Tag Archives: NATO

US Presidential Elections: Importance for Latvia and Eastern Europe

US_Election_2016.png

Just one week left before the most important political event in United States of America and arguably the rest of the world. An average American voter may think it only matters their own country and interior policy, but US still has responsibility towards many parts of the world especially Baltic States and rest of Eastern Europe. That is why this statement will be more about the election outcome influence on foreign policy and our security. The interior policy and economic issues in these elections is something more important to US citizens themselves then your foreign policy to us which importance inside US is often neglected.

During Cold War years when US policy was always to assure that it will never recognize Soviet occupation of the Baltic States and support anti-soviet resistance; the US presidential candidates often met with Baltic exiles. They also tried to apply to exiles of the Eastern Block and captive nations of the Soviet Union like Ukrainians. Now 25 years after the “end” of Cold War such meetings and reach outs never happen. During presidential debates the question of Ukrainian conflict was never raised and only the question of US support for NATO was mentioned briefly. The current adversary for Baltic States – Russia was only mentioned as in form of Syria and DNC email hacks. Now why Russia is keyword in these elections?

Back in past both US ruling parties have made their ups and downs with Russia/Soviet Union. Franklin Delano Roosevelt conceded Baltic States to Soviet Union, while his successor Harry Truman ignited confrontation to deter further soviet expansion. Republican Dwight Eisenhower warned of the rise of the military industrial complex in result of arms race. Democrat John F. Kennedy did his best to neutralize the Soviet missile threat in Cuba and reached upper hand in arms race. Republican Richard Nixon and Democrat Jimmy Carter attempted to create a détente with Soviet Union which only lead to breakdown after Soviet invasion in Afghanistan. Republicans Ronald Reagan and George Bush used Soviet weakness to win the first Cold War and witnessed the fall of the Soviet Block.

Since then the following US presidential candidates have failed to understand the Soviet successor state – Russian Federation. Bill Clinton hoped for democratic change in Russia and even hoped for partnership. What western powers failed to understand that despite the communist removal from power, the soviet ruling elite or nomenklatura remained in power, but most importantly the Praetorian guard of the Soviet Union – the KGB and Army elite kept their position. They were determined prevent desovietization, prevent the transition to liberal democracy and revenge on US for the breakdown of the Soviet Union. In the end they succeeded to install their member Vladimir Putin an ex KGB Lieutenant colonel, who in his 17 years of rule have returned the so-called “siloviki” to their past prominence. Vladimir Putin’s foreign policy is based on deception, forgery, sabotage and use of outright force when it’s needed.

 Republican George W Bush at first as many did not decode Putin and his government, but later started more assertive approach. During Bush administration despite Russian resistance whole Eastern Europe and Baltic States was admitted to NATO, however Bush did not rush to create constant NATO military presence in the Baltic States. A major Bush and other NATO leaders mistake was not to reach common ground on admitting Ukraine and Georgia into NATO. Germany and France resisted to assign a road map for these countries while Putin openly threatened that Ukraine will only enter NATO without its Eastern and Southern part. To prevent Georgia from joining NATO and EU Russia invaded Georgia, and witnessed impotence from US and EU countries who could not defend Georgia. Some say that US fleet presence in Black Sea was the factor to stop full occupation of Georgia, while other say that French president Nicola Sarkozy managed to make a deal on dividing Georgia and leave Russian occupied territories as unrecognized republics to Russians for the common good. Russian leadership understood that it can be done again in future. As Russia provoked Georgia into attacking first, Georgia was scapegoated and no western sanctions followed. Russia did it first strike, but that was not a wakeup call.

Democrat Barack Obama first 4 years were catastrophic in relations with Russia. At first Obama failed to understand that de iure president Dmitri Medvedev was not de facto and any direct talks with him excluding then Prime Minister Putin would result in nothing. But, the greatest blunder was the so-called “reset” button that then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton brought to Moscow. In attempt to normalize relations since Georgian war Clinton gifted the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavror a with a red button with the English word “reset” and the Roman alphabet transliteration of the Russian Cyrillic alphabet word “peregruzka”. Only the word “peregruzka” in Russian means overload. And that is what this attempt of new détente lead to. Obama administration abandoned important plans for rocket defense bases in Poland, Baltic States and Eastern Europe was placed on second plan while Obama sought unrealistic goals for nuclear disarming a thing Russia could not possibly agree. When US and NATO countries entered the civil war in Libya, then prime minister Putin witnessed Gaddafi’s horrible death as direct threat to him and ignited his will to return to Presidential post. As from 2012 scared by unexpected opposition towards his third presidency Putin started a consolidation of power and confrontation with the west, who he blamed for trying to topple his regime and his puppet regimes in Belarus, Ukraine and Central Asia.

 Obama one last mistake towards Russia was the “red line in the sand” – failed promise to make military action against Syrian regime in case of use of chemical weapons. Obama who made this promise unwillingly for himself instead fell for Putin’s intimidation and agreed for deal with Russia and Assad that kept him in power. By doing so he aided popularity for so-called Islamic State (Daesh) radicals and created environment where Russia can directly intervene in Syrian war. Thus Putin no longer recognized Obama as competitive rival. What happened in 2014 in Ukraine we all know. Obama seemingly have learned for their past mistakes. Sanctions are in place and finally what had to be done many years before – a constant NATO military presence is being enforced in Baltic States. In last few months the relations between US and Russia has deteriorated so much that Russia is openly preparing for possible nuclear war and has moved nuclear capable rockets to Baltic region. And that is where the US elections comes in.

Republican party has been taken over by arrogant millionaire who believes he can become a president without any political experience and who leads a fight against so-called establishment. Donald Trump is alarming for Baltic States and Eastern Europe for dozens of things. He suggests that he may only help those countries that pays them enough, practically its gang ransom diplomacy and is against the principles of NATO. Baltic States desperately are trying to balance their national budgets to increase spending for defense, but its obvious that they can’t do it alone. Latvia right now has created a good defense assurance relations with Canada, but if US drops its leading position in NATO it’s a signal towards Russia that it could possibly avoid major war if it decides to tamper with Baltic States. Trump has many times stated sympathies for Putin and his regime and using Russian propaganda slogans in his campaign. He even uses conspiracy theories that first appears in sites like Russia Today and to add he is even endorsed by pro-Russian conspiracy theorist Alex Jones. He has stated that Crimea is “Europes problem” and is better off with Russia, he has removed past Republican promise to send weapons for Ukraine. He states that Russia only fights Daesh and has no problem it with massacring the people in Aleppo with their bombings. Most importantly he pretends that he is not sure if Russia is behind DNC email hack and Russian connection to Wikileaks. He says that CIA and FBI can’t be trusted, however he praises FBI for his new probe into Hillary Clintons emails. Trump himself might not be Russian agent, but his many campaign aids and supporters are and Russia is directly interested in person who may disrupt things on global scale. Russian strategy of divide and conquer is to use western democracy to install Russia friendly regimes in Europe. They have succeeded in Hungary, partly in Slovakia and Greece. Russia supported Brexit in UK and supports right-wing and leftist radicals in Germany, Italy and France. Now Trump is Putin’s greatest gamble that might turn things into his favor. Trump is most unpredictable and dangerous candidate since Barry Goldwater.

Now Hillary Clinton is full of uncertainties too. It’s beyond prediction how her email saga will end, it could end with acquittal or it could end with impeachment. Clinton who pushed the ‘overload’ button now feels the bitter taste of fruits of her failed foreign policy. Russian secret service tries to undermine her election campaign, her intentions of imposing no fly zone in Syria is met with threats of world war. Clinton uses strong words calling Putin the adversary, accusing of Trump of being his puppet and warns of Putin’s intention. We can only hope that if she is elected she will keep up to this and not forgive Russian attack on her campaign. Last thing we need is another “reset” button. But for this reason Clinton cannot be fully trusted.

No matter who will be elected, both of them and all US citizens will have to stand ready for even greater trouble from Russia. First Russia has already ramped up its military presence in Kaliningrad and around Baltic eastern borders. One day it will break up the ceasefire in Ukraine completely when it feels the conditions are perfect for that. Russia is increasing its presence in Syria and provoking NATO into confrontation. If Russia sees that Baltic States are not defended well enough and US lacks leadership to help them it may mount an invasion here.

If Donald Trump will be elected he must certainly feel some gratitude for Putin for contributing for his campaign. Trump will probably again try to make a new détente with Russia, giving her free hand in Syria and limit US presence in Eastern Europe and Baltic States. History teaches that every deal with Russia is not the worth the paper it’s written. Once Trump will witness that Russia endangers his own country a new confrontation will begin. Question – will it not be too late for Baltic States?

If Hillary Clinton is elected and that’s what Russia fears from, the confrontation will continue. If Clinton stays committed to be prime time member of NATO and support Baltic States with military presence it will result in even higher Russian military increase to intimidate her. Question how long Russian economy can hold such arms race­­ – that was one of the reasons why Nazi Germany moved to war in 1939. If Clinton will impose no fly zone in Syria and indict Russia with war crimes then Russia might instigate a crisis situation even involving US casualties. Nerves of steel will be needed to avoid a direct confrontation. Clinton following Obama’s footsteps probably will not arm Ukraine, but keep sanctions. That will not make Ukrainian situation any easier. Lastly Baltic States if ever gets victims of war – then it could happen as consequence of US – Russian conflict in Syria or a last final gamble for Putin’s regime to keep its power prestige and save economy by “short victorious war”.

In both ways the world can expect many dangers after November 8. A dangers that may even went to nuclear war. Russian leadership has nothing to lose. If the regime falls they will lose all their looted millions, mansions and even their lives. They would rather end their existence in war that future Russian generations will blame on foreign powers rather their own leaders and themselves. Russian openly shows its people and the world that is ready even for nuclear war. US and Europe should also tell its citizens its ready for a war with Russia or China if such occurs. We cannot pretend that such threat does not involves us and this 70 year-long peace that was only possible thanks to strong acts of deterrence. In last 25 years the deterrence was naively removed and has caused a greatest global security threat since 1961.

It’s up to US voters to determine the fate of their nation and many other nations. And remember in democratic countries the elections are determined by those who did not vote. …Or Russian hackers. For all US citizens, friends of Latvia, people who study Baltic affairs let this be a warning to make your decision with full responsibility as you will be making history and future for all of us.

Comments Off on US Presidential Elections: Importance for Latvia and Eastern Europe

Filed under Uncategorized

Russian Invasion in the Baltic States: Nightmare or Reality?

Baltic Invasion

Since 2014 the relations between Russia and NATO has reached the levels of Cold War. Russia has annexed Crimean peninsula from Ukraine  and wages proxy war in Eastern Ukraine. Russia has also made intervention into Syrian civil war. Russia has increased arms race and military buildup causing NATO countries to respond. Right now in NATO summit in Warsaw has decided to increase its military presence within Baltic States and Poland by deploying four international battalions in Baltic States under Canadian command while US will deploy 1,000 additional troops in Poland. In so Baltic region will become a NATO war base. This decision will create increase of Russian military near Baltic borders and inside Kaliningrad region. However, since 2013 Russia has already increased its presence and already outmatches and will outmatch the NATO forces in the region. Last two years in Baltic States the social tensions have been increased by the fears of war and Russian invasion. Is this a still far-fetched nightmare created by historic past and inner insecurity or a real threat and does the invasion already taking place by non military means? What are the possible scenarios for Russian invasion? What are the reasons for Russia to invade and not to invade the Baltic States? What consequences it would make for both sides. These questions will be discussed here.

NATO vs Russia. Balance of Military Power in the Baltic Region

Baltic States have population of six million and all three countries suffer from significant depopulation issues. So creating a sizable military force for all three countries is impossible task both financially and by means of manpower. Estonian Defense Forces has 6,500 active officers and 12, 600 in paramilitary Defense League.  In case of war Estonia plans to use 30,000  men and woman. Estonia spends 2,07% for military the required amount by NATO guidelines. Land forces have 2 infantry brigades, infantry is well equipped with NATO, Swedish, Finish and Israeli firearms and special weapons. The army motor pool is currently being expanded and consists mainly of infantry fighting vehicles.  Estonia employs compulsory service. Latvian National Armed Forces have 5, 350 active personnel. In case of war NAF could gather 50, 000 soldiers. Latvian infantry has modern firearms from NATO, Sweden and Israel with bit outdated artillery and only for last two years it has begun supplying its motor pool with infantry fighting vehicles.  Along army the National Guard is a sizable force. Latvian National Forces are currently most underfunded in the region with 1,4% spending on defense. For years the Latvian government has neglected the defense spending and only for last two years are trying to improve the situation. Ādaži training poligon has been improved and regularly hosts foreign troops on rotational training. Lielvārde Airfield has been fixed to host advanced NATO aircraft for landing. Latvian Navy is on path of improvement and is regularly involved in patroling Latvian waters   checking for passing Russian naval vessels. Latvia is the only country in Baltic States with professional military service.  Lithuanian Armed Forces  have  8,120 active land troops with two mechanized infantry brigades. Lithuania has the most advanced vehicle force and artillery. Lithuania has reverted from professional to compulsory service on 2015. The Šiauļai Air Base that hosts NATO Baltic Air Patrol mission is one of the most important military objects in the area. All three countries have small air forces suitable for training, local search and rescue missions and patrolling.

This means that all three countries are heavily reliant on support from NATO allied countries. Closest military ally with significant active force of 120,000 man and woman is Poland with its sizable Air Force and Navy. Polish forces have key importance in securing so-called Suwalki gap, containing Russian forces in Kaliningard and assisting Lithuanian army. Currently there are no constantly present NATO troops in the region. During last two years US, Germany, Poland, UK and other countries have sent their forces for temporary period for training. These mostly brigades and battalions stays in Baltic for few months then head to next assignment. That is about to change as Warsaw summit in July 9 2016 has decided to station permanent troops in Poland and Baltic States. In Latvia 450 a battalion sized Canadian contingent will arrive, in Poland 1,000 US troops will be stationed. This actually means the NATO Article five on invading allied country will come fully into effect as in case of invasion in Baltic States or Poland the stationary troops will be first to be involved. This serves as clear warning to Russia that if it would wish to undertake the invasion there would be almost no chance to avoid a World War 3 situation.

However, the size of newly stationed troops in region will be still be minimal. Russia had begun its buildup of military forces already before 2013 and has modeled conflict with NATO in its massive drills before conflict in Ukraine. Russia has divided its military in four main military regions with most of its European part is called the Western military district. Russia has gathered already more that 20, 000  men and woman in Western Military district and 10, 000 men and woman in Southern Military district in Caucasus region. A special territory of importance is Kaliningrad region. Formerly German East Prussia it was divided between Poland and Soviet Union on 1945. Soviets established forward army in naval base in more far west region of USSR to support Soviets stationed in Poland and East Germany and gain entry for Soviet Baltic Navy to Atlantic. That changed after 1991 when Kaliningard region became sandwiched between Lithuania and Poland cutting direct land supply routes. After both countries joined NATO the Russian army and Navy considered themselves surrounded in 15,100 km² small area. So steps were taken to improve regions defense. Now Kaliningrad has become the most militarized region in Europe with 225,000 military personnel (2014 data) the main Baltic Naval base in Baltiysk. The region hosts about 60 different military units, has functional airfields, early warning radar station and radio listening stations. The 941,873 large regional population affected by militarization and constant propaganda emphasizing 1945 victory and military strength is considered one of the most loyal supporters of the Moscow policies. Kaliningrad is also a vulnerability and burden for Russia. Since it cannot supply it and deploy more forces by land it its forced to use the only route along the Baltic Sea from St. Petersburg to Kaliningrad. This is done by air and sea transport. Since the narrow route is between Baltic State and Swedish and sea and air space the task is made difficult because Russian Air Force and sea vessels always impose secrecy on their routes and never allows to track them by use of radars. Transponders are always off and ships do not respond to identification calls from NATO Air force and Navy. For this reason the NATO Air Policing mission always have to take off to scramble and identify Russian warplanes and NATO navy must detect ships and submarines that passes by. This equal harassment so far has always ended peacefully, however we must take note of Turkish experience when SU-24 that supposedly entered Turkish air space was shot down on October 29 2016. Russians themselves are sometimes risking to cause a serious incident by making low pass fly by over USS Donald Cook giving US warning signal that Baltic Sea belongs to them.

Another point of argument is Belarus. Belarus is one of the most loyal allied states to Russia, not to mention Armenia. It has force of 62,000 active men and woman, sizable tank and air force. Whats more to add to importance is that Belarus hosts Russian troops and probably will host more as answer to NATO buildup. While Belarusian president Alexander Lukashenko officially seeks a partnership with EU countries he has stated many times that in case of Russian conflict with NATO Belarus will side with Russia and take direct part. That means Belarusian army is a threat to Latvian eastern region of Latgale and to Lithuania particularly to Lazdijai and Druskinkai municipalities along the Polish border that have Belarusian border on the east and Russian border on the east. Presumably both forces could attempt to take the region to cut off Baltic States from Poland and Western Europe. So far there has been insignificant opposition towards Russian military presence among Belarusian society. That could change if economic difficulties deepen for Belarus.

Two nearby Scandinavian countries Sweden and Finland with sizable military, but are not NATO members are concerned over worsening security issues in the region. There are many in both countries who advice to join NATO or at least expand the cooperation with NATO. Sweden that has maintained long history of neutrality and now it as the crossroads. Russia knows this and ha begun campaign of intimidation against Sweden to weaken their will to join NATO. Finland has very long border with Russia and historical policy of keeping neutrality with Russia, however that may change at some point and how Finland would react to the assault against ethnically close Estonia? So involvement of these two countries remains a question.

Russia’s reasons for invasion. For and against.

Baltic States provides almost no valuable natural resources for Russia to plunder. Financial gains might be the worth, however Russia already gains from Baltic States by trade, transit and gas supplies. Baltic States are trying to shake off reliance on Russian energy export, most successful in this matter is Lithuania. That’s way as same in Ukraine, Russia’s goal is to prevent Baltic States independence on energy sources and that can be done by multiple means.

One of the main reason for invasions are political and emotional. Baltic States was possession of  Russian Empire and was under Soviet occupation for most of XX century. Moscow highly regarded the European cultured territory and invested much in their industrialization and militarization. Now what is left is mostly empty carcasses of abandoned factories and war bases but what was left as inheritance was large numbers of Russian speaking immigrants in Latvia and Estonia. Both countries in early nighties did crucial and disputable actions to deny citizenship for most of these people creating a massive disappointment towards Latvian and Estonian ethnic population. The creation of large non-citizen community had political reason – Latvian national parties feared that Russian speaking voters could elect anti-western political force that would disrupt Latvian and Estonian path to NATO and US. In last 20 years the naturalization laws have allowed non citizens to obtain citizenship and indeed most of them vote for parties supporting Russia. While still significant size of non citizens remain and they are material for Russian special foreign policy to support Russian speakers outside Russia.

The policy to support Russian speakers by civil and military means was already introduced  during Boris Yeltsin and fully deployed by Vladimir Putin. Moscow spends millions of rubles to create so-called Russian World a net of organizations committed to protection of Russian language, education and culture outside Russia. In Latvia some of these organizations like Non Citizen congress, Russian party “Zarya”, Russian National Union and others are openly rebellious towards Latvian government and have been persecuted by law agencies. In Georgia 2008 and in Ukraine 2014 Russia claimed that Georgians and Ukrainians are creating violent actions against Russian speakers and was obliged to protect them. In Baltic States only violent outburst was Bronze Soldier riots in Tallinn on 2006 when Russia instigated massive cyber attacks and sent the provocateurs from Russian border. With financial capability and willing agents Russia could instigate a violent provocation to get casus belli for invasion. So far from 2014 various pro-Russian and anti-Russian demonstrations have taken place with small incidents not enough to cause outrage. Russian speaking community nevertheless is important recourse for Russia and worry for Riga and Tallinn. Tallinn has made many successful steps for Russian speaker integration, while Latvia has its ups and downs. The largest parliamentary fraction in Latvian Saeima the Harmony is kept in opposition and for its ties with Kremlin the major Latvian parties had vowed to keep it out of power. While Harmony is charge of Riga and Rēzekne municipality and is plagued with corruption scandals it has enough voter support base. On 2012 Russian national radicals managed to hold referendum for Russian as second state language and failed. Russian and Latvian languages both have been politicized by both sides and is used in political argument.The latest surveys show that Russian speakers feel most endangered by Latvians in areas where they live the most like Riga, Daugavpils and Latgale region while in Kurzeme (Courland) and Vidzeme with Latvian absolute majority they feel almost no danger and support Latvian policies. So Russia has many reasons both real and imaginary to use military action to protect Russian speakers in the region. However, as today it seems highly unlikely that Baltic States would impose any repressions towards its Russian speaking community.

The third reason is common Russian political strife against NATO. Vladimir Putin and his ruling elite started its carrier during last decades of the Soviet Union and deeply regrets its fall. Many of them blames directly US and West for the breakup and still suspects US of plotting against them. Some authors suggest that Putin at first wanted to create good relations with US and UK by trying to create good impression on Tony Blair and George W Bush, but, was deeply disappointed when  they made steps that  contradicted his own interests. Such was Eastern Europe’s admission to NATO and western support for democratic movements in Georgia, Ukraine and Russia itself. Putin’s inner circle has always blamed all the democratic revolutions in former Soviet countries as CIA plot and deeply feels that such plot could be carried out in Moscow. Russian propaganda has created the story of Fortress Russia that is encircled by NATO and China. So to contain this “threat” Russia has increased its military strength and severely limited political freedoms since 2012. One of the Russian strategies is to stage a preventive war to prevent NATO to attack or expand further to Russian borders. Currently preventive wars are being carried out in Ukraine to prevent in ascension to NATO and EU and in Syria to keep the Damascus pro-Russian regime and do not lose valuable Tartus Naval base. If Russia would feel further endangered by NATO increasing presence  in the Baltic States it may choose a “preventive strike” to remove NATO “threat” from its close borders. Question yet remains and cannot be answered – does Kremlin really do believe its being threatened by Western countries or it’s just propaganda phantom for Russian people made to justify Kremlin foreign and inner policy actions.

Fourth last reason for invasion is the use of war as tool for mass control. Russian society was deeply moved by annexation of Crimea  and had its support for war in Eastern Ukraine and intervention in Syria. War was and is central part of Russian propaganda since Soviet times and it is enough to hold massive support for the region despite economic difficulties. A war against NATO an event both feared and propagandized would be last and final straw for Kremlin to keep support of its people should there be danger of economical collapse. Also its a “leave nothing behind us” thinking by some of the Kremlin people who would rather perish in war then be arrested or hanged during revolution. That’s why Russian military doctrine does not fear using nuclear weapons.

The main reason for not invading the Baltic States is obvious: they are part of NATO. Russia may gamble that for sake of their own citizens and soldiers NATO countries might sacrifice the Baltic States, but as NATO has decided on permanent presence in the region the military conflict with all the member states will be impossible to avoid. Secondly such action will result complete international isolation of Russia that only contribute to its difficult economical and political state caused by War in Ukraine. Thirdly  the failure of this invasion may in light variant my cause breakdown of regime in worse case – nuclear war.

Scenarios for Invasion.

There are two possible scenarios for invasion. First: full-scale invasion. Second: limited, non-direct like it’s happening in Eastern Ukraine. Full scale invasion would require much use of land, sea and air force. The main Russian objectives would be securing control over the air and blockade the Baltic Sea. Kaliningrad region would be used to blockade the land route trough Suwalki, Poland to Vilnius and Riga. Russia would not necessarily need to assault Suwalki itself, but rather secure control over Lithuanian towns of Kybartai, Marijumpole, Kalvarija and Druskinskai. First cities to fall would be Narva, Tartu, Balvi, Kārsava, Rēzekne, Krāslava and Daugavpils. Since Vilnius is close to Belarusian border it would be first Baltic capital  to be attacked. The question of further advance will determined in the skies over Baltic, in the sea and the Suwalki gap zone. If Russia manages to secure access points to Baltic States it has chance to overrun the NATO forces trapped in encirclement. NATO forces in every way has technical  and numeric advantage over Russia and using it NATO would eventually break the blockade and force Russia to retreat. So NATO objective is to prevent the Baltic blockade and cut off Russia from Kaliningrad. Air, Naval and tactical superiority is in need.

A logical question then arises what about nuclear weapons? First no country has ever had experience of using nuclear weapon against country that also have them. However, the common sense and most military doctrines is to use nuclear weapons after the warring country has exceeded all conventional means. Their forces are defeated and are on rout and country is on breakdown. That is one of the actions Russia would possibly choose. However, Russia has far-fetched doctrine of using nuclear detonation to prevent NATO for acting further. A scenario in mind that Russia would use tactical nuke against military unit or city and then in fear of nuclear war would try to impose ceasefire advantageous for them. However, such strategy is a gamble. One country might possibly not respond and seek solution while other fires tactical nuke in response, creating response after response leading to ultimate nuclear annihilation.  So using or not using nuclear weapons it’s a question of common sense.

Second scenario is limited invasion like the one that takes place in Ukraine. Russia could try to form Russian peoples republics in Narva, Daugavpils and Rēzekne and try to instigate revolts in Riga, Tallinn and Vilnius. Same as in Ukraine Russia has large Russian speaking population to use for their goals, many of them including some Latvians would support pro-Russian revolt. Russia might still try to blockade Baltic sea and Suwalki gap, but it will refrain from taking all countries completely. Border areas would fall for Russian control and there Russia would try to create environment for frozen conflict that would bleed out three Baltic States and NATO trying to help them. Such scenario may avoid discussion of using nuclear weapons, however, Russia would have hard time to prove that there are no Russian troops in Latgale.

The Consequences

  In both case of full and limited invasion Russia would fall under tougher sanctions and isolation. Russian populace at first would support the invasion., however basing on military success or failures it would change drastically. Victory if such is possible would lead to Russia as totalitarian fortress in opposition against western block for times to come. Defeat would cause an unpredictable series of events, like state breakdown, civil war and foreign intervention. Limited frozen conflict in Baltic states will lead to same Russian totalitarianism and isolation only to hope find agreement over the conflict. Failure and loss of national prestige will leave its regime vulnerable.

For Baltic States its means great loses of lives, destruction of infrastructure and economical breakdown. In some ways the limited invasion and frozen conflict would be more crucial as it would be  a constant bleed out.

For the world it would mean the danger of WW3. Not to mention fear of use of nuclear weapon, the conflict might spread to Poland, Caucasus, Moldovo everywhere where NATO and Russian troops might encounter each other. This would be major political and economical disruption for EU countries and US and UK that are already plagued by social disturbances. By all means such conflict would be highly disadvantageous for both sides.

The Covert Soft Invasion Already Taking Place 

The Chinese military theorist Sun Tzu has stated that the supreme way to win the battle is to win it without fighting it. This is soft power, propaganda, espionage and subversion of state and society. In many accords this is already taking place for many years and has intensified. Russia clearly is aware of all the risks mentioned above. Thats why its obvious goal is to create climate in the West and Baltic States where its leaders and people are unwilling to fight a war. First its massive emission of Russian propaganda in all languages using all possible ways. Often this has success like Western Media still has issues who are the armed people in Donbass – separatists, terrorists, or Russian soldiers and mercenaries. There are people who are against sanctions and don’t see the need for supporting Ukraine and Baltic States. What Russia needs is for such people to be in large numbers and elect populist, nationalist or far left politicians who leads against so-called establishment and will contribute to lifting sanctions, recognize Crimean annexation and weaken NATO. Such politicians gained their successes recently in UK and managed to disrupt the EU and cause divide within British society. In France, Czech Republic, Austria, Greece ect. there are forces who wish to come to power and are supported by Russia. In US Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump who has proved he almost no understanding about European and Russian policy wishes to achieve deal with Russia and question the need American involvement in  NATO.  Trump might be a gamble for Moscow to weaken the US by populist Russia sympathizing president. But, Trump is highly unpredictable person with zero experience in politics. If he keeps his America First! doctrine he would soon find that his deals with Russia are playing against him and will break them and cause problems for Russia. In similar way Napoleon and Hitler broke his deals with Russia after they found disadvantageous for them. In countries like Poland and Latvia where nationalistic conservative forces have taken power but are ideologically against Russia a another phenomena  is taking place while these forces are generally against Putin’s regime, they are very found of his conservatism and authoritarian methods. On both countries these forces are trying to sit on fence – while supporting military alliance against Russia they try to impose same laws that Putin would impose. Such situation is anomalous. The greatest fight for European hearts and minds are taking place now and will decide the events on battlefield if such takes place.

Conclusion

As it was discussed here war in Baltic States are not advantageous for both sides and will lead to plenty of worse consequences. So its fair to say that likelihood of such invasion is not possible. However, as long as Russia continues its war in Ukraine, does not end occupation of Crimea and continues intervention in Syria the danger of Russian military aggression stays.   As it was stated here Russia often does not need a logical or rational reason to start a war the decision can be based on fear, hate, power mongering and  oversight. Thus the war can be caused by simple unforeseen incident like in Sarajevo 1914 when few shots brought whole Europe to war that was waiting for it for last few years. So there is no reason to competently override the danger of Russian invasion. As long as aggressive, suspicious and totalitarian regime is in power in Moscow that relies heavily on its military success the danger will stay and should be considered and prepared for.

Comments Off on Russian Invasion in the Baltic States: Nightmare or Reality?

Filed under Current Events

Latvia and the NATO

The Logo of the NATO summit in Riga 2006

The Logo of the NATO summit in Riga 2006

When the North Atlantic Organization was established by the main western powers on April 4 1949 Latvia was part of the Soviet Union. Since NATO was made to defend the Western Europe and US from possible Soviet invasion no doubt that in case of war Latvia would become a battlefield. During the Cold War years Latvia was filled with Soviet bases and NATO gathered intelligence about them. Until the very end many of the NATO leaders could not imagine the collapse of the opposing Warsaw Pact Union and the Soviet Union. The question became open to the western leaders – what to do with former Eastern European satellite states and the Baltic States? Integrate them in the NATO? Or leave under the Russian influence? But, the answer for many of the Eastern European countries and the Baltic States was clear- we want to join NATO! The process of joining was difficult  because of protests from Russia and Latvian readiness for such step. And the responsibility of being a NATO member in this fast changing unstable world is even more challenging.

On January 1991 during the Barricade movement the Latvian government started to form a legislation for own armed forces. The past Latvian Army in 1918-1940 was in great memory for many, but it was unable to defend its homeland in the most critical moment. Mostly because of lack of foreign support, lack of unity between the Baltic states and the cowardice of the ruling politicians. The first national armed unit of the restored independent republic was the Latvian National Guard (Zemessardze) made right after the breakdown of the coup in August 1991.   NG is a basic land component, consisting of volunteers who perform traditional national guard duties such as crisis response and support for military operations. It consists of 3 regions of National Guard.

First Latvian soldiers on 1991

First Latvian soldiers on 1991

On September 10 1991 a law of compulsory military draft was made to form new Latvian armed forces. The Latvian men from age of 19 to 50 had to fulfill a military duty. On November 13 1991 the Ministry of Defense was formed. Before the WW2 the ministry was officially called the Ministry of War. First Minister of Defense was Tālavs Jundzis who before that served as the chief of the commission of the defense and interior affairs.   In the same time the vitally important Latvian Border Guard was also formed. On January 21 1992 the main Joint Headquarters (NAF) was formed to take command of all land, sea and air units. All other headquarters of navy, air defense and border guards were subordinated to the main command.  The first commander-in-chief was colonel Dainis Turlais.

The Coat of Arms of the Latvian National Armed forces

The Coat of Arms of the Latvian National Armed forces

On November 4 1992 the law regarding National defense and armed forces was made. Latvian military was officially named the National Armed Forces (Nacionālie Bruņotie Spēki NBS). The structure of the NBS changed many times. The Land Forces (Sauszemes spēki SZS) consists of Headquarters HQ and Signal Company 1st Infantry Battalion 2nd Infantry BattalionFire Support Battalion Combat Support Battalion. Latvian Naval Forces (Latvijas Jūras spēki LJS), Air Force (Latvijas Gaisa Spēki LGS), Latvian Special Task Unit (Speciālo Uzdevumu Vienība SUV) and the Military Police. There are active 4,763 active duty personnel in the NAF. 971 in SZS,  552 in LJS, 10,642 voluntary national guardsmen with 1,284 officers and 1,945 non-commissioned officers in the Latvian National Guard. There are 1,288 civil employees serving in the NAF. From 2005 Latvia switched from institutional draft to professional army.

The cooperation with NATO begun shortly after the founding of the new Latvian military. On 20 December 1991, NATO founded the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC) to collaborate with potential partners. Latvia also participated in the NACC foundation session, thus becoming a Member State of the forum.
In 1994, Latvia joined the programme “Partnership for Peace” established in the same year, which gave the possibility to take advantage of consultations of NATO civil and military specialists, their support and practical assistance in development of the defence system. In 1995, the participation in the “Partnership for Peace” programme also allowed Latvia to get involved in the NATO Planning and Review Process that, in subsequent years, facilitated compliance of the Latvian National Armed Forces with those of NATO Member States.

The joining NATO meant that Latvia had to make many changes in its laws and policy. From 1992 to 1994 Latvia had tough time of managing the withdrawal of the Russian army from Latvia. The ex-Soviet soldiers now part of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation were still in their bases and many refused to leave. Latvian delegation managed to achieve that all ex-Soviet bases including the top-secret sites are evacuated. Russians destroyed most of their military objects and made unusable for the Latvian army. After the last Russian soldier left Latvia (not including the retired officers and their families) the Latvian government set path to join EU and NATO. Many amendments were made including the Citizenship law that caused a failed referendum to cancel these changes.

Latvian Armed forces also had to prove themselves in the International operations. From 1996 to 2009 Latvia joined the Peace Keeping operations on Bosnia and Herzegovina. On 1999 Latvia sent its soldiers to join the peace keeping  mission in Kosovo the KFOR. Latvians left on 2009. 17 soldiers, 13 Military reconnaissance experts and four staff sergeants was stationed there during the mission.

On 23―25 April 1999, at the NATO summit meeting in Washington, USA, NATO suggested Latvia and the other eight candidate states to elaborate a Member Action Plan (MAP) for participation in NATO by reflecting the entire preparatory process and measures for the participation in NATO therein. MAP would permit the states to receive additional consultations, support and practical assistance from NATO Member States. On 21 November 2002, at the meeting of NATO Heads of state in Prague, Czech Republic, Latvia and six other candidate states were invited to join NATO. This marked the beginning of the last stage for Latvia for becoming a NATO Member State, which took place on 29 March 2004.

The reasons for invitation only in 2002 is linked with the change in the global policy. US started a “Crusade against terrorism” and needed more supporters for their actions. Russia who was actively acting against the Baltic States joining in NATO, after September 11 seemed for friendlier to US than before.  However, Russia again became more hostile after US invasion in Iraq on 2003. But, it was too late to prevent the full integration of Eastern Europe and the Baltic States. The borders of NATO had extended to Russian borders making Russians to adopt the “encircled fortress doctrine” that stated that Russia is surrounded by the western powers and needs to defend itself from the foreign influence. The so-called “orange revolutions” in Georgia, Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan where liberal forces managed to overthrow the pro-Moscow autocratic regimes made Russian leaders believe that NATO is against them even more. As Russia again experienced economic boom due to the rising oil prices, Russian military started a revival and power demonstration.

Meanwhile Latvia joined the ISAF mission in Afghanistan on 2003. Latvian soldiers were already sent under the Soviet lines on “International Duty” to Afghanistan from 1979 to 1989. However, they were sent mainly against their own will. This time the participation in the mission was voluntary and paid. So far Latvia has sent 144 soldiers and the mission still continues. Latvians operate in Kabul, Mazar-i-Sharif and Meymaneh. So far three soldiers have been lost. Latvians were and are involved in heavy firefights with the Taliban insurgents. Now Latvians are mostly involved in training the Afghanistan Defense forces. The US, Norwegian and other partner state military has praised their Latvian colleges for their courage and discipline.

Latvian soldiers in Afghanistan

Latvian soldiers in Afghanistan

Latvia officially supported the US invasion in Iraq when other NATO states such as France and Germany did not. First soldiers were sent to Iraq on August 2003. Latvian troops were initially deployed to Kirkuk (under U.S. command) for a year, then transferred to Camp Charlie in Al Hillah, followed by Camp Delta in Al Kut. Finally, the Latvians were stationed at Camp Echo in Ad Diwaniyah where they conducted external security patrols. During their final posting, three Latvian soldiers were killed in action. On June 18, 2007, all but 7 of Latvia’s 125 troops left Iraq. Four of the remainder left within two weeks, leaving three officers who participated in intelligence analysis and operational planning from July 2007 onwards. The last three Latvian soldiers concluded their mission on November 8, 2008.

Latvian army specialists were also involved in military conflict in Macedonia on 2003, Latvian military observers were sent to Georgia on 2008. Latvian government officially sided with Georgia, during the war with Russia. The Prime Minister of Latvia Ivars Godmanis joined others western leaders and went to Tblisi during the war action. From 2011 Latvian naval specialists are involved in action against the Somalian pirates. On 2013 Latvian military instructors were sent to Liberia to help instructing the Liberian armed forces. And the latest ongoing mission with the Latvian troops on the ground is Mali where Latvia has sent officer and instructor.

Important aspect of the Latvian NATO membership is national security. The Article V is the most important for Latvia. This committed each member state to consider an armed attack against one state to be an armed attack against all states. This would mean if for instance Russia would attack Latvia it would trigger full NATO-Russian war. Optimists see this as a full-time guarantee for the Latvian security. Pessimists remind that in case of such event the nuclear weapons would have to be used and NATO would give up the Baltic States to escape nuclear war. What they forget that because the gigantic amount of the nuclear weapons made by both sides in the past would meant a total destruction and make these weapons useless for achieving victory. So nuclear weapons are mostly used as power demonstration and diplomatic argument. And the other important issue is that the Russian nuclear arsenal has been outdated and downsized by the many nuclear disarmament treaties. The Russian nuclear forces also can be destroyed in pre-emptive strike with using conventional weapons as concluded by many Russian military experts. Therefore in case of NATO-Russia conflict Russia may only be able to threaten others with their nukes not actually use them. And is Russia wiling to doom itself for the sake of the Baltic States if loosing few thousand conventional troops would be more cheaper.

French fighters in NATO Baltic Air Policing mission

French fighters in NATO Baltic Air Policing mission

The NATO guarantee for Baltic States security so far is Baltic Air Policing. Its NATO air defence Quick Reaction Alert (QRA) in order to guard the airspace over the three Baltic states Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. The NATO jet fighters are stationed on Zoknia airfield at Lithuania. The Latvian main air force base at Lielvārde so far is not sufficient for modern NATO aircraft. Various NATO countries including Germany, France, Portugal, Poland and others have sent their fighters to do routine flights across the Baltic States. Their daily routine is sometimes interrupted by Russian Tu-95 bombers and fighter planes who for some reason heads to close to Baltic air space or even enters it. During the past decades Russians have sent their heavy strategical bombers on regular flights. In many cases they dare to violate the NATO airspace. Its a Russian power demonstration, however most of these bombers are built during the Soviet era and are outdated. While Russian air force is still in large numbers and pose a significant threat its suffers from outdated aircraft and accidents. Russians still face heavy problems in releasing new aircraft’s and  rockets. Numerous test accidents were widespread during the Soviet Union, but no the Russian military simply cannot hide it.

The main threat for the Baltic State security is the military inequality between the member states. Also the US foreign policy during the Barack Obama administration have shifted from Eastern Europe towards the Middle East and Asia. However, in recent two years its apparent that the American “reset” policy has failed. Russia is wiling for more confrontation with US and NATO. The reasons for this is the downsizing Russian economy and falling popularity of the Vladimir Putin regime. To divert the national attention from domestic issues the Russian government blames the US, NATO and EU for its failures. Also Russia is interested in keeping the Middle Eastern conflict hot as possible to keep the oil prices up at high level. Since the main profit for Russian economy goes from oil and gas exports, Russia is interested to keep the oil prices high as possible at the expense of the Middle Eastern peace. And also the Russian paranoid belief that all the democratic opposition is actually a western agents makes them more aggressive towards the west.

With such nervous neighbor, Latvia has irresponsibility kept low military budget for many years. Only in recent times the current Defense Minister Artis Pabriks has openly pushed for adding more funds for Latvian military budget. On 2008 the military budget was 63 000 000 LVL on 2011 93 000 000 LVL. When the new state budget is being arranged the Defense Minister had openly stated that the funding for the defense is still not enough and not reach the NATO standard levels. He even said that the NATO leadership may object the Latvian capability of fulfilling their duty. Meanwhile Estonia spends 249 million euros on defense. Lithuania spends 252.0 million. While it’s not meant as un-patriotic criticism it could bring the situation where in case of emergency Latvia becomes a “white spot” in Baltic State security.

  NATO is also concerned about the Swedish military capability. Russians have even played a war games where they proved they can isolate the Swedish air forces in case of war in the Baltic States. Sweden has also neglected its defense for some time and stands as fragile ally. With the US military action looming in Syria, Russia has become even more nervous and some war hawks have even called for invasion in the Baltic States in case of US strike on Syria. While we may view these as empty threats its clear that Russia is no longer a stable neighbor. For Latvia the Putin regime is more desirable as long its controls its military rhetoric and economy to stable level. However, Latvia must also keep off the “soft power” this regime makes.  Awareness of danger posed by authoritarian neo-soviet thinking that Moscow tries to import even in the rooms of the parliament must be eminent. The worst case scenario the Russian regime drift to extreme military policy or the complete civil disorder is the main reason why Latvia and other NATO states should do everything to improve their security.

Comments Off on Latvia and the NATO

Filed under Historical Articles