
        With their occupation, everything is also sour! All the Baltic states show extremely bad demography, the population is small, and what is rapidly aging or leaving for good in more developed states. Appetites, appetites, but it is necessary to occupy someone, and there is no one to occupy, there are barely enough of our own armed forces to guard the borders, and the budget is barely enough to purchase decommissioned equipment and modernize the old one. If we consider Poland - in theory, yes, Poland could pull back a piece, both the economy and demography allows. But again, it is much more convenient and profitable for Poland to withdraw a piece of Ukraine than to have long-term problems with a religiously, mentally and linguistically alien population. Theoretically, the demography of Poland makes it possible to replace the population, so to speak, but one must understand that now it is not the 1930s and those who want to live on a powder keg have somewhat diminished. So the meaning of forcing around all these things is personally unclear to me, but it is definitely not from the plane of practical benefit.
        1. andybuts
          andybuts April 5 2021 16: 55
          0
          Quote: Knell Wardenheart
          Quote: Knell Wardenheart
          If we consider Poland - in theory, yes, Poland could pull back a piece, both the economy and demography allows.


          And Poland does not need it, even theoretically. The population of Poland is stagnating just the fall of their socialism (38-38,7 million people since 1990, and this is with emigrants from the Baltic States and the CIS countries). And Poland will not digest such an acquisition as Russia has never - and the local population will not assimilate, and it will not be enough to populate the territory of even the European part, and it will not reach the resources of the Urals and Siberia. So even theoretically it will not pull, well, it is clear that the Western allies will move Poland away from the division.

          So the anti-Russian hysteria there is tied to two points (in my opinion):
          - given the centuries-old dislike of the Poles for Russians, this is a good tool for attracting the electorate for the ruling circles, it is convenient to overshadow existing problems with external enemies (we see the same thing here: "you want to protest against the pension reform, corruption or falling living standards" in "you want to go to the Maidan in Moscow, so that it was like in Ukraine);
          - and this hysteria is directed by Western curators, especially since it comes naturally from Poland and the Baltic states.
  6. sleeve
    sleeve 31 March 2021 15: 04
    0
    What it resembles the times of the USSR. "World imperialism does not sleep and cherishes aggressive plans. Our task is to strengthen the country's defense capability. Namely: to strengthen the army, strengthen the navy and strengthen the valiant ground forces. Confrontation is inevitable." Although there is no "victory will be ours" no longer sounds. "Recommendations" of course "not from a good life." Already the "greatest military machine of our time" is not being created. So, the groundwork in the regions, and to develop a couple of three segments in order to "inflict unacceptable losses." What is this "unacceptable loss"? Gone is the understanding that the "boiling point" has been raised to such a level that the conflict (God forbid us!) Will have the goal of "leveling the partner", and not like a sluggish fuss. Will there be acceptable or unacceptable levels of losses in it when it comes to world restructuring? It all looks very much like a reaction to the military doctrine of Russia with the thresholds for the use of nuclear weapons, with the rejection of full-fledged aggression as a political instrument, with the emergence of "thresholds" for the use of conventional forces as a preventive tool for eliminating threats. That is, since the Russians are still peaceful, it is possible to save some money, otherwise the "confrontation" is no longer affordable.
    1. max702
      max702 31 March 2021 19: 12
      0
      Duc noneshny west is a bad cosplay of the late USSR, all the same signs from propaganda to Washington elders ..
      1. sleeve
        sleeve 31 March 2021 19: 54
        0
        Agree to 120%
  7. rozman
    rozman April 1 2021 16: 06
    0
    It is not clear where Sweden belongs here, who is threatening her and how?
  8. Fisherman
    Fisherman April 1 2021 21: 55
    0
    The Swedes have the most powerful intelligence in our direction. The messages and infa are correct. But they make the final conclusions wrong, based on their mentality, this is typical of all national intelligence and national analysts. We do not even have such a concept for ourselves as "unacceptable damage", there is "task completion".
  9. Papapg
    Papapg April 3 2021 07: 51
    0
    Whatever the strategists, tacticians, and hat-takers plan, the present plan will correct the war, whether we like it or not, and then the force will be on the side of those who have better preparation of actions in isolation from the management of the center. A.V. Suvorov said - "... every soldier must know his maneuver." our soldiers are no longer there, and if anything, the Second World War will seem like Paradise to them. The enemy must not be beaten, the enemy must be killed!
  10. andybuts
    andybuts April 5 2021 16: 21
    0
    The balance of forces and capabilities of Russia and NATO is considered on the example of a hypothetical conflict in Eastern Europe, started by the Russian side. According to the FOI scenario, the Russian army begins an offensive into the Baltic States from its own and Belarusian territory. The purpose of such an offensive is to quickly seize territory and destroy local NATO forces.


    It turns out that the report was made to intimidate the public? After all, NATO analysts, in theory, are not fools to believe that Russia will attack the Baltic States in order to return these lands.

    By the way, what does a more realistic scenario show, in which NATO attacks Russia, or was it not calculated due to the obviousness of its results?
  11. The comment was deleted.
  12. Thomas the Unbelieving
    Thomas the Unbelieving April 6 2021 17: 50
    0
    Who else, but I proceed from two facts. 1. World War II began in 1931 by Japan. This war has been going on for the division and redivision of the world. It has not ended. Now there is a peaceful respite when Europe and Japan are occupied by the United States. It is difficult to say how the military actions will develop further. But the war continues in different forms