As Russia re-arms, this is the best response NATO has to offer?
From Defense News:
Norway’s ambition of persuading NATO to establish a strong direct military presence in the Arctic High North — and as a strategic counterweight to Russia’s intensifying rearming programs in the region — suffered a setback after the leader of NATO said the alliance has no plans to expand its role there.
Russia’s multibillion-dollar rearming of its northern and eastern naval, air and land combat capabilities has raised the ire of its Nordic neighbors in recent weeks.
On March 30, Russian fighter jets and bombers staged a large-scale, Cold War-type simulated bomb-run attack on military and industrial targets on the Swedish mainland. That produced a highly critical riposte in political quarters in Sweden after it emerged that the Swedish Air Force (SAF) had no capacity on that night to scramble JAS Gripen fighter jets to deal with the simulated threat.
Much to Sweden’s embarrassment, the immediate threat was handled by Danish F-16s operating from NATO’s Baltic air policing station at Siauliai in Lithuania.
Although NATO is aware of increasing concerns among Nordic and Baltic nations about Russia’s military rebuilding programs, there will be no major change in the alliance’s strategic position in the High North, NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said.
“At this present time, NATO has no intention of raising its presence and activities in the High North,” he said.
Tensions in the region, and the potential for disputes over sovereign rights to the region’s estimated vast oil and natural gas resources, could be best handled through dialogue, the NATO chief said.
“The Arctic is a harsh environment. It rewards cooperation, not confrontation,” Rasmussen said. “I trust we’ll continue to see cooperation.”
When has Russia ever responded to anything other than superior force?
6 thoughts on “As Russia Re-Arms in the North, NATO Does Nothing”
Sorry Alphonse. i have to 100% disagree with you. I only wish bush had gone way further. Russia was then, and is today America’s number one enemy. Add their allies China and Iran into the mix, and an appeaser (at best) in the White House, and you have a major disaster looming.
Trevor, Sorry I have to 100% disagree with you, nobody ever looks at the big picture, go back thru history especially the last few 100 years, it all points to one person who controls everything in the world and that person is the JESUIT GENERAL (aka the Black Pope) and who has been their bankers since 1823? these same people the Power Of The Rothschild State: The Hijacked Name Of Jew By The Khazar Banking Cartel.
Trevor, we all know what the coming attack on Iran is all about you need to go to this site Intel From Israel On What’s Getting Set To Happen In The Middle East to see!
You are certainly far from alone in your take on Russia. Perhaps we can treat the subject more thoroughly another day. Thank you for the reply.
This is truly a case of a problem that we created-
I have always held that, out of all of GW Bush’s decisions, his alienation of Russia was by far his worst and most short-sighted move. The Russian State, having stabilized after eight years of post-Soviet Union rebuilding, would have been the perfect partner in business and security. Our oil, gas, and mineral extraction interests, for one example, could have undertaken projects with Russian companies that would have benefited both nations. Instead of basing our military in Kyrgyzstan and other nations of dubious loyalty, we could have had the chance of operating in conjunction with Russian forces. What Russian got instead was an enlarged NATO that recruited former Warsaw Pact nations and brought a potential threat right to their doorstep. As Charles XII of Sweden, Napoleon Bonaparte, and Hitler learned, the Russians do not look favorably on invaders (or potential ones) from their Western borders.
The US had a grand opportunity for a easy win-win relationship with Russia. I can’t even begin to imagine the range and scale of business partnerships that could have been made. We could have had a ready and able partner to balance against the military and economic growth with China. Russia’s strategic location would have been ideal for coordinating anti-terror operations instead of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, etc. Unlike Eastern or Muslim-majority nations, they think and act more like we do. They also have a long tradition of an Apostolic Christianity.
Instead, we took advantage of their economic turmoil and trouble with Chechnya, rounded up their old Warsaw Pact satellites and former USSR countries, and brought them either into NATO or trained and supplied them in an manner that could be seen as provocative or threatening to Russia. We also created another missile threat for them. Those missiles, if they were only intended for defense against Iran, could have been deployed in a manner that did not make the Russians feel as if they were being targeted and pushed into a corner.
-Now, having regained their footing, they are letting us know that the Bear was not quite dead.
Another head in the sand Chamberlain.