The old idea that a relatively thin NATO “tripwire” along parts of the alliance’s eastern flank would be enough to deter Russian aggression was not, in all probability, wrong, but, since the Russian attack on Ukraine, there has been growing unease in the Baltic states that, if the tripwire were to be snapped, the fallback plan — rescue within a few weeks — would be too late to save them from a terrible fate. Places such as Bucha, near Kyiv, were liberated from Russian occupation within a few weeks, but the intervening period saw widespread destruction and mass murder.
“If you compare the size of Ukraine and the Baltic countries, then it would mean a complete destruction of our countries, of our culture,” [Estonian prime minister] Kallas said. “Those of you who have been to Tallinn and know our Old Town and the centuries of history and culture that is here, that would all be wiped off from the map, including our people, our nation.”
Under the circumstances, it is unsurprising that the Baltic trio (as well as other eastern European NATO members) wanted to move from reliance on the tripwire to a policy of more substantial “forward defense.”
This message appears to have gotten through. Thus the U.K., which is the “lead” NATO ally in Estonia, will be increasing its forces in the country, and it is far from being the only NATO member to be sending more troops to eastern Europe.
Rose Gottemoeller, former deputy secretary-general of Nato, said the alliance had agreed to a “big renewal of its readiness to fight, if need be”.
“There needs to be a more efficient and effective way of deterring Russia and that means being able and ready to defend territory from the outset.”
Pre-positioning greater combat forces is part of the answer. The US said it would send a further 5,000 troops to Romania and the UK 1,000 to Estonia. But the more significant change, Gottemoeller said, was Nato’s commitment to vastly increase the number of rapidly deployable troops, underpinned by planning processes to ensure that each country’s forces were sent to the right place and assigned the right task.
A planned increase to 300,000 troops trained and prepared to respond to an attack within 30 days represents a return to the alliance’s cold war doctrine, where its military commanders would have detailed plans for defending against attacks on specific territories with specific troops and weapons. A new US army corps headquarters permanently stationed in Poland will support the readiness effort, which is set to be implemented next year after Nato collates enough troop pledges from allies.
The U.S., in its plan announced Wednesday, will add to the 100,000 troops it now has in Europe and deploy more military equipment to NATO allies. The additions include rotational deployments to Romania and the Baltic region, and a permanent Army headquarters base and other units in Poland, the White House said. Until now, the U.S. and other allies have only rotated troops in and out of NATO countries once under Soviet domination, not permanently located them there . . .
Russia, predictably enough, was not thrilled by this development.
The WSJ:
In response to the U.S. moves, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said that Moscow would take “compensatory measures.”
“I think those who propose such decisions are under the illusion that they will be able to intimidate Russia and somehow restrain it. They won’t succeed,” Mr. Ryabkov said Wednesday in comments carried by Russian state news agency RIA Novosti.
Putin’s reaction to the possibility that Sweden and Finland will join NATO has, for the most part, been relatively low-key. His subordinates are becoming noisier.
Russian officials . . . reacted angrily to Nato’s offer of membership to Finland and Sweden, calling it a “destabilising” effort that will increase tensions in the region.
“We condemn the irresponsible course of the North Atlantic Alliance that is ruining the European architecture, or what’s left of it,” Russian deputy foreign minister Sergei Ryabkov told reporters on Wednesday.
“I have a great deal of doubt as to whether the upcoming period will be calm for our north European neighbours,” he added.
Meanwhile, there are signs that the EU might be stepping in to ease tensions created by the (very partial) Lithuanian “blockade” of Russia’s Kaliningrad exclave. Vilnius is attempting to enforce EU sanctions restricting what can be imported into Russia, but those sanctions didn’t take account of the complications caused by their application to the transfer of goods from Russia to a Russian exclave cut off from the country’s “mainland.”
Trade through Lithuania to the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad could return to normal within days, two sources familiar with the matter said, as European officials edge towards a compromise deal with the Baltic state to defuse a row with Moscow.
Kaliningrad, which is bordered by European Union states and relies on railways and roads through Lithuania for most goods, has been cut off from some freight transport from mainland Russia since June 17 under sanctions imposed by Brussels . . .