NATO mimics weakness to prepare for war with Russia

“This is evidence of the direct preparation of NATO countries for a possible war with Russia.” With these words, military experts assess the preparations that NATO is actively pursuing in Europe. The Alliance justifies this by the inability to quickly move troops to protect the Baltic states – but does not take into account one extremely important nuance.

US experts concluded that the NATO command will not have time to transfer troops to the east in the event of a conflict with Russia. The transfer of troops is hampered by a number of logistical problems and bureaucracy, the Washington Post wrote. This was demonstrated by the results of military exercises. In addition, constant problems arose in the movement of American troops across Europe.

Roads in Europe are poorly adapted for the transfer of troops and military equipment. Tractors with armored vehicles will inevitably have to travel on roads that have one strip in each direction, often very narrow and even without separation markings. And military columns can easily trudge at a low speed for some truck or tractor, the American newspaper points out. At the same time, some roads, as well as many bridges, will not be able to withstand heavy armored vehicles at all.

As for the railways, the fact that the railways in the Baltic states are wider than in the rest of Europe, is a great delay, because of this it is necessary either to replace the wheeled cart, or to unload the equipment and re-load it to another structure. And this and that takes a lot of time.

The question arises, why two more ways of transferring troops – sea and air – are not indicated. “Sea transport is one of the main methods of delivery, speaking of the Baltic countries. But it delivers troops and equipment to the ports, and it is necessary to transport them from the ports to the destination areas on the same railways and highways, “the Colonel Viktor Murakhovsky, a member of the expert council of the Collegium of the Military-Industrial Commission under the government, told.

“In the air, only personnel and light equipment can be transferred in small numbers. In addition, they know that our air defense systems are deployed in the Kaliningrad region, “the expert said regarding air transportation. Murakhovsky believes that in the event of a conflict, this will not allow the use of an air bridge, and the main load will lie on sea and rail transport.

The Washington Post also noted that the movement of armored vehicles across Europe is accompanied by a huge number of bureaucratic procedures. In Germany, for example, armored vehicles are only allowed to travel on weekdays, and Sweden, which is not part of NATO, but works closely with the bloc, requires notification three weeks before the transfer through its territory. For example, when the US military transported Stryker armored personnel carriers across Europe last year, Hungarian border guards forced them to reinforce them with chains, although before that the mount was approved by their Romanian counterparts. It took even more time because the receiving inspector left for the weekend and returned in a couple of days.

“If you can not get in 45 days, then you’re already late for the war,

– said WP Major General Stephen Shapiro, responsible for the movement of US troops in Europe. He noted that he had to fill 17 documents in order to transfer troops from Germany to Poland.

Senior Vice President of the PIR Center, Lieutenant-General Yevgeny Buzhinsky, speaking of bureaucratic obstacles to the movement of NATO troops, said: “They are not far from the truth, this is absolutely accurate and just.”

“This is a huge bureaucratic structure, and therefore they can create the forces of fast, super-fast and even super-fast response and deployment. But until some kind of consensus decision is taken, the troops will not be able to move and will not be able to use anything, “he explained to the newspaper VIEW. “Philip Breedlaw somehow tried to get the right that the commander of the Allied Armed Forces in Europe in his theater of operations independently disposed of the rapid reaction forces, but he was denied this – added Buzhinsky. – And they have a lot of logistics problems. When there was a cold war, they had more order: roads are marked, bridges are adapted. Then in the 90’s everything fell into decay.”

The Americans themselves in this connection note that NATO has only small forces deployed in the member countries that share a border with Russia. And in this regard, it is expected that at the summit in Brussels, NATO leaders will approve plans to increase the number of rapid reaction forces. At present, they number 5,000 troops, which can be used within 10 days. It is also planned to expand their capabilities so that they can transfer 30,000 people within 30 days.

Murakhovsky specified that such a program of the NATO rapid reaction forces “30-30-30” and assumes the possibility of deployment in for 30 days in the Baltic states 30 battalion tactical groups, 30 air squadrons and 30 warships of high readiness. Then, he added, deployed first-use connections within 60 days and connections of the second stage – for 90 days. Under these forces and means, it is necessary to modernize the infrastructure, which they are engaged in. “There is a problem with logistics. But at the same time, the Americans are artificially fueling the situation in order to encourage their European allies to transfer more significant military forces to the borders of Russia, “correspondent of the Academy of Military Sciences Alexander Bartosh told the newspaper VZGLYAD. In addition, the Americans are already in good time based in Europe heavy armored vehicles: tanks, armored personnel carriers and heavy artillery, he said. Also, attempts are made to eliminate organizational and administrative obstacles for the transfer of troops across several European states. “They are engaged in the creation of a” military Schengen “, when all cargo and machinery will receive a green light when traveling from the ports of France, Germany, Poland in the direction of Russian borders. This is evidence of the direct preparation of NATO countries for a possible war with Russia. This is how I regard it, “said Bartosh. Murakhovsky believes that it’s not just a matter of wanting to build up the very group of troops near Russian borders. “This is again the obmusolivanie topic of allocating funds for the modernization of infrastructure and operational training of the theater of operations in the Baltic countries and Poland,” – said the source.

He recalled that such a program exists for a long time and according to it, not only railways and bridges are modernized and expanded, but also ports, airfields, communication centers, logistics facilities and other infrastructure in the respective countries. On this topic, the scope of the exercises “West-2017” is far from the Soviet counterparts. NATO is preparing for battles with the Russian army right at our borders. Why should the US marines train in Norway in the presence of Alaska? In case of conflict, the troops will have to go hundreds of kilometers, and delays due to the bureaucrat and poor planning and decaying infrastructure may allow Russia, which has no problems with the movement of troops on its own territory, to quickly seize the Baltic States, noted Washington Post. So, the publication referring to military experts suggests that the Russian Armed Forces are able to take Riga in less than 60 hours. That’s only a nuance in that Russia is not going to attack the Baltic countries, as has been repeatedly stated. “Do you believe that there will be a conflict between Russia and NATO? I do not believe. And if there is, then with mutual destruction, “said Evgeny Buzhinsky.

President Vladimir Putin even called such statements “complete nonsense”: “But do you really think that we are going to conquer the Baltic region using nuclear weapons, or what? No less important is the fact that, only according to open data, Russia repeatedly loses in relation to the military forces of NATO, located in Europe. The Russian army is at times weaker both in terms of numbers and in armaments. And this if you do not take into account the American troops stationed in the North American continent, which in the event of a conflict will immediately begin the transfer to Europe. Between NATO and Russia, conditional parity remains only in nuclear weapons.