We will rise from our knees

NATO changes its nuclear strategy, to respond the Russian Avangard and Poseidon

NATO adopted a new military concept because of the “Russian threat”. About this in an interview with the German weekly newspaper Welt am Sonntag told the secretary general of the alliance Jens Stoltenberg.

 

– This is a full readiness for defense and the ability to ensure stability in the future. Sometimes it requires a new military concept, – he said.

 

According to him, NATO military experts adopted a new strategy last week. He called this step a response to the nuclear threat to the West that is allegedly coming from Russia, which is constantly growing.

 

The NATO Secretary General explained that since 2014, a “new security situation” has developed, new challenges have arisen in the east and in the south of Europe. He also noted that the strength of the alliance lies in the ability to change when necessary.

 

What could be the new concept, and why is it accepted now, when the world is actually in a state of new cold war for the sixth year?

 

According to the professor of Moscow State University. Doctor of Political Sciences Andrei Manoilo, Stoltenberg’s statement means that now NATO will adopt a new strategic concept of its existence and development, justifying the unjustified expansion of the alliance, increasing its offensive military power and the emergence of new vectors aimed at the Arctic, Ukraine and Georgia, etc.

 

  • The formal reason – the alliance must respond to new types of weapons declared by Russia (on Poseidons, Avangardes, Sarmatians, etc.) on its increased military power and therefore strengthen and strengthen its power. How to strengthen? First of all, in an extensive way: involving new members into the bloc, establishing control over new territories, urgently advancing into the Arctic, building up weapons and personnel. And this, in turn, new budgets, expenses, and extortion from the parties involved are colossal money that we already have to “cut” (creatively master).

 

– What are the possible changes in the NATO nuclear strategy? How will it be different from the previous one?

– The general principle is this: Russia threatens us with new types of weapons, and we are defenseless before it. It is urgent to build something in response, otherwise – “save yourself who can!”

 

I think the NATO strategy will provide, first of all, an asymmetrical response: the threats from Poseidon and Avangard will be counterbalanced by a massive invasion of the Arctic, the threats from Russia’s participation in Venezuela’s affairs – an invasion of Africa (there is already a serious military the presence of various NATO countries, including Germany – in Mali, Algeria and even in Lebanon). An intensified development of logistics will begin – the rapid transfer of large military units to the threatened areas (which, by the way, NATO is now intensively engaged in). And, of course, NATO will begin to fend off the “nuclear threat” of Russia with medium- and short-range missiles, creating bridgeheads in “vassal” territories (Georgia, Ukraine, the Baltic States) and increasing the total number of non-nuclear units.

– Is the nuclear potential of Russia a threat to NATO? And the same Chinese?

 

  • No, the threat from the nuclear potential of Russia is imaginary. But the Western world is so much intimidated by the Russian threat that it will willingly believe everything Stoltenberg will say. And will give the last money in order for the NATO generals to live well. As for China, it seems that only the US is concerned about its tactical nuclear potential. And in many respects it is because Russia is a promoted “brand”, and Europeans know China mainly on consumer goods and consumer electronics.

 

– Stoltenberg noted that the strength of the alliance lies precisely in the fact that it can “change” if necessary. Will it be able to change in any way? Or is it a rant? And why should it change at all if the bloc was created as an instrument of struggle with Russia and now has returned to the roots?

 

  • Stoltenberg had in mind that it was now that such a need for change arose due to the new threat from Russia.

Like, if it were not for this threat, NATO would have remained the same. That is, Stoltenberg hints that the expansion and strengthening of NATO is a forced measure, and is being forced by the “evil Russians” to do it. But at the same time, NATO is able to reorganize, “rise from its knees”, to which Putin made him fall – the alliance will “rise” and regain pride and dignity lost under pressure from Russia.

  • We will be able to do this! Stoltenberg says, counting in his mind the profit from new injections into the alliance. And this has its own mermy logic.

– How to respond to Russia? And is it worth it?

– A further increase in NATO aggressiveness is, in principle, expected and predictable. In these conditions, Russia is left to do only one thing – to strengthen its defense capability. The specificity of today’s moment is such that the world in which we live is now very similar to the USSR, which created its nuclear shield: if we manage to create our own shield from Poseidon, Sarmat and Avant-garde, NATO will not risk touching us and the world will rescued from the threat of slipping into a new global conflict.

 

  • Yes, indeed, the current statement by Stoltenberg is another reason to strengthen the military presence in Europe and a new rationale for allocating US defense money, which will successfully master them to fight against a fictional enemy, – continues political analyst Ivan Lysan.

– In principle, there is nothing new: now China turns out to be in a similar situation, only if the economic instruments of countering Russia for the most part have already lost their effectiveness, then economic restrictions are still working against China. Then, when they stop working, the United States will move on to the unwinding of the “Chinese threat” topic.

– Why now? What are the prerequisites for this?

– Such programs are accepted in advance and some time are written and accepted. Therefore, in the time of their adoption there is nothing special – it just happened. And one premise is the US desire to maintain its dominance in the world, which has significantly weakened due to the economic degradation of the United States and the strengthening of other powers.

– What are the possible changes in the NATO nuclear strategy?

  • I believe it will be a matter of strengthening the missile defense segment in Romania, deploying cruise missiles in Europe and, in the medium term, militarization of space with the deployment of hypersonic missiles (both space and hypersound will take time and money).

– For the new concept, of course, are the United States. And what is the attitude of the European NATO allies?

– Eastern Europe will support, Poland, in particular, will accept everything with a bang, the Baltic States and Romania will not even be asked. But the opinion of Germany and France is not interested in Washington – it’s not for nothing that the United States seriously decided to impose sanctions on Nord Stream-2 – they are ready to cool relations with the EU.

– How should Russia answer to all this?

– Russia needs to meet the restructuring of the economic model. Those who have a greater margin of safety in the economy, the political system and a higher degree of social optimism in society will survive. That’s what you need to follow. And the military will do their work.