Analytics for NATO: between the “attack Putin” and “Putin will never dare”

Аналитика для НАТО: между "Путин нападет" и "Путин никогда не посмеет"

© RIA Novosti / Alexei vitvitskiy. Logo of NATO in Brussels. Archive photo
The Jamestown Foundation published an analytical report of the senior scientific employee of the organization Richard hooker “How to defend the Baltic States?” has caused many jokes in Russia. I gave a reason in the first place described by the author of the scenario of the loss of Moscow the Kaliningrad region in the event of a military confrontation with NATO.However, the sharpening of wit in this case not quite pertinent, because the document represents not defeated fantasy divan expert. Essentially, it is a very depressing — for the Alliance — look into the future of NATO in the Baltic region.Dr. Richard D. hooker, Jr. is a graduate of the Military Academy of West point, and thirty years, having served in the Armed forces of the United States. Participated in military operations in Grenada, Somalia, Rwanda, Bosnia, Iraq, Afghanistan, and commanded a parachute brigade in Baghdad in 2005.Upon completion of military service, he switched to academic, teaching and expert work. Hooker, PhD in the field of international relations, Professor, Department of Theodore Roosevelt on issues of national security at the national defense University. The University is preparing a “tadpoles” — analysts, strategists and so on for the Pentagon. In the record of the expert — a long list of important posts in the state system of the United States (including the White house) and in NATO structures.His report gives a concise, but sufficiently detailed overview of the military-political situation in the Baltic region — both internationally and within specific countries. Frankly the picture is not rosy for the NATO’s: the absolute military dominance of Russia in the region is complemented by a disregard for “the security of the three Baltic republics,” the leading partners of the Alliance and their implicit confidence that in fact no danger from Moscow.Hooker tries to prove the fundamental infidelity of the last and that, “maybe it’s time to reconsider the approach “Putin will never dare”. However, the maximum it can do is pulling the ears of the classic Scarecrow: about the statements of the Kremlin on the right to protect the Russian-speaking population, “the Russian aggression in Chechnya, Georgia, the Donbass, the Crimea and Syria” and so on.By the way, the author would have the sense not to bother with this issue. Military analyst is entitled — and even obliged — to provide scripts for any, even the most fantastic of events, including the landing of the aliens and zombie Apocalypse. In the end, hypothetical aggression of Moscow against the Baltic States definitely is somewhere higher up in the ranking of probability.The military component of the report much more interesting. The author gives specific recommendations to guide countries in the region, as well as the Pentagon and NATO’s actions in the moment to reduce the threat, and in the case of the Russian attack. And the tone of the text is frankly alarming, as almost any aspect of a hooker fixes the problems and shortcomings of the Alliance: from the low readiness to inadequate coherence partners, right down to the lack of political cohesion. In fact, the only bright spot in the overall hopelessness for him in favor of Poland, is real and actively pumping the military muscles in recent years.By the way, written in the dry language of the balance of forces, transfer of specific military units and recommended measures, the report creates a much more intelligible way the loss of NATO capabilities and positions than all the hysterical cries of “Putin will attack” together.Even offer the hooker scenario repel Russian aggression through the capture of the Kaliningrad region is replete with numerous terms and conditions that you must follow to have a chance at success.According to him, this requires that NATO forces have overcome the air defense system in Kaliningrad in two weeks, the operational power lasted until the arrival of reinforcements 30 days, and that the reinforcement was the same in these terms. How right the author points out, “today, NATO is not ready to perform any of these tasks.”A separate list are political goals such as to coerce China to pressure on Moscow. Is it realistic — the subject of a separate discussion.Although the confidence of a hooker that Moscow in case of an attack on the Russian exclave will not resort to nuclear weapons, of course, considerably reduces the alarmist thrust of the document. A justification that the escalation of the conflict “would entail massive destruction and civilian casualties, will bring together NATO and even more direct international public opinion against Russia,” seems all the more unconvincing. But understandable.The recognition that the Kremlin in the event of a NATO attack on any region of the country will not hesitate to press the red button indicates the futility of any action, including the report. Of course, Richard hooker, could not write like that.After all, the objective of the document “How to defend the Baltic States?” is to help the Pentagon and NATO to dislodge additional funding from our own and other governments, not to prove the complete futility of it.Irina Alksnis

Share Button