by Dr. Jiri and Leni Valenta
Recognizing that Russia does have a military and strategic advantage in the Baltics comparative to NATO, the present inquiry focuses primarily on divining aspects of strategic importance to NATO.
Landing Craft, Air Cushion 87 departs the
well deck of the San Antonio-class
amphibious transport dock ship USS
Arlington (LPD 24) during a beach landing
in Ventspils, Latvia, as part
of exercise BALTOPS 2017; U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication
Specialist 3rd Class Ford Williams via Wikimedia Commons
Executive Summary:
At a time when news reports often have as much
Shakespearean drama as fiction, General Sir Richard Shirreff, a former
NATO deputy supreme commander of Europe, has created fiction he believes
could become news. In his novel, 2017 War with Russia, he anticipates a
2017 Russian invasion of the Baltics through Latvia. Much like Georgian
provinces South Ossetia and Abkhazia, invaded by Russia in 2008, Latvia
is a state with a high minority of Russian speakers – 34%. The Crimea
Russia also invaded in 2014, also have large Russian minorities.
Shirreff posits the Russian president then tries to blackmail NATO by
threatening a nuclear response to any defense. A Russo-NATO war follows
which assumes a nuclear face.
However, in another scenario, retired U.S.
general, Jack Keane, former vice chief of staff of the U.S. Army posits
the Russians would invade not Latvia, but Lithuania, a state with only a
9% Russian population from the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad.
Yet a third case for war in the Baltics, was
provided in 2013 by a Russian analyst, Mikhail Aleksandrov, of the
Commonwealth of Independent States [CIS] Institute in Moscow. He linked
it to the conflict in Syria. On August 27, 2013, President Barack Obama
was seriously contemplating a missile strike on Syria to punish its
dictator, Bashar al-Assad, for using sarin gas on civilians during the
country’s civil war. His “red line” against chemical WMD having been
crossed, Obama sent four destroyers to the Syrian shores ready to carry
out an attack.
With Russian help, the strike was ultimately
forestalled by diplomatic measures. But on August 26, 2013, as Russia
and Iran were preparing to defend Assad, Aleksandrov offered some advice
to Putin. “In the case of a NATO attack on Syria, Russia should deploy
its forces where we have clear strategic advantage, that [is] in the
Baltics.”
Recognizing that Russia does have a military and
strategic advantage in the Baltics comparative to NATO, the present
inquiry focuses primarily on divining aspects of strategic importance to
NATO. We also look at Putin’s possible intentions in the Baltics.
Because nations have complex histories that mold or mar them, what
geopolitical lessons and historical lessons can we draw from Russia’s
previous military interventions? Has the historical relationship of
Russia with the Baltic states been conditioned by a clash of
civilizations as claimed by some Baltic thinkers? If so, how does this
factor into the present tensions? What role does the sizable minority of
Russians in the Baltic states play in the Kremlin’s policy-making? How
can strategic military savvy and diplomacy aid in preventing the
escalation of present tensions in the Baltics into full-scale war?
Source: https://besacenter.org/mideast-security-and-policy-studies/russia-baltics-nato/
Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment