Cold War, The Reimagined Series

[bd1]

besides the french once already did cut off israeli mirage-v and missile boats, and argentine during falkland war

[swerve]

Haven't they refused to upgrade Taiwan's Mirage 2000s?

[NickM]

 

You mean if French act like US (Pakistani F-16s) or Russia (Iranian S-300s), nobody will buy from them any more? Last I checked, US and Russia were #1 and #2 in arms exports.

 

Izzat dollar value or 'piece work'? US material, being overly complex as it often is, usually costs much more that Russian Material.

[Gregory]

 

You mean if French act like US (Pakistani F-16s) or Russia (Iranian S-300s), nobody will buy from them any more? Last I checked, US and Russia were #1 and #2 in arms exports.

Izzat dollar value or 'piece work'? US material, being overly complex as it often is, usually costs much more that Russian Material.

 

How would you compare "piece work", precisely? I can just imagine - "2 Oliver Hazard Perry frigates are equal to a 30 T-90 tanks? Impossible! The air conditioning in OHP is far superior to air conditioning in T-90, therefore each OHP is equal to at least 25 T-90s."

Edited September 6, 2014 by Gregory

[BansheeOne]

I've been thinking around the East European basing stipulations of the NATO-Russia Founding Act again.

 

[...]

 

NATO and Russia have clarified their intentions with regard to their conventional force postures in Europe's new security environment and are prepared to consult on the evolution of these postures in the framework of the Permanent Joint Council.

 

NATO reiterates that in the current and foreseeable security environment, the Alliance will carry out its collective defence and other missions by ensuring the necessary interoperability, integration, and capability for reinforcement rather than by additional permanent stationing of substantial combat forces. Accordingly, it will have to rely on adequate infrastructure commensurate with the above tasks. In this context, reinforcement may take place, when necessary, in the event of defence against a threat of aggression and missions in support of peace consistent with the United Nations Charter and the OSCE governing principles, as well as for exercises consistent with the adapted CFE Treaty, the provisions of the Vienna Document 1994 and mutually agreed transparency measures. Russia will exercise similar restraint in its conventional force deployments in Europe.

 

[...]

 

http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_25468.htm

 

Once more I come down to what "additional" means. We have previously discussed on the main Ukraine thread that permanently basing "substantial"* Western troops on the territory of the new members would certainly violate the spirit if not the letter of the agreement even if actual force levels in the east had dropped since 1997. What I didn't consider then is what if you based Western troops in exchange for local ones, purely for the previously elaborated political tripwire function?

 

Case in point, the early plans for a German-Polish cooperation scheme similar to the OPCON assignment of NL 11 Airmobile Brigade to GE Division Schnelle Kräfte and, in future, NL 43 Mechanized Brigade to GE 1st Panzer Division. I have argued before this gets 1st Panzer an excess of brigades, leaving one for assignment to a Polish Division. Now usually units just stay where they are in such undertakings, but theoretically you could base it in Poland and transfer a Polish brigade west in exchange, therefore leaving overall troop levels the same.

 

Most advantageous would be to base the Poles just across the border in East Germany, but I guess technically this also counts as an "eastern" area; certainly it was referred to as such in the famous promise that NATO would "move not a centimeter to the east" during the negotiations on German re-unification which resulted in no NATO installation there to this day (except the SALIS strategic airlift base in Leipzig, which is a civilian contractor to NAMSA on behalf of various European nations including Finland and Sweden plus Canada, funnily enough run by a Russian-Ukrainian consortium).

 

Of course I believe that at the next ostentative Russian move, like taking Mariupol, the Founding Act is toast anyway.

 

* I said on that occasion that "substantial" is widely held to be at least brigade strength in NATO circles. Former Chairman of the NATO Military Committee General Klaus Nauman defined the term as "anything above a division" at the time of the agreement, which is the prefered interpretation by Poland and the Baltic States for obvious reasons.

Edited September 6, 2014 by BansheeOne

[urbanoid]

'current and foreseeable security environment' - a few things changed, didn't they?

 

Also IIRC Russia suspended the CFE in 2008 or so.

[Gregory]

At this point, the NATO-Russia act is just a fig leaf - the western half of EU is holding on to it to preserve the fiction that "Еverything is fine! Everything is fine!". I suppose it could also be used as a token in the "sanction escalation ladder".

[Adam Peter]

Also IIRC Russia suspended the CFE in 2008 or so.

 

Yes, they did. On a side note, how a temporary base mentioned in the article would look like? Tents?

[Adam Peter]

Poipulated with things like this?

[BansheeOne]

At any rate Lithuania received 361 M113A1/2G and 42 M1064 mortar carriers from Germany between 2000 and 2006, some as spares.

 

[...]

 

They have been looking for a replacement to the M113, but seem to not even have made their minds up yet whether it should be wheeled or tracked. I guess the Rosomak would be a good choice for them to achieve commonality with their immediate Polish neighbors, though there is a lot to be said for joint procurement of all three Baltic nations.

 

Update: Lithuania seeks new armoured vehicles

Nicholas de Larrinaga, London - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly

24 July 2014

 

Lithuania is looking to buy wheeled infantry fighting vehicles (IFVs), the Ministry of Defence (MoD) revealed on 21 July.

 

The new vehicles are intended to replace the country's existing fleet of 300 M113 tracked armoured personnel carriers (APCs), according to the MoD.

 

However, the new vehicles are intended to not just fulfil an APC role, but to be capable of engaging both armour and personnel. For this the IFVs are to feature a stabilised automatic cannon no smaller than 25 mm as its primary armament, a coaxial armament no smaller than 7.62 mm, while the turret should be capable of integrating anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs), the request for information (RfI) from the Lithuanian MoD states.

 

Explaining the decision to opt for a wheeled IFV, Brigadier General Gintautas Zenkevicius, Director General of Capability and Armament at the Lithuanian MoD told IHS Jane's on 25 July that: "Deployability, speed manoeuvrability, affordability and sustainability were major factors that were considered. To be ready for today's and tomorrow's mission spectrum in country and outside its borders these qualities are essential. Wheeled vehicle provides us with this flexibility."

 

The MoD has issued the RfI to nine different prospective IFV suppliers to seek information on the family of 8x8 vehicles that they might be able to offer. The company's contracted are: France's Nexter Systems, Finland's Patria, Germany's Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW), Israel's Elbit Systems, Italy's Iveco, Poland's Wojskowe Zaklady Mechaniczne (WZM), Switzerland's General Dynamics European Land Systems - MOWAG, and Turkish firms FNSS Savunma Sistemleri and Otokar.

 

The Lithuanian programme isn't limited to these suppliers however, with Gen Zenkevicius stating that: "With this RfI Lithuania is conducting market research to access availability of desired IFV. At this stage the Lithuanian MoD is ready to consider all offers that meet criteria specified in the RfI."

 

Interested suppliers are required to reply by mid-October the MoD stated, adding that it hoped to sign a contract for the vehicles in 2015.

 

The new vehicles are intended to initially equip two mechanised infantry battalions. The purchase of new armoured fighting vehicles forms part of Lithuania's new defence development programme covering 2014 to 2023.

 

The IFVs are requested to feature a three man crew, and to be able of accommodating eight fully equipped dismounts. No maximum or minimum weight for the vehicle has been specified in the RfI, while an amphibious capability is understood to not be a priority requirement for Lithuania.

 

http://www.janes.com/article/41216/update-lithuania-seeks-new-armoured-vehicles

[BLAH]

Can Germany make Tiger-III now?

[BansheeOne]

Todays Swedish defense politics is both fun and depressing to watch, with a general election coming up and the Russians reemerging as the great boogeyman. We have a room full of elephants and a bunch of politicians tap dancing around terrified that they might bump into one of them.

 

What will be the likely impact of yesterday's election outcome?

[wendist]

 

Todays Swedish defense politics is both fun and depressing to watch, with a general election coming up and the Russians reemerging as the great boogeyman. We have a room full of elephants and a bunch of politicians tap dancing around terrified that they might bump into one of them.

 

What will be the likely impact of yesterday's election outcome?

 

You mean in relation to the new cold war? Not much I think. First of all Sweden usually reacts rather than acts in this kind of situations so it´s Putin that create the momentum and decide where this is going.

The ruling right-wing coalition has been defeated, that much is clear, and the Social Democrats will be asked to form a new government. Right now they are in negotiations with the Greens but that will at best create a rather weak government that will rely on the support of other parties to get a majority in parliament. That support may have to come from some of the small centre-right parties which could open up to some really interesting constellations.

The Social Democrat leader Stefan Löfven has made two announcements so far that is interesting.

He has made clear that the communists will not be part of any government coalition with the Social Democrats. That is pretty much post-war SOP for the Social Democrats, they have never allowed the communists to be part of any government even if they have needed the support of the communists in parliament.

He has also stated that he is prepared to cooperate with the non-socialist parties on defense issues and they in turn have declared themselves willing to do business with the Social Democrats.

The Greens and the communists both want to slash the defense budget so the only way for the Social Democrats to get parliament approval for their defense proposals is to turn to the opposition and the only way for the opposition parties to prevent the Greens and communists from destroying Sweden´s armed forces is to cooperate with the Social Democrats.

It used to be that the non-socialist parties, particularly the Conservatives, were more inclined to give money to defense than the left but during the eight years of Conservative rule their government has proven to be just as stingy with money as the socialists ever where. Much to the disappointment of anyone who cares about the future of Sweden´s armed forces.

In that respect I fear it will be business as usual for the next four years, unless of course old Putin scare us into action.

[BansheeOne]

Thanks.

 

Poland to create joint military unit with Lithuania and Ukraine

 

WARSAW (Reuters) - Poland will create a joint military unit with Lithuania and Ukraine, with its command headquarters in the eastern Polish city of Lublin, the Polish president's office said on Thursday.

 

A Polish defense ministry spokesman told Reuters that the planned brigade will comprise of Ukrainian, Lithuanian and Polish soldiers who will be located in their home countries, while it will be commanded from Lublin.

 

He said the aim of the project is to create a unit that could take part in peacekeeping operations, as well as creating the basis to build a NATO battle group should a decision be taken to do that in the future.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/poland-create-joint-military-unit-lithuania-ukraine-153111757.html

 

I found this is actually no new project, probably just kicked into implementation by recent events.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithuanian%E2%80%93Polish%E2%80%93Ukrainian_Brigade

[wendist]

I´m too old for this déjà vu shit but here we go again.

http://www.thelocal.se/20141017/sweden-scrambles-against-foreign-activity-off-stockholm

[BansheeOne]

Lithuanian and allied forces are getting ready for international Exercise Iron Sword 2014

 

2014-10-14

International command post exercise (CPX) involving over 300 soldiers from 7 countries - the Czech Republic, U.S.A., Canada, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Hungary and Germany - is held at the General Adolfas Ramanauskas Warfare Training Centre in Nemenčinė on October 13 through 16 ahead of the international Exercise Iron Sword 2014 that will take place in Lithuania in November.

[...]

According to the Lithuanian officer, the CPX participants will plan and prepare all the military actions for different phases of the international exercise so that the participants of Iron Sword 2014 know what their tasks and objectives are precisely in November. "Lithuanian soldiers have attended numerous combined exercises and have been deployed to multinational operations in Iraq and Afghanistan with some of the allies, so we are perfectly aware of their actions, tactics and procedures. However, there will be participants in November from the allies with whom we have little or no cooperation experience, for example, military personnel of Luxembourg," Maj M. Juozaitis commented on the challenges likely to be presented by the exercise.

Exercise Iron Sword 2014 held in Lithuania for the first time is organised by the Lithuanian Land Force. The main training objectives of the exercise will focus on interoperability and coordination of combined allied units, and their readiness to complete defensive, offensive and stabilisation operations. The exercise is planned to involve over 2 thousand participants from 9 NATO allies - the Czech Republic, Estonia, U.S.A., UK, Canada, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Hungary and Germany.

The multinational Exercise Iron Sword 2014 will also certify contingents of the Lithuanian Land Force for standby for the NATO Response Force in 2015 and 2016. Also, it will be linked to another exercise of the Lithuanian Land Force, Trust 2014.

 

http://kariuomene.kam.lt/en/military_insignia/news_1889/lithuanian_and_allied_forces_are_getting_ready_for_international_exercise_iron_sword_2014.html

 

German participation is about 150 from a reconnaissance and an armored engineer unit.

 

24/10/2014 | News release

 

German combat materiel brought for multinational exercise to Lithuania

 

On October 24 combat materiel of the German Armed Forces will arrive at Šeštokų Railway Station in advance of the multinational Exercise Iron Sword 2014 which will be running in Lithuania on November 2-14.

The German participants of Exercise Iron Sword 2014 will bring 70 military vehicles and 14 containers: two BPZ heavy tracked armoured recovery vehicles, FUCHS armoured personnel carriers, FENNEK and EAGLE IV light armoured reconnaissance vehicles, other ATVs, trucks, combat equipment and materiel.

At Šeštokų Railway Station the equipment will be loaded to other train cars fitted for transportation via Lithuanian railways.

The equipment is planned to reach Pabradė Train Station on October 28. The next day it will be unloaded and transported to the General Silvestras Žukauskas Training Range at Pabradė.

 

http://www.noodls.com/view/D3EAC5E02D75B7216D355DE952F1A2E9056E2E0C?3896xxx1414157185

[BansheeOne]

According to this:

 

Nearly 2 thousand Lithuanian participants from the Lithuanian Land Force, Air Force, Logistics Command, Training and Doctrine Command and the Military Police of the Lithuanian Armed Forces will train at Iron Sword 2014. Roughly half a thousand of participants from NATO allies will be the following: an air defence platoon from the Czech Republic, the U.S. company of the 1st Cavalry Division of the U.S. Army deployed in Lithuania, a reconnaissance company and an engineering platoon from Germany, infantry companies from the United Kingdom and Hungary, infantry platoons from Estonia and Canada, and a reconnaissance platoon from Luxembourg.

 

Over 300 combat vehicles of various purposes will be used during the exercise, including the BRADLEY tracked infantry fighting vehicles, the BPZ heavy tracked armoured recovery vehicles, the M113 tracked armoured personnel carriers, the STRYKER, FUCHS, BTR-80 and BTR-80 AM wheeled armoured personnel carriers, the HMMWV, DINGO, FENNEK and EAGLE IV light armoured all-terrain vehicles, the SISU multipurpose trucks, and various other trucks, ATVs and four-wheelers.

 

Case in point, the early plans for a German-Polish cooperation scheme similar to the OPCON assignment of NL 11 Airmobile Brigade to GE Division Schnelle Kräfte and, in future, NL 43 Mechanized Brigade to GE 1st Panzer Division.

 

The German and Polish defense ministers signed an agreement yesterday which calls for increased cooperation in joint exercises and officer training, and envisions that battalions of one nation could be assigned to forces of the other. This is a lower level than with the Dutch so far, but I have a feeling that this still takes the NATO-Russia Founding Act into account, which may imply actual cross-basing of units.

[BansheeOne]

France hits back after Russia warns of Mistral compensation

 

By Thomas Grove and Elizabeth Pineau

MOSCOW/PARIS Fri Nov 14, 2014 6:14pm EST

 

(Reuters) - Prime Minister Manuel Valls said on Friday that France would not be dictated to after an unidentified Russian official was quoted as giving Paris two weeks to deliver the first of two Mistral helicopter carriers or face possible compensation claims.

 

France has for months resisted pressure from Washington and other allies to scrap the 1.2 billion euro ($1.58 billion) contract and in September said it would only hand over the first carrier, the Vladivostok, if there was a lasting ceasefire and a political settlement in Ukraine.

 

With the situation worsening on the ground in Ukraine, France has again come under fire over the deal, while Moscow has tried to drive a wedge between Paris and its allies on the issue knowing that failure to deliver the carriers could damage France's image at a time when it is finalising other military contracts.

 

"Today, the conditions to deliver the Mistral aren't there," Valls told reporters. "France honours its contracts, but France is a nation that counts, wants peace in Ukraine and that makes sovereign decisions without anybody from outside dictating how it acts."

 

An unidentified Russian source quoted by state news agency RIA on Friday said if the Mistral was not delivered by the end of November Moscow would seek compensation.

 

The comments were published on the day a Russian delegation, including arms exporter Rosoboronexport, had originally been invited by the Mistral's manufacturer DCNS - 65 percent-owned by the French state - to travel to France for a ceremony to transfer the first ship.

 

"We are preparing for various scenarios. We will wait until the end of the month then we will announce some serious claims," the unidentified Russian source was quoted as saying.

 

Analysts were looking at various amounts of compensation, the source said, adding that the sum would not be kept secret.

 

French President Francois Hollande said at the end of October he would make a decision during November, but his defence minister, Jean-Yves Le Drian, told parliament on Wednesday DCNS had not been given the necessary government export licence.

 

"No date for delivery can be fixed at this stage," he told lawmakers. "A definitive decision will be taken when the time comes."

 

Europe and the United States have imposed numerous rounds of sanctions on Russia for its role in eastern Ukraine and EU foreign ministers will discuss further sanctions on Monday.

 

Hollande is due to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin on the sidelines of the G20 leaders summit in Australia this weekend.

 

"What's key - and the president will discuss it with several leaders during the G20 - is to rediscover the path to peace between Ukraine and Russia," Valls said. "We're far from that today."

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/14/us-russia-france-mistral-idUSKCN0IY0XO20141114

[wendist]

The new Cold war just got a bit hotter! Eagerly awaiting pictures!

 

http://www.thelocal.se/20141128/russia-intercepts-sweden-navy-love-texts

[BansheeOne]

NATO Struggles to Muster ‘Spearhead Force’ to Counter Russia

 

Promised Rapid-Reaction Force Proves Costly, Logistically Difficult for Europe

By STEPHEN FIDLER

Dec. 1, 2014 1:37 p.m. ET

BRUSSELS—Three months after NATO agreed to set up a rapid-reaction force to ease its eastern allies’ fears about Russia, the task is providing an object lesson in the limitations of Europe’s military capabilities.

Foreign ministers from the 28-nation North Atlantic Treaty Organization meet Tuesday in Brussels to review progress on the so-called spearhead force that leaders pledged to create at their September summit in Wales.

The plan is to create by 2016 a brigade-size force of up to 5,000 ground troops, ready to head to trouble spots at a couple of days’ notice, along with air and naval support.

European governments want to be in the lead in providing the ground forces and not leave the job to Washington.

Diplomats say they are sure the force will be established in full and on time—not least because the alliance’s credibility depends on it. But setting it up is proving harder than expected because defense budgets are already stretched to their limits and much of NATO’s Cold War-era infrastructure has disappeared.

“The challenge is that NATO hasn’t done this for two decades,” Douglas Lute, U.S. ambassador to NATO, said Monday.

In operations in the Balkans and in Afghanistan, NATO allies had months to prepare for deployments, he said. Now “we need something that’s at the ready.”

Leaders decided to set up the rapid-reaction force in part because they thought it would be cheaper than placing standing forces in countries on the group’s eastern flank.

Some governments also wanted to avoid breaching a 1997 agreement between NATO and Russia. That agreement said that “in the current and foreseeable security environment,” NATO foresees no “additional permanent stationing of substantial combat forces near the border with Russia.”

It isn’t clear now whether the spearhead force will end up costing less than sending in permanent forces. Keeping 5,000 troops on high alert requires large amount of logistical support, for example, to be able to move them rapidly, along with backing from the air and possibly the sea, as well as special forces.

NATO is also debating what equipment it should preposition on its eastern flank to make deployment easier—and will need to establish command-and-control operations and contingencies for troop reinforcement if necessary to sustain a deployment.

One person involved in the discussions said there was “a high level of angst” about how much more of a burden the force would impose on defense budgets.

One important discussion has been about how to share costs among the allies, which Mr. Lute said has been lively. “We haven’t decided where the bill is going to fall here. You can imagine that that’s a big deal because forces of that size and that readiness are not inexpensive,” he said.

[...]

One issue under debate is how many countries will provide the spearhead force for the expected yearlong deployments.

Each one-year deployment would also require a year of preparation and a year of winding down, so diplomats said that ideally more countries beyond the U.K., France and Germany—Europe’s three largest militaries—would step up to contribute.

Diplomats said European governments are trying to avoid asking the U.S. to provide ground troops for the spearhead force, acknowledging the large role that it is likely to play in providing intelligence, special forces, transport, air and sea support.

Jens Stoltenberg, NATO secretary-general, said that Germany, the Netherlands and Norway have agreed to establish an interim force next year.

It would have a higher degree of readiness than the existing NATO Response Force from which it would be drawn, and which is meant to be able to move in five days, although would likely take longer in practice.

This way, he said, “we get more readiness sooner than expected.”

 

http://online.wsj.com/articles/nato-struggles-to-muster-spearhead-force-to-counter-russia-1417459067

 

I never heard that having a quick reaction force was supposed to be cheaper than basing troops in Eastern Europe, only the concerns about the NATO-Russia Founding Act. Also as I read it, it's already agreed that the UK, France and Germany will rotate in lead by year. There are supposed to be six logistics bases throughout the Eastern partner states to receive deployed forces, too, each staffed by about 100 personnel.

[wendist]

We truly do live in interesting times here in Sweden. The government have just declared that they intend to call up the reserves for refresher training. Old Putin is definitely making someone nervous.

 

http://www.thelocal.se/20141211/sweden-calls-in-reserves-over-russian-unrest

 

 

When the Cold War ended we took the opportunity to reform our military in a major way. Instead of having conscript based armed forces of some 500 000 men that might (or might not) have worked as planned after a general mobilization we intended to build a much smaller force (50 000 men) that would consist of a mix of professional and semi-professional soldiers. This would be a much leaner, better trained and better equipped force than the old one. It would be easier for the government to deploy forces abroad or put the whole force on full alert without having the civilian society grind to a halt in the process (like it would if the conscript army had been mobilized). Or so was the idea at least.

 

Unfortunately we have never been able to fill all positions with warm bodies, much of the OOB exists only on paper. Poor pay and uncertainty of your future in an army that was constantly down-sized meant that few swedes opted for a military career. To fill the holes the government now want to call up retired professional soldiers and even old conscripts for emergency refresher-training. It will be very interesting to see what the reaction will be among those swedes who suddenly realize that they have been chosen to spend a couple of weeks in uniform refreshing what they learned in basic training maybe 6-8 years ago.

[BansheeOne]

Russian Sailors Finish Training at French Port, but Will Leave Without Warship

By AURELIEN BREEDEN and MAÏA de la BAUME DEC. 17, 2014

PARIS — Over 400 Russian sailors will soon leave the French port city where they received training on one of two warships that France agreed to sell to Russia, a deal that was delayed when relations between Russia and the West soured over the situation in Ukraine, the contractor building the ships said Wednesday.

Emmanuel Gaudez, a spokesman for the contractor, DCNS, said the sailors had completed their training in Saint-Nazaire on the first ship, the Vladivostok. “They are going to head back to Russia, but not once and for all,” Mr. Gaudez said, adding that the sailors would come back to take command of the ship if the French government decided to deliver it.

France signed a deal worth 1.2 billion euros, or about $1.5 billion, in 2011 to build and sell two Mistral-class warships to Russia and to train Russian sailors to operate them. The sailors arrived in Saint-Nazaire, on the Atlantic coast, in June for a four-month training program.

The Vladivostok was scheduled to be handed over to Russia in October, while the second ship, the Sevastopol, was due for delivery next year. The Mistral-class ships are designed to each carry up to 30 helicopters, 60 armored vehicles, 13 tanks and 700 soldiers.

But the deal grew increasingly controversial, especially in Germany and the United States, as relations with Russia deteriorated following its annexation of the Crimean peninsula and Moscow’s support for a separatist insurgency in eastern Ukraine. In September, President François Hollande of France said that conditions for delivery of the ships had not been met, despite talks toward a cease-fire in Ukraine.

This month, the French defense minister, Jean-Yves Le Drian, suggested in a television interview that the two warships might never be delivered. “The Russians must realize this situation,” he said.

Mr. Gaudez, the spokesman for the contractor, said the training of Russian soldiers concluded last month. “They stayed a bit longer because they were hoping that the ship would be delivered after their training, as was initially planned,” he said.

“If the decision is made — it wouldn’t be made by us — to deliver, Russian sailors would come back to take delivery of the ships,” Mr. Gaudez said, adding that construction on the second ship would continue.

Ouest-France, a regional newspaper, reported that the sailors might leave as soon as Thursday.

The sailors had become the focus of much attention in Saint-Nazaire, a shipbuilding city that had welcomed the deal as a respite from hard economic times.

“We can’t have 400 soldiers going round and round in circles in a foreign port for weeks” said Christophe Morel, a union delegate at the STX France shipyard that is building the warships. “We hope that the diplomatic situation will allow the delivery of the ship.”

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/18/world/europe/russia-ukraine-france-mistral-warship-vladivostok.html?_r=0

[BansheeOne]

I have centered thoughts on the Baltic states as the most obvious frontline for some time, starting with a look at their own meagre military capabilities. First, Estonia:

 

[...]

 

They have also been looking for new equipment and are currently in negotiations with the Netherlands about purchase of 44 CV 9035 in 2015; an interest in Dutch PzH 2000 and possibly Fenneks has also been reported as well as in actual tanks, though the latter seems to be particularly doubtful due to cost. That goes even more for recent reports that they are thinking of getting an actual air force with some Gripen; earlier they were looking at getting NASAMS, which seems a much more sensible air defense capability for them. The navy, currently running three British Sandown-class minehunters and some support vessels, wants some fast multirole patrol boats.

 

Purchase of CV 9035 would seem to make them a good partner for the Danish in case of NATO reinforcements under MNC Northeast logistics-wise.

 

Estonia to acquire CV90 infantry combat vehicles

27.11.2014

Tallinn, 27 November 2014 ‒ In a meeting today, the Government of Estonia authorised Defence Minister Sven Mikser to sign an agreement with the Netherlands for the acquisition of CV90 infantry combat vehicles. The purchase agreement will be signed in the Netherlands on 9 December.

Estonia is purchasing 44 CV90 infantry combat vehicles, unarmed support vehicles based on the Leopard I tank and maintenance kits for the vehicles. Under a bilateral cooperation agreement, Estonia and the Netherlands are also planning a joint procurement of munitions and spare parts.

Defence Minister Sven Mikser stated that the acquisition represented Estonia’s largest defence procurement to date. “The infantry combat vehicles will take Estonia’s fighting power to a new level,” said Mikser. “It is one of the three main priorities of the national defence development plan alongside self-propelled artillery and the recently completed procurement of the Javelin anti-tank missile systems.”

 

For a good price, Estonia is acquiring outstanding infantry combat vehicles, which are modern, have proved themselves in combat and are made for the conditions of northern Europe, according to Mikser. “In the course of a selection process, our experts assessed various possible combat vehicle that would be suitable and the CV90 proved the most modern of these, having the best combat capability,” said the Defence Minister.

 

The CV90 infantry combat vehicles will be part of the armament of the Defence Forces’ professional Scouts Battalion to guarantee the Battalion’s manoeuvrability, greater fire power and increased protection. The CV90 will be part of the Defence Forces’ weaponry for years to come.

 

The vehicles will arrive in Estonia in stages from 2016 to 2018. At the same time as the vehicles are being delivered, Estonian Defence Forces personnel will receive training in their use, starting from next year; the necessary infrastructure and training areas will also be developed in stages.

 

[...]

 

http://www.kaitseministeerium.ee/en/estonia-to-acquire-cv90-infantry-combat-vehicles

[BansheeOne]

Russian Nuclear Missile Trains to Reappear as Tensions With West Grow

• The Moscow Times
• Dec. 16 2014 21:09
• Last edited 21:09

A Russian general on Tuesday confirmed that Russia will revive the Soviet tactic of launching nuclear missiles from trains in order to combat Washington's efforts to upgrade the U.S.'s attack capability.

 

Lieutenant General Sergei Karakayev said Russia's Strategic Rocket Forces would create a missile group using three launch platforms — underground missile silos, truck-mounted missile units and train-mounted missiles, which, Karakayev said, "proved their effectiveness in the Soviet period," news agency RIA Novosti reported.

 

The Soviets first deployed missile trains in 1987, and by the fall of communism four years later 56 missiles criss-crossed the country by train. But years of underfunding for the military meant that by 2005 all had been decommissioned.

 

The trains' revival comes as Moscow pursues a huge rearmament program that will see Russia's entire arsenal of missiles upgraded by the end of the decade.

 

Karakayev said last year that Russia was being forced to consider reintroducing missile trains by the U.S. Prompt Global Strike program, which is developing hypersonic missiles capable of fast, high precision strikes anywhere on the globe.

 

A key part of nuclear war planning is nuclear forces' ability to survive an opponent's first strike. Missile trains would increase the survivability of Russia's nuclear arsenal by complicating enemy efforts to locate its missiles by moving them quickly and constantly around the country.

 

Russia's military prowess has roared back into headlines this year as tensions with the West have spiked over Ukraine.

 

Russian tabloid Moskovsky Komsomolets on Tuesday ran the story on nuclear missile trains under a headline saying: "Headache for the U.S."

 

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/russian-nuclear-missile-trains-to-reappear-as-tensions-with-west-grow/513463.html

Edited December 24, 2014 by BansheeOne

[Gregory]

I can understand why they are doing it, but it still strikes me as unwise to put so many resources into conventional weaponry. Even if they managed to put up a Division, they would still be outnumbered 4 or 5 to one if it ever comes to a fight. The most they can be useful for is keeping insurgents under control, and 44 AFVs is not going to go very far.

 

Not that they have many alternatives, but I think arms caches and stay behind parties would have a lot more to commend them. Either that or form an airmobile brigade. From the islands lying in the Baltic, they would have a pretty good field of action without getting tied down.

 

Pricey solution though.

Very pricey. Even if we consider brigade that has only a battalion-sized simultaneous lifting capacity, we're talking about 40-50 medium-lift helicopters, such as UH-60. That's well over a billion dollars for the procurement of the systems itself. Once you add all the support systems, it's probably closer to 2 billion, with corresponding maintenance bill. That sort of purchase would consume the entirety of Estonian procurement capacity for the next decade, at least. And it would not necessarily allow tactical mobility in circumstances where MANPADS are likely to be readily available.

 

Honestly, I think Estonia is doing a lot of things right. They are building a capable mobile active force, while maintaining a sizeable reserve component. Perhaps they should look at procuring some surplus MRAP units to provide better protection and mobility for those forces -I'm guessing they are primarily truck-bourne infantry at this point. Lithuanians are also doing some good things with their Rapid Reaction Force. Latvia ... not so much.

Edited December 24, 2014 by Gregory