Military Review

NATO covering troops in the Baltic States will not stop Russia (The National Interest, USA)

65



At a recent summit in Warsaw, NATO officially announced its intention to deploy four battalions in the Baltic States from the beginning of 2017, in order to deter Russian aggression. They will be located in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland (there will be an American battalion in Poland). These small units will play the role of covering forces, signaling Russia that an attack on one of these states will immediately entail an escalation and lead to a full-scale conflict with NATO. That is, four battalions must convince Russia that an attack on one of its Baltic neighbors is too risky, since the result will be a big war with the United States and its European allies.

NATO cover forces will not hold Russia if it decides to launch an offensive on the Baltic States. Simply put, weak power cannot be evidence of full determination. A strong and wealthy country like the United States costs almost no battalion in Poland. The fact that the deployment of these troops does not create real risks and costs for the United States and its NATO allies, at the same time signals another. Russia is unlikely to believe that the alliance is sufficiently motivated to escalate and use such forces that will throw Russia out of the Baltic country it has seized in the event of a containment failure.

I studied all international crises from 1945 to 2007 the year in which the United States threatened to force this or that state to change its behavior. I found out that the threats do not produce results when they are not backed up by anything, because the devalued threat does not indicate the complete determination of the United States to defeat the stubbornly resisting enemy. Such a state believes that an unsupported threat can be fulfilled, but doubts that the United States is ready to put significant forces and means into action for a long time to win a decisive victory over the enemy after the initial use of force cannot change it. behavior. The battalion, which the United States plans to deploy in Poland, is too small to convince Russia of its American readiness to do everything necessary to prevent the invasion of the Baltic states.

The concept of covering troops (placing small forces in a particular area to signal its strategic importance to both opponents and allies) gained popularity in the early stages of the Cold War. Economist Thomas Schelling (Thomas Schelling) called the cover forces one of the ways in which the United States can signal to the Soviet Union its determination to defend Western Europe. The promise to protect your own country can be believed without a doubt, but various signals that you are ready to defend the territory of another country from the threat to its existence cause a skeptical attitude.

Let's think about it. How far are you ready to go to protect your home from the threat of an armed attack? And how far are you ready to go to protect your neighbor's house across the street? And further. How can you convince an armed invader that you are ready to risk your own security in order to protect someone else's house? The belief of the likely occupier of your willingness to defend someone's territory is also known as the problem of "extended deterrence."

The covering forces are restraining the enemy invasion of the ally’s territory not by depriving the aggressor of the possibility of achieving his goals. They have a different purpose. They guarantee that the invasion will entail a dramatic escalation of the conflict after the entry of these forces and troops of the attacked ally. The main thing is to signal to the aggressor that you are determined to send additional troops to the combat area after breaking through the positions of the covering forces. In the era of "massive retaliation" at the beginning of the Cold War, the United States deployed troops in West Berlin as a kind of nuclear cover force, showing that an attack on them would entail a nuclear escalation. This decision was an extremely risky and expensive enterprise - and therefore it was a strong signal that the United States was determined to protect the city. But this cannot be said about NATO troops, who will be stationed in the Baltic States at the start of the 2017 of the year. Although NATO has never officially abandoned the idea of ​​using nuclear weapons in order to protect its territory, it is impossible to believe that the alliance will actually decide to use such weapons during the conflict, having done so for the first time since 1945, especially because repelling a Russian invasion with nuclear means will damage the very country that NATO is trying to to protect.

In the non-nuclear world of 2017, the deployment of symbolic forces in the Baltic States will be too weak and an unconvincing signal of US determination. Supposedly, the United States agreed to send troops to Poland due to the fact that they had already planned to deploy the headquarters of the ground combat brigade there, and because Poland had the necessary infrastructure for these forces. This new NATO mission will cost the United States very cheaply: it will only be necessary to slightly increase the size of the group that was planned to be created a long time ago. But precisely because of the simplicity and cheapness of this enterprise, these troops cannot become an effective force to deter the Russian invasion of Poland.

If and when deterrence fails, the United States and NATO will have to decide whether they will stop Russia and how to do it. The RAND Center recently published the results of several war games with scenarios involving Russia's invasion of the Baltic states. These results are very disappointing for NATO. Russia will be able to seize the capital of the Baltic States for 60 hours. In the event of an attack, the United States and its allies simply will not have time to transfer reinforcements to the Baltic States to help cover troops.

If we think (and we think so) that the United States will not want to send several divisions to Poland or Estonia, then the political leadership will probably prefer one of the cheap methods of delivering remote attacks to force Russia to retreat. it aviation, cruise missiles, drones, or some combination of these funds. Like the symbolic cover battalions, these funds are quite cheap and do not pose much risk to the United States when used. It is for this reason that they are so attractive. But as my research shows, the United States will not be able to force Russia to change its behavior by threats alone, or even by the limited use of weak forces. Weak forces in no way can signal the complete determination of the United States to achieve its goals. They will only demonstrate that the United States does not intend to risk something really valuable and for a long time to suffer heavy losses due to the fact that they really do not care.

So what awaits the United States and its allies if Russia decides to invade NATO territory? Covering forces are not an effective deterrent in case Russia attacks one of its neighbors, and these nominal troops are not ready to block the Russian army from entering the Baltic capitals. The threat of air strikes, too, will give nothing for the above reasons. If the United States really wants to keep Russia from attacking the Baltic States, then the only chance for success is the use of brute force. Without the deployment of troops and equipment at the forefront, this will mean only one thing. It will take a large-scale use of brute and powerful force in order to dislodge Russian troops from their positions, which were well-prepared for several weeks, in densely populated areas, where there is good access to Russian internal communications. NATO, on the other hand, will have to figure out a jumble of privatized railways and comply with EU rules on the rest of truck drivers carrying troops and supplies to Eastern Europe. In addition, the United States will have to fight for the first time in a long time with an adversary that possesses serious air defense forces and means, not to mention nuclear weapons. It is one thing to introduce a no-fly zone in the sky over Libya and launch drones there, and quite another to act in the same way on the territory seized by Russia.

Cover troops are the worst course of action the United States can choose. They will not be able to stop Russia if it starts a decisive attack on the Baltic States. And since these covering forces will in no way deter the Russian invasion, the American soldiers will be in a dangerous position for the sake of an incomprehensible strategic goal. Remember, we talked about how difficult it is to convince an armed invader that you will defend a neighbor's house? Here is one way. You send to the house of a neighbor of one of your young children. Or even better - put your child in the most prominent place on his porch. Now the potential invader will definitely find your promise to protect the neighbor’s house convincing. Until the United States takes the same expensive step, until it places five divisions from 18-year-old recruits, that is, the children of their country, their promises to defend the Baltic states will not convince Russia that America is ready to devote forces and means to repel its attack. .

The United States must take an expensive step and place enough forces and means in the Baltics to deter the Russian invasion and to prepare for the defense after the failure of deterrence. Or they should admit that they are not interested in this, that they lack motivation, and that they will stay at home. At best, deterrence forces will have the same effect as inaction. And at worst, the Americans will start to perish aimlessly, and Russia will experience a keen sense of insecurity. One way or another, half measures are worse than the absence of any measures.
Author:
Originator:
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-skeptics/natos-baltic-tripwire-forces-wont-stop-russia-17074?page=2
65 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. theadenter
    theadenter 24 July 2016 05: 47
    +8
    Their role is cannon fodder to slow down our troops so that NATO can react in time. In principle, this is quite logical. And not very good for the Baltics, which will be sacrificed "for the common good" at the slightest threat.
    1. andr327
      andr327 24 July 2016 06: 05
      +8
      Slowing down for 15 minutes? Don’t tell my slippers!
      1. Teberii
        Teberii 24 July 2016 06: 57
        +4
        This is enough in the field for the NATO generals to go.
      2. Lukich
        Lukich 24 July 2016 07: 24
        +2
        Quote: andr327
        Slowing down for 15 minutes? Don’t tell my slippers!

        may they not even shoot. not suicides.
    2. Bayonet
      Bayonet 24 July 2016 07: 20
      +7
      Quote: theadenter
      Their role is cannon fodder to slow down our troops so that NATO can respond in time.

      And are we really going to attack someone? smile
      1. Lukich
        Lukich 24 July 2016 07: 27
        +1
        Quote: Bayonet
        And are we really going to attack someone?

        yeah if attack, so immediately landing on phishington smile
      2. Amurets
        Amurets 24 July 2016 07: 40
        +6
        Quote: Bayonet
        And are we really going to attack someone?

        Well yes! With hunger, we attack the Baltic sprats, and after eating sprat, we pounce on Dalia, in an attempt to rape. And would such nonsense dream of these political litter? This is the threat Dahl saw in a dream.
        1. Egoza
          Egoza 24 July 2016 07: 49
          +4
          Quote: Amurets
          This is the threat Dahl saw in a dream.

          Why a threat? Maybe Dalia is so dreaming. After all, they will pay for sprats, well, her ... at the same time.
          In general, all these NATO troops in the Baltics are like Yatsenyuk's "European shaft". Only cows should not be allowed to drink.
          1. Lukich
            Lukich 24 July 2016 08: 35
            +4
            Quote: Egoza
            Maybe Dalia is so dreaming.
          2. Lelek
            Lelek 24 July 2016 09: 24
            +2
            Quote: Egoza
            In general, all these NATO troops in the Baltics are like Yatsenyuk's "European shaft".


            Hi Elena.
            There is no need to underestimate the danger of confrontation in such a sensitive region as the Baltic states, but "guard! Everything is lost" is also not necessary. It's just that Russia has something to defend its territory and honor. And the gentlemen "minibaltiytsy" and NATO members are time to learn this firmly. And in confirmation (click):
    3. Baloo
      Baloo 24 July 2016 08: 36
      +1
      Residents of geyrops and Banderkrains do not realize that they are consumables in the plans of the Naked Saxons. Their leaders will cut finances into American weapons and dump them.
      Think geyropa and banderkraina, think. fool
    4. BMP-2
      BMP-2 24 July 2016 11: 20
      +2
      Quote: theadenter
      Their role is cannon fodder to slow down our troops so that NATO can respond in time.


      At VO their role has already been discussed. Everything is simple here: the official version of "the introduction of battalions to protect the Baltic countries" is nothing more than an information cover operation.

      In reality, the main task of these battalions is not to resist "external aggression", but to police functions within the limitrophe countries: for all the militant rhetoric of their governments, within each of the Baltic countries there is a significant percentage of Russians, Russian-speaking and those who do not support the official course. It is to control, intimidate and suppress the likely activity of these categories of citizens and NATO troops are brought in.
    5. Altona
      Altona 24 July 2016 13: 24
      +1
      Quote: theadenter
      Their role is cannon fodder to slow down our troops

      ---------------------
      Their role is a shket for provocations, which asks an adult uncle to light a cigarette, and around the corner there is an insolent gang, ready to punish the uncle for "insulting the little one." ALL!
      1. theadenter
        theadenter 24 July 2016 17: 08
        0
        Of course. And that too.
  2. shinobi
    shinobi 24 July 2016 06: 02
    +8
    And what are the actual Baltic states for?
    1. svp67
      svp67 24 July 2016 07: 13
      +7
      Quote: shinobi
      And what are the actual Baltic states for?

      And also Poland, Romania, Bulgaria - this is the main question, on the answer to which everything else depends, namely: "Why are NATO troops needed in that region?"
      If you didn’t invent and inflate NATO to a universal scale, the problem with Russia, then NATO would no longer exist.
      1. Penzyac
        Penzyac 24 July 2016 07: 52
        +2
        Quote: svp67
        Quote: shinobi
        And what are the actual Baltic states for?

        And also Poland, Romania, Bulgaria - this is the main question, on the answer to which everything else depends, namely: "Why are NATO troops needed in that region?"
        If you didn’t invent and inflate NATO to a universal scale, the problem with Russia, then NATO would no longer exist.

        NATO is a comparatively legal way of the US occupation of its satellites, so as not to dare to rock the hegemon, as well as an instrument for dressing them with blood by participating in punitive operations against relatively weak third countries, nothing more. This block is practically incapable of any serious defense, because it was not created for this purpose and continues to exist. As they say, these radishes will crack at the first jump. And, the rhetoric on the topic of Russian aggression is akin to calls to keep the thief by the thief himself, from a sore point to a healthy one. The hat is on the thief ...
    2. EvgNik
      EvgNik 24 July 2016 07: 31
      +3
      Quote: shinobi
      And what are the actual Baltic states for?

      Are needed. That sprats were ours and again the competition in Jurmala. Without this, we have a pipe.
      1. Amurets
        Amurets 24 July 2016 07: 55
        +4
        Quote: EvgNik
        Are needed. That sprats were ours and again the competition in Jurmala. Without this, we have a pipe.

        Zhenya! Hello. I read their economic review. The Baltic states are in a panic. The treasury's revenues have fallen sharply. The Russian Federation has hit them hard through transit through the Baltic ports. chopped up the wings, and the second will finally finish. And they can’t do anything. Merkel wanted to sneeze on them and if she still misses the contract for Nord Stream 2, she will have to put an end to her political career.
        1. Lelek
          Lelek 24 July 2016 09: 34
          0
          Quote: Amurets
          The northern stream cut their wings, and the second will finally finish.


          You're right. Despite the belligerent rhetoric, our Western "sworn partners" are making forecasts for energy supply from Russia, and we have "huge plans" in this part. (cry)
          1. Amurets
            Amurets 24 July 2016 12: 16
            0
            Quote: Lelek
            You're right. Despite the belligerent rhetoric, our Western "sworn partners" are making forecasts for energy supply from Russia, and we have "huge plans" in this part.

            Thank you! This one somehow slipped past me. Although I heard that the EU wants to crush trade in Russian gas for itself and dictate prices in the oil and gas market. I just did not see this article.
        2. EvgNik
          EvgNik 24 July 2016 13: 58
          +1
          Hi Kolya. Already sick of these small ones. All that we want to capture them. Who the hell are they for?
      2. Alex_Tug
        Alex_Tug 24 July 2016 15: 16
        0
        And what are the actual Baltic states for?

        That sprats were ours and again the competition in Jurmala.


        Alas. their sprats are not the same. after stripping by the Russian Epidemiological Surveillance. (or in some other way the office is called)
        1. code54
          code54 25 July 2016 10: 04
          0
          Who needs these sprats? So many conversations around them or with a sprat attached as a joke-joke! I have half of my friends who do not like and do not have them, and the other half of them have heartburn! And then, as the Baltics in reasoning, so immediately malicious sprats emerge! )))
      3. grandfather Mih
        grandfather Mih 24 July 2016 16: 30
        0
        Quote: EvgNik
        competition in Jurmala
        He laughed. LGBT competition and for this a battalion to Jurmala from "NATO itself". Britain with Durex at the ready.
    3. Lukich
      Lukich 24 July 2016 07: 31
      0
      Quote: shinobi
      And what are the actual Baltic states for?

      request it is necessary to ask Fashington. nobody knows for sure in Russia
      1. Marconi41
        Marconi41 24 July 2016 10: 20
        0
        It is strange that the people see no reason for the occupation of one of the Baltic republics.
        Example: The conflict between Russia and Poland on the border of the Kaliningrad region. Well, how should Russia become reinforcements? The easiest way to train. Well, how do we get there?
        1. Amurets
          Amurets 24 July 2016 12: 22
          +1
          Quote: Marconi41
          It is strange that the people see no reason for the occupation of one of the Baltic republics.
          Example: The conflict between Russia and Poland on the border of the Kaliningrad region. Well, how should Russia become reinforcements? The easiest way to train. Well, how do we get there?

          Hitchhike on the freeway! Can you think the Balts will let us through?


          Quote: Lukich
          Quote: shinobi
          And what are the actual Baltic states for?

          request it is necessary to ask Fashington. nobody knows for sure in Russia

          To invest in a new one, to develop industry, transport, and they will lower everything in a new way, as in a brothel. Here is the answer to this question.
      2. grandfather Mih
        grandfather Mih 24 July 2016 16: 57
        0
        I guessed. "Dirty laureate" (not skin color! Otherwise, you never know) digs land for the second prize in the Baltic states. With the help of the mother of terrorism. Near Norway! Not?
  3. Dam
    Dam 24 July 2016 06: 08
    +3
    Does Mr. Fundstein work out the money? Oh, play out, in the days of developing fascism, Europe has a nice habit of letting fund steers into soap making. And Russia may not be in a hurry to save the chosen ones
    1. Amurets
      Amurets 24 July 2016 06: 53
      +2
      Quote: Damm
      Is Mr.Funstein working out the money? Oh, they will finish badly, Europe, in the days of developing fascism, has a cute habit of letting the fund stewards into soap making. << And Russia may not be in a hurry to save God's chosen

      It's not him, but she, even though you are Chamberlain, Dayana, is a complete fool ... in the event of a conflict, the first blow will not be at these pitiful battalions of American slaves ... >> Quote from Inosmi. that American, they justify their surname. There are no brains, only languages.
  4. kervin78
    kervin78 24 July 2016 06: 11
    -1
    Russia ended diplomatic arguments, after which she said: And I ... Ay me ... And right now I’ll break your face!
    1. 33 Watcher
      33 Watcher 24 July 2016 06: 37
      +3
      Quote: kervin78
      Russia ended diplomatic arguments, after which she said: And I ... Ay me ... And right now I’ll break your face!

      However, NATO ended this argument, Russia had and still have the same arguments. They were told to look at the results of the Crimean referendum, they sent Cook, they were told to re-read the UN charter, they introduced sanctions and drag troops to our border.
      Now they are told that we are not interested in either Poland or the Baltic states, so they are not appeased. So who ended up arguing?
      Or do they want us to force Polish apples and Latvian sprats to buy us by force?
    2. Penzyac
      Penzyac 24 July 2016 08: 02
      0
      Quote: kervin78
      Russia ended diplomatic arguments, after which she said: And I ... Ay me ... And right now I’ll break your face!

      Only not in Russia, but in the USA, do not get the hell out of your head to a healthy one. In general, with diplomacy, as well as with many other things in the West, they are not very lately - they are degrading, apparently the result of the Bologna system and triumphant all-consuming tolerance ...
    3. Lelek
      Lelek 24 July 2016 09: 37
      +1
      Quote: kervin78
      .And right now, I’ll break your face !!!


      And it breaks and clicks on the nose (click):
  5. PKK
    PKK 24 July 2016 06: 17
    +2
    The bottom line is that US policy in this region is aimed at dividing Russia with Germany and France, but all this will turn out to be a mouse fuss if there are decisive politicians in strong European countries and steps are taken to unite the countries.
  6. bald
    bald 24 July 2016 06: 26
    +1
    More divisions --- more attendants. Let them invest, the other will not remain. And with such a concentration of forces in a relatively small area, they, if anything, even very compactly settle down in a matter of minutes. No matter how this contingent was used against emigrants from the Middle East, sooner or later the West will have to crush cockroaches in its head. What sow ....
    1. Amurets
      Amurets 24 July 2016 07: 00
      +1
      Quote: bald
      More divisions --- more attendants. Let them invest, the other will not remain.

      First of all, they will invest money on paints and paper to print even more candy wrappers, and only then they will pay for these divisions with these candy wrappers. The costs will be exactly as much as the money they need to print these candy wrappers.
      1. Penzyac
        Penzyac 24 July 2016 08: 25
        0
        Quote: Amurets
        Quote: bald
        More divisions --- more attendants. Let them invest, the other will not remain.

        First of all, they will invest money on paints and paper to print even more candy wrappers, and only then they will pay for these divisions with these candy wrappers. The costs will be exactly as much as the money they need to print these candy wrappers.

        Now they don’t need paint and paper either - there is a computer with a hard drive, clicked on the digital sign and it’s ready, there is a new account, everything is purely virtual, without straining at all.
        One problem, even for virtual candy wrappers someone has to do the real work, otherwise inflation, they would like it to be done not by them. That is why it is necessary to keep troops everywhere, preferably also consisting not of them, but of those who dream of becoming a part of the self-chosen. It’s not a fact, of course, that becoming, promising doesn’t mean getting married, the main thing is to promise then and, like, change your mind, an excuse is not a problem ...
  7. jovanni
    jovanni 24 July 2016 06: 40
    +3
    Our answer to this Chamberlain: - You are a fool, EPT!
    1. bald
      bald 24 July 2016 07: 00
      +2
      Moreover, finished! To enclose such a pig to Europe - one in one hara-kiri.
      1. Amurets
        Amurets 24 July 2016 07: 05
        0
        Quote: bald
        Moreover, finished! To enclose such a pig to Europe - one in one hara-kiri.

        Not just finished, but the chairman of the US Senate Intelligence Commission.
        1. kit_bellew
          kit_bellew 24 July 2016 08: 57
          0
          Quote: Amurets
          Not just finished, but the chairman of the US Senate Intelligence Commission.


          I recalled in this connection:
          Quote: Mark Twain
          Reader, imagine that you are. Now imagine that you are a congressman of the United States. However, I repeat ...

          On the other hand ... Of course, you and I do not need sprat republics. But for them, Russia is not you and me, but those who make decisions. And from the point of view of geopolitics, it is quite logical that Russia needs, as was relatively recently, buffer zones between themselves and hysterical ones straights NATO members.

          As usual, the puppeteers did not come up with anything new. Just as before the Second World War, we have a riot of Nazism on our western borders and exposing us as aggressors by all possible means. That is, everything that happens can quite be regarded as a signal: war is a real war! with bullets, bombs, nurses, genocide and partisans - just around the corner. And on the other hand, Peter does not pull the piglet at the great Fuhrer of the Ukrainian nation. It’s interesting, what if the Yankees gave him money for the same thing that Hitler once did? And instead of the second Wehrmacht, they received ukrmacht in its current state wassat
          1. Amurets
            Amurets 24 July 2016 12: 31
            0
            Quote: kit_bellew
            As usual, the puppeteers did not come up with anything new.

            To come up with a new, unexpected one is very difficult. But the rest of your reasoning is very logical and reminded me of materials about the pre-war situation on the western borders of the USSR. The truth is Dill, not Germany of the 30s.
  8. wasjasibirjac
    wasjasibirjac 24 July 2016 07: 06
    0
    The United States and Western European countries provided the Tribalts and Poland with their hostages to ensure protection requirements from Russia. So who runs NATO?
  9. SeregaBoss
    SeregaBoss 24 July 2016 07: 21
    0
    At best, deterrence forces will have the same effect as inaction. And at worst, the Americans will begin to die aimlessly, and Russia will experience a keen sense of insecurity. One way or another, half measures are worse than the absence of any measures.

    What kind of nonsense? I have not seen such a stupid hash for a long time, what does the author use?
    It seems that the purpose of the article is to use the slogan as often as possible - “Russia attacked the Baltic states.
  10. V.ic
    V.ic 24 July 2016 07: 46
    0
    If the United States really wants to keep Russia from attacking the Baltic states, then the only chance of success is the use of brute force ...
    The United States must take an expensive step and deploy enough forces and means in the Baltic states to deter Russian invasion and prepare for defense after containment failure. (Dianne Pfundstein Chamberlain)

    Here is something I immediately remembered the lines of Demian Poor, although I do not really like him as a poet:
    "They wanted to beat us, they tried to beat us,
    And we also did not sit, we were waiting for that!

    The Chinese generals are all bold warriors:
    To the workers' quarters a rod, like crazy.

    At the end, they rogues, so desolate:
    They decided to fight back the Soviet "dirty tricks":

    "Destroy the Bolshevik infection completely!"
    But their business immediately became very loose.

    They wanted to beat us, they wanted to beat us, they tried to beat us,
    But we also did not sit, we were waiting for that! "
    .........................................
    1929
  11. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 24 July 2016 08: 07
    0
    Several battalions can’t defend anything. Especially Suvalkovsky corridor, in which, according to the standards of the Second World War, 4-5 divisions are needed. DIVISIONS - not battalions! Everything else is PR and cheap air shake.
    1. rudolff
      rudolff 24 July 2016 10: 16
      +1
      Suvalkovsky corridor? Is that which? From Belarus to Kaliningrad through Lithuania along the Polish border? Have you forgotten about Alexander Grigorievich? Yes, he would rather strangle himself than let the Russian army into his territory, which by the way does not hide. Al and through Belarus to punch a corridor?
      As for the battalions ... Based on the number of one in 1000 people, it is more likely not about battalions, but about the analogue of battalion tactical groups (BTG), and these are very serious connections. Caps do not throw.
      1. rudolff
        rudolff 24 July 2016 10: 36
        +2
        Well, for information regarding divisions.
        Armed forces of Poland. Three years ago it was 120, now (in connection with the transition to the contract) 000. In the next few years it is planned to increase the number by at least 95%, i.e. up to 000-50 thousand people. Plus, new territorial defense forces are being created, plus a new multi-billion dollar rearmament program.
        Lithuania. Now about 13 000 people, by 2021 it is planned to 31 660. Plus a reserve.
        Latvia. Now 3, 700 planned. Plus part of the people's militia.
        Estonia. About 5, 000 planned. Plus reserve, border units.
        As a result, we have a grouping of close to 200 people, which can be doubled in a short time due to the reserve, reassignment of the border guard forces, and the transfer of NATO units from neighboring alliance member states.
        This is a very decent strength and cheers (we’ll break in five minutes) are simply inappropriate here.
  12. Basil50
    Basil50 24 July 2016 08: 51
    0
    That's interesting, but where did the * threat * come from? And why is she RUSSIAN? The author tries to solve the * problem * knowing in advance that * the conditions * are conditional and therefore there is so much about how to solve, and not about that * but what for *. They themselves create a conditional threat and valiantly repel it, * without a fight fell into big bullies *. According to the results of * reflection *, you can reward yourself, so you look and * generalisimus * will appear, but as the result is, * the attack is reflected *.
    1. rudolff
      rudolff 24 July 2016 11: 13
      +1
      The threat is very real, the background is only slightly different. All fuss because of Kaliningrad. Depriving Russia of this enclave essentially means expelling Russia from the Baltic region. The bottleneck of the Gulf of Finland does not count. Yes, Russia itself is not going to attack, but it can be forced to this. For example, the blockade under some false pretext of the Kaliningrad region. On land, the blockade may be 100 percent, by sea, partial, problems with air traffic. And a situation may well arise when Russia really has to break through the corridor. The forces in the region are now focusing on this case. While they are not enough, but what will happen in a few years? Rhetorical question.
      1. berezin1987
        berezin1987 25 July 2016 03: 15
        0
        Sea and air blockade is impossible, because the paths of ships and aircraft are in neutral space. Trying to stop our ships in neutral waters or attacking an aircraft will be considered a declaration of war. And we will have every right to roll in concrete Chukhontsev, pshek and Hans. And I really hope that they get acquainted in this case with the creation of Kurchatov. The Germans have a special account ...
        1. Simpsonian
          Simpsonian 25 July 2016 04: 30
          0
          The Cuban crisis was possible, and Khrushchev didn’t even start a conventional war in Europe or Alaska.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. rudolff
          rudolff 25 July 2016 17: 49
          +1
          They still stop civil courts if necessary. An example of this is the return of our ship with a cargo of Mi-24 helicopters for Syria. You can’t put a combat ship for escort for each transport, and you can’t bring much to the BDK. In addition, the installation of minefields is possible. But a naval blockade may not be needed, and a land blockade may become sufficient.
          Regarding Kurchatov ... According to our military doctrine, we can use nuclear weapons only in response to the use of WMD on our territory or in response to aggression with conventional weapons, but when the very existence of the state is compromised. In addition, if we begin to acquaint the enemies with the creation of Kurchatov, then we ourselves will have to familiarize ourselves with the works of Oppenheimer.
  13. zulusuluz
    zulusuluz 24 July 2016 09: 16
    0
    until they place the heels of the divisions of the 18-year-old recruits
    It's not a matter of numbers ... If these 5 divisions are destroyed in a matter of minutes, will the United States go to mutual destruction? After all, there were earlier precedents with downed civilian planes, as it was agreed. I think, in this case, "they will agree". And in order not to lose face, they "isolate" Russia even more.
    1. Alex_Tug
      Alex_Tug 24 July 2016 15: 43
      0
      If these 5 divisions are destroyed in a matter of minutes, will the US go to mutual destruction?


      However, with ... 5 divisions in minutes? So for this you need to have 15 divisions. (at least a 3 to 1 ratio). Unreal.
  14. wow
    wow 24 July 2016 09: 41
    +2
    What is typical for NATO (USA), when at least one out of 10 (ten) soldiers dies, the other nine want to sue the enemy, because insurance "burns", and loans are not paid. I went through all this in the DRA (1987-89), dealt with their "advisers". The main thing is asked - do not kill ....
  15. Thompson
    Thompson 24 July 2016 11: 07
    0
    There is simply a divorce of dough and suckers. The states are well aware that without NATO they will become nothing. Now everything is aimed at proving by any means its necessity, in the absence of the USSR. Therefore, they came up with a new horror story, Russia.
  16. Machete
    Machete 24 July 2016 11: 49
    0
    Does she offer in the Baltic States to post 200-300 thousand group units of troops?
    A smaller number will still not be a problem.
    It will only be necessary to evict all the Baltic states in order to deploy troops, equipment and infrastructure.
    1. Alex_Tug
      Alex_Tug 24 July 2016 15: 48
      0
      Does she offer in the Baltic States to post 200-300 thousand group units of troops?


      200-300 thousand troops in the Baltic states is a war. No one will keep such a number of troops for a good life.
  17. iouris
    iouris 24 July 2016 12: 05
    0
    Such articles in the US are printed for domestic consumption. It does not at all follow from this that there are plans to seize Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Also, it does not follow that the military and economic power of the Russian Federation exceeds 10% of the total power of the West. The real balance of power can be judged by the results of the participation of the Russian Federation in the Olympics.
  18. BARKHAN
    BARKHAN 24 July 2016 12: 37
    0
    Until the United States takes a similar expensive step, until they deploy five heels of the 18-year-old recruits, that is, the children of their country,
    Hitler did something similar near our borders ... But then he had to shoot himself ... Well, and his comrades-in-arms, who were hanged, who swallowed poison himself ...
  19. TOR2
    TOR2 24 July 2016 15: 38
    0
    Remember, we talked about how difficult it is to convince an armed invader that you will defend a neighbor’s house? Here is one way. You send one of your young children to your neighbor’s house. Or even better - sit your child in the most prominent place on his porch. Now the potential invader will definitely consider convincing your promise to protect the neighbor’s house.

    But what if the enemy turns out to be smarter and takes hostage your offspring who have eaten cheeseburgers. Ready for such a multi-way?
  20. pavelty
    pavelty 25 July 2016 15: 55
    0
    Well, who will tell me, finally, why should we attack the Baltic states? Well, please ... Well, why did they surrender to us? Can the clever Dianne Fundstein Chamberlain answer this question?