Military Review

Russia and NATO: RAND report and its implications

One of the main events of the last days in the military-political sphere was the statements of US Assistant Deputy Secretary of Defense Michael Carpenter. With reference to the results of a recent study, the official said that the current situation in the Baltic region is very complex and may lead to unacceptable consequences. According to American analysts, the Russian troops, in the event of an armed conflict, will be able to break the defense of NATO in just 60 hours or even faster, which requires appropriate measures from the organization.

The concerns expressed by M. Carpenter are based on the recently published report of the RAND Center for Strategic Studies. The document “Reinforcing Deterrence on NATO’s Eastern Flank” by David A. Shlapak and Michael Johnson provides data on the current situation in the Baltic region, and also discusses possible risks associated with the opposition of Russia and the North Atlantic alliance. After examining the current situation, analysts came to harsh and even frightening conclusions. It should be noted that this report was published as early as February, however, as M. Carpenter noted, it still does not lose its relevance.

The general conclusions made by the results of the analysis are made in a separate section of the document. From it it can be understood that the authors of the report consider the current situation in the region to be complex and even threatening to the interests of NATO. First of all, it is noted that various exercises, command-and-staff games and analytical activities force us to make negative predictions about the possible development of events in the region. Thus, in the current situation, Russian troops will be able to get to Riga and Tallinn in no more than 60 hours.

The rapid advancement of Russian troops through the territories of NATO’s Eastern European countries puts the entire organization in a difficult position. It is expected a sharp reduction in the choice of possible strategies and ways to develop the situation. In this case, all available options for one reason or another can not be considered positive.

Calculations show that in order to confidently deter "Russian aggression" in the region, it is necessary to additionally place about seven land brigades, including three heavy armored ones. It is also necessary to provide adequate air support, reinforcement by ground-based fire weapons and a number of other measures. Such a defense system will not be able to securely defend the countries under attack, but, as the report’s authors point out, it will allow changing the strategic picture seen from Moscow.

The last general conclusion of the report concerns the financial side of a hypothetical conflict and the means of its prevention. It is noted that in absolute terms, the organization of the required defense described above will not be too expensive. At the same time, the East European participants of NATO cannot afford such expenses.

The purpose of the latest work of the RAND Center was to study the situation in the Baltic States and to consider the consequences of a possible “Russian aggression”. After the beginning of the Ukrainian crisis, the NATO command views Russia as a potential aggressor, posing a threat to a number of Eastern European states. The Baltic states are seen as the first targets for military aggression. In 2014-15, RAND specialists conducted several activities aimed at simulating a hypothetical conflict in the region. Based on their results, the recent report “Reinforcing Deterrence on NATO’s Eastern Flank” was written, and recommendations for reducing the threat were formed.

The threat of capturing the capitals of the two countries in just 60 hours leads to the need to build an appropriate defense system. To protect the Baltics from a possible threat, the deployment of seven brigades and the corresponding infrastructure is proposed. According to RAND's estimates, the creation of such a deterrent system of the “aggressor” will require annual expenditures at the level of 2,7 billion US dollars. Given the total gross domestic product of the NATO countries at the level of 35 trillions and the total defense expenditures in 1 trillion dollars, such amounts do not look large.

In addition, the annual spending in 2,7 billion dollars - this is much less than the losses from a hypothetical conflict and the seizure of the Baltic states. As a result, deterring a potential adversary turns out to be much more advantageous than war, both for strategic reasons and for financial indicators.

Conclusions about the seizure of the Baltic for 60 hours were made, not least by analyzing the correlation of forces in the region. YES. Shlapak and M. Johnson reviewed the quantitative indicators of the armies of Russia and NATO countries. The results of this study have become one of the main reasons for concern.

According to the authors of the RAND report, there are 17 battalions of NATO ground forces in the Baltic countries. The Estonian army has three infantry and two light infantry battalions. The Latvian army has two light infantry battalions, while the Lithuanian army has two battalions of mechanized and motorized infantry. The United States can help the defense of the region with two amphibious battalions, two battalions of attack helicopters, one motorized rifle, armed with equipment of the Stryker family, as well as one consolidated land battalion. The latter can be deployed in Poland, the rest - in the Baltic States. The UK is able to provide one landing battalion.

The Russian ground forces, according to analysts, look much more powerful and are also larger in number. The Western Military District has four tank battalion, 10 infantry and 8 airborne battalions. In addition, three similar units of the Navy's marines are deployed in the Kaliningrad region.

Three artillery battalions, as well as seven subunits armed with multiple rocket launchers, should provide fire support to troops. For the solution of some tasks, armed forces with tactical missile systems may be involved. The Western Military District has two divisions each equipped with Iskander and Tochka systems. Another division "Points" deployed near Kaliningrad.

Air support can be carried out by Mi-24 helicopters. According to estimates of RAND specialists, six battalions equipped with such equipment will take part in a hypothetical conflict.

Thus, in the case of the ground forces and the army aviation leadership remains with Russia. In total, only the Western Military District has 46 battalions for various purposes with different weapons and equipment. The Baltic countries and their NATO allies can immediately use no more than 17 compounds. According to American analysts, a similar situation is observed in the field of the air force. Against 27 Russian squadrons, NATO can only set 18.

The Air Force and the US Navy can provide four squadrons of F-15 fighter-bombers, two squadrons of F-16, two squadrons of F / A-18, 1,5 and squadrons of F-22 and 0,5 - A-10. It is also possible to use B-1B long-range bomber from one squadron. American military aircraft must operate from Lithuanian, British, Polish, Swedish airfields and aircraft carriers in the North Sea.

Britain is represented by two squadrons of the Typhoon FGR Mk 4 and Tornado GR Mk 4 aircraft deployed in Lithuania and Poland. The French Air Force is represented by a squadron of Rafale aircraft at a Polish airbase, and Norway is represented by an F-16 squadron deployed to Stockholm. Also, several units of the Canadian CF-18C / D and a squadron of the Danish F-16C are based on Polish airfields.

Russian military aviation is represented by a large number of squadrons that are part of the air force and naval aviation fleet. The composition of the fighter units is as follows: 9 squadrons equipped with Su-27, and 3 on the MiG-29. There are also four squadrons of MiG-31 interceptors. Attack aircraft consists of two Su-34 squadrons and five units armed with the Su-24. There are also four units equipped with long-range Tu-22M3 bombers.

The advantage in the number of troops, according to analysts of RAND, can be realized using the geographical features of the region. So, a blow to the Baltic states can be inflicted both from the main part of Russia and from the Kaliningrad region. In this case, the three countries are under attack from two directions, with corresponding consequences for them and their allies. In combination with a larger number of troops, such a strategy can simplify the advance and capture of countries.

To reduce the risks associated with “Russian aggression”, the authors of the report propose to change the structure of the troops deployed in the region, as well as to reinforce them with a number of additional units. It is necessary to strengthen the land component, as well as deploy additional armored formations. Naturally, such a modernization of defense would require additional expenses, but their analysts found it acceptable and not too large amid possible risks.

The reaction to the RAND report “Reinforcing Deterrence on NATO’s Eastern Flank” is interesting, and the statements of foreign officials are the most curious. Thus, representatives of the US military and, a few months after publication, consider the report as an actual document to which attention should be paid. In addition, it is with the recommendations of RAND that the Pentagon plans to strengthen its troop grouping in Eastern Europe.

The NATO Secretary General commented on the data on the "seizure of the Baltic states in 60 hours" differently. Jens Stoltenberg skeptical about such calculations. He argues that NATO can protect all its allies from any threats. At the same time, however, the organization’s secretary general added that it was for this reason that the existing defense system was being modified.

Despite statements about the possibility of protecting all allies, the leadership of NATO decided to strengthen the military grouping in Eastern Europe. Perhaps this was the result of the study of certain reports authored by research organizations. 14 Jun became aware of plans to deploy four additional battalions. These units can be sent to Eastern Europe as early as next year.

As you can see, NATO continues to build up a grouping of troops in Eastern Europe and in the Baltic States. As a pretext for such actions, a hypothetical “Russian threat” is now being considered, studied by specialists from various organizations. The February report of the RAND Center, as well as the Pentagon’s reaction to it, show that foreign commanders and politicians once again see Russia as a threat, to combat which it is necessary to take measures of a military nature. At the moment, the main way of such a confrontation is to strengthen the military grouping and conduct exercises. What will be the next steps of NATO and the participating countries will become clear later. However, it is already clear that in the foreseeable future we should not expect an improvement in Russian-NATO relations.

On the materials of the sites:

RAND "Reinforcing Deterrence on NATO's Eastern Flank" Report:

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Teberii
    Teberii 16 June 2016 05: 50
    The conclusion, as always, is one, you need to build up strength.
    1. Yarik
      Yarik 16 June 2016 08: 53
      And do not forget about Cuba, Nicaragua and Mexico
      1. yushch
        yushch 16 June 2016 11: 38
        And the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces was offended after such data. The representative of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation said that these are very inaccurate numbers, for the capture of the Baltic states, Russia will need from five to twelve hours.
      2. Skif83
        Skif83 16 June 2016 12: 23
        I agree that the Yankees need to create problems near their borders with the hands of their "sworn" friends, in order to shit less around the world.
        1. Reserve officer
          Reserve officer 16 June 2016 14: 20
          "in the foreseeable future, one should not expect an improvement in Russian-NATO relations"

          Then, rather, Russian-American relations. NATO, as an independent entity, does not exist in the political arena.
    2. The comment was deleted.
      GELEZNII_KAPUT 16 June 2016 09: 49
      Quote: Teberii
      The conclusion, as always, is one, you need to build up strength.

      Well, yes, judging by the map, the guys are very addicted to Civilization V! laughing
    4. Oskar1965
      Oskar1965 16 June 2016 09: 50
      Quote: Teberii
      The conclusion, as always, is one, you need to build up strength.

      How to build it? Compressed air? :) Those forces that are listed in this article by the RF Armed Forces are, to put it mildly, wishful thinking. Time has passed, corrupt politicians and liberals have done their job.
      1. kodxnumx
        kodxnumx 16 June 2016 17: 13
        I’m reading this report and thinking, why the hell do we need these three dwarf republics with vicious and venal residents, if you collect the three republics in a heap, you get one block in the city of Moscow, the question is, what do they smoke there ?!
        1. The comment was deleted.
  2. saniajan
    saniajan 16 June 2016 05: 55
    As usual, we got together to figure out how to be even more afraid of the "Russian threat", to dream of an invasion and, as always, to pass these dreams as reality. Behave like limited, ill-mannered children.
    1. Aleksander
      Aleksander 16 June 2016 06: 35
      Quote: sanyadzhan
      We got together, as usual, to figure out how to be even more afraid of the "Russian threat

      They invented it themselves, they were afraid, they themselves defended themselves from their own inventions. Called persecution mania -paranoia

      Well, they would say the main thing, finally: WHY. Well, why Russia these Baltic nonsense ?!
      1. 34 region
        34 region 16 June 2016 08: 03
        Alexander! 06.35. What for? Nobody wants to answer this most important question from them. Why should Russia attack Europe? What will Russia have from this? Well, we get to Paris and London. And then what? If Europe goes to Russia, then it benefits. Slaves and raw materials. And what is the benefit of Russia from an attack on Europe? Why don't they voice this question?
        1. Irbenwolf
          Irbenwolf 16 June 2016 15: 08
          Let me remind you that the Caribbean crisis began when the United States deployed ballistic missiles in Turkey (Moscow-Ankara distance is 2500 km). Now the U.S. holds the Gulf of Riga, into which you can drag a ship with missiles (distance Riga-Moscow 923 km). They planned to do the same, among other things, in the Crimea (the distance of Sevastopol-Moscow is 1500 km).

          Do you need more reason to strain about NATO at the borders?
    2. Zefr
      Zefr 16 June 2016 23: 17
      We must pretend that we want to capture Antarctica. And what? NATO is not there. Let ten armored battalions be brought there urgently. And some kind of airplane, which is not a pity. And the Latvian riflemen are two companies. Defend yourself so defend.
  3. paxil
    paxil 16 June 2016 06: 25
    This is how they are afraid, afraid, and then they will attack Russia with fright. European folk fun once a hundred years to go to Russia, rally as it should, and whine again in its corner. Well, uncles from overseas will take off their gesheft again. But here we will get the problem and overseas and want and prick.
  4. Uncle Murzik
    Uncle Murzik 16 June 2016 06: 33
    "After all, it's impossible, for a year in a row. They scare them with plates, they say, they are mean, they fly, Now your dogs bark, then the ruins talk. We have gotten used to something - we beat the plates all year, We have already eaten a dog on them, if the cook is not for us lying. "
  5. rafaelich
    rafaelich 16 June 2016 06: 35
    And they stupidly forget about Belarus! ..
  6. aszzz888
    aszzz888 16 June 2016 06: 37
    On June 14, plans were announced to deploy four additional battalions.

    Quiet glanders and pull troops to our borders. And everything from them, from the NATO members, is legal. From their point of view, of course. Everything is like in 41 g.
  7. Banishing liberoids
    Banishing liberoids 16 June 2016 06: 37
    I explain for those who do not understand why we will take extinctions for 60 hours! After receiving the order, the troops massively go to pharmacies where they buy shoe covers (so as not to stain official shoes with NATO fake clothes on the lawns of the dying people) and gauze dressings (the so-called muzzles) so as not to smell fumes from lawns and lawns! only after that they go to clean up the extinctions, and they will only have to go on foot, for the countries are microscopic and, God forbid, you inadvertently jump out into some kind of Poland or another European neighbor of the extinct!
  8. valent45
    valent45 16 June 2016 07: 15
    The confrontation is growing. Where is the critical point of this confrontation? Isn't NATO
    understands that sooner or later an imperceptible transition of this critical point can occur?
    In their Russophobia they have gone so far!
    1. 34 region
      34 region 16 June 2016 08: 12
      Valent45! 07.15. It looks like a shamanistic rite when they knock on a tambourine. And the more they knock, the stronger the adherents of the sect come into ecstasy. And when everyone will be in ecstasy, an order will follow to go to the East. This technology worked very well on the outskirts. Now on a larger scale they are trying to repeat in the EU. Where demons will be Russia, and they are healers-casting demons.
  9. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 16 June 2016 07: 21
    Russian troops, in the event of an armed conflict, will be able to break the defense of NATO in 60 hours or even faster

    But what about the superiority of 6-9 times according to Klintsevich (see below on the branch)? NATO members probably do not know this yet, before the bourgeoisie had time to figure out our main secret.
  10. parusnik
    parusnik 16 June 2016 07: 45
    The authors of the report consider the current situation in the region to be complex and even threatening the interests of NATO...Also, Russia is encircled by NATO bases from all sides, treacherously crept to the borders of its members and insidiously threatens .. Hmm .. tensions are growing ... It seems to me that this situation in the world was also the prewar years .. of the past century ..
  11. Volzhanin
    Volzhanin 16 June 2016 07: 59
    What are 60 hours? The NATO degenerates were clearly told that one hour would be enough. We will only get dirty about these rubbish, if we ourselves do not insist. Well, if they insist, there will be no prisoners or wounded on their part. All 100% of the "Natava military" will have to be killed! Once again, the Earth will have to be thoroughly cleaned from filth, rotten rotten stuff cannot be left.
  12. volodya
    volodya 16 June 2016 08: 03
    They really want Russia to attack the Baltic states. And we will do, as in Ukraine.
  13. EvilLion
    EvilLion 16 June 2016 08: 08
    So remove NATO from there and there will be no threat.
  14. drop
    drop 16 June 2016 08: 13
    How well they lived in Soviet times. He began to come to the Baltic States from 1958 of the year. We were sometimes sent in the autumn near Narva to help harvest. Then work. He began to create enterprises in this region of the USSR since the 1979 year, when he headed the State Institution of one of the defense ministries. Everything was excellent, much friendlier than in Lviv (PO named after V.I. Lenin).
    Here is the result of the work of Gorbachev and Yakovlev. They gave the United States what our Peter I bought from the Swedes and created the enemy of Russia. I can tell you exactly what kind of bill Russia can invoice additionally for the Baltic states for established enterprises, research institutes, built houses, roads, ports, educational institutions, specialist training, etc. (in Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia). I have the honor.
  15. then
    then 16 June 2016 08: 13
    For Western generals, war is the looting of conquered territories. For the former Soviet Union, this is a spread of the communist idea. Therefore, the war was considered to be won until the foot of the infantryman entered the enemy territory. For modern Russia, neither one nor the other. The war for Russia is to defend its territory and give an adequate response to the enemy such that in the future he would no longer have such thoughts from the word at all.
  16. EvilLion
    EvilLion 16 June 2016 08: 24
    In general, good hexagons, correct, how many movement points are there for the tank battalion on the T-72B? Hex 10 go?
  17. vladimirvn
    vladimirvn 16 June 2016 08: 32
    Armor is strong and our tanks are fast
    And our people of courage are full
    Alien land we do not want an inch
    But we won’t give up our tip!

    "March of Soviet Tankmen". From the movie "Tractor Drivers".
    1. parusnik
      parusnik 16 June 2016 12: 39
      And if an enemy is getting to us,
      He will be beat everywhere and everywhere!
      Then press the drivers starters
      And through the forests, by the hills, by the water ...
      The thunder of fire, sparkling with the brilliance of steel
      Cars go on a furious hike ...
      1. Mikado
        Mikado 16 June 2016 18: 41
        another great song good :

        In the whole world, nowhere is there such power
        To crush our country, -
        With us is Stalin's native, and with an iron hand
        Voroshilov leads us to victory!

        On earth, in the heavens and the sea
        Our refrain is both powerful and severe:
        If tomorrow is war
        If the hike is tomorrow, -
        Be ready for the trip today! soldier
    2. Kenneth
      Kenneth 16 June 2016 19: 11
      The troops sang armor ... nya but our tanks are fast.
  18. Tatar 174
    Tatar 174 16 June 2016 08: 40
    They i.e. The West and the United States judge Russia by themselves, considering us a threat. Russia is doing something - they are screaming, Russia is silent - they are screaming even more (out of fear ...) Paranoid schizophrenia is with them, and we have to spend money on defense and from this they make round eyes and repent of fear and stink even more ...
  19. dmitriyruss
    dmitriyruss 16 June 2016 09: 42
    They are looking for a basis for deploying a strike force in the Baltic states, and we focused on making excuses saying that we should step on the Baltic states, and then not quite cleverly flaunt some of our generals that even 60 hours are too long to capture. And Vaska is listening and eating.
  20. pig killer
    pig killer 16 June 2016 10: 20
    Quote: dmitriyruss
    And Vaska listens and eats

    There remains the hope that this name is Vaska Sergey Kuzhugetovich.
    1. dmitriyruss
      dmitriyruss 16 June 2016 10: 36
      If only the next June 22 did not show what they eat us
      1. pig killer
        pig killer 16 June 2016 10: 59
        Now Russia is much more vulnerable than the USSR in 1941, despite our WMD.
        The adversary will only be stopped by the fear of a massive, and, most importantly, inevitable retaliatory strike that will overtake the overseas Empire of goodness. But does the leadership of Russia have such a will? And will the situation of Iraq repeat in 2003?
      2. The comment was deleted.
  21. Kenneth
    Kenneth 16 June 2016 11: 08
    Firstly, their warriors want dough no less than ours but much more. Secondly, we really surprised and scared them with the Crimea. Why can a referendum be held in Crimea under the supervision of polite people but not in Narva or Riga? And thirdly, their politicians who are more comfortable in managing with an obvious rallying threat use the first two points to the full.
  22. Oskar1965
    Oskar1965 16 June 2016 11: 17
    It would be interesting to chat with those who are minus me. I would like to read their argument and if they are military like me, then it would be doubly interesting.
    1. Kenneth
      Kenneth 16 June 2016 11: 35
      Yeah. I support. Although I had in mind this rating.
  23. potapych
    potapych 16 June 2016 12: 19
    And what the hell is that for? what, access to the Baltic? Lock your fleet again.
  24. Oskar1965
    Oskar1965 16 June 2016 12: 20
    Quote: Kenneth
    Yeah. I support. Although I had in mind this rating.

    So, dear, tell me what I'm wrong?
    1. Kenneth
      Kenneth 16 June 2016 19: 14
      Dear you are right in everything
      I had in mind minusers. IMHO, setting the minus should imply the presence of a comment.
  25. Samoyed
    Samoyed 16 June 2016 12: 48
    But in fact, why should Russia conquer the Baltic states? In the event of an attack, they will strike at attackers and bases, infrastructure facilities. And to introduce troops? What for. And then there will be no remnants of industry and energy in the Baltic states. Asymmetric answer!
  26. denchik1977
    denchik1977 16 June 2016 13: 32
    By aggravating relations with Russia and constantly increasing the degree of confrontation, the North Atlantic Alliance in the Baltic is in great danger of repeating the sad fate that befell Charles XII, Napoleon Bonaparte or Adolf Hitler. It seems that the "vaccination" against ill-considered actions against Russia has apparently ceased to work and as a result of this Europe is ready to make the last, and most likely, absolutely fatal mistake, which will become the nail in the coffin of its existence ... once the leaders of NATO, by their thoughtless policy towards Russia, show that history teaches them nothing at all, and with inexplicable stubbornness they want to continue dancing on the same rake.
  27. viktor.
    viktor. 16 June 2016 17: 19
    one poplar and silence in the Baltic states. wassat
    1. Kenneth
      Kenneth 16 June 2016 19: 16
      You. You need a belt so that they don’t carry garbage.
  28. Robin_bad
    Robin_bad 16 June 2016 17: 59
    That's interesting, but in the report there is a analysis of the reasons why Russia suddenly attacks the Baltic states?
    1. Kenneth
      Kenneth 16 June 2016 19: 18
      Easy. Protection of Russian-speaking residents from the earliest times of Russian Narva in which Russian-speaking non-citizens are oppressed. In Crimea, the Russians were citizens of Ukraine. And to me personally this scenario does not seem ridiculous.
  29. WERSTA.
    WERSTA. 16 June 2016 18: 54
    We do not need to trample the lands of the Baltic states. If there is no provocation on their part. But! Even in the case of provocative actions on their part with the use of military means, the Baltic states simply cease to exist in the form of state formations from three countries.
    We will not be touched and we will not be touched. And they will be affected ... we won’t let them go.
  30. Jmbg
    Jmbg 16 June 2016 22: 35
    At that time, on southern krill: Romania proposed the creation of a joint fleet with Ukraine, Turkey and Bulgaria to confront Russia in the Black Sea. Bulgarian prime minister Boyko Borisov categorically rejected. Turkey, as a punishment, began to flood Bulgaria with refugees and refuses to take them back.
  31. Patriot
    Patriot 17 June 2016 18: 47
    I don’t understand why we need them, but then I need to feed them lol