Meanwhile In The Baltic Republics And Poland...

[Simon Tan]

Yugolavia strikes back!

[RETAC21]

Deterrence from attack would need to work on at least two levels.

 

1. Forces in situ that could repel, at least significantly delay and cause massive attrition to a Russian incursion. On that scale it would make sense to issue the populations of the countries with vast numbers of sniper and anti materiel rifles, hand held AT weapons, ATGW, mortars and mines and have an all encompassing obstacle plan in place.

 

2. Forces to defend the Russians leveraging their advantage in long range precision strike weapons to interdict or simply blackmail us. That requires a similar capability to be put in place. The Americans seem to be working on one, but European NATO should have its own and pay for it.

 

You can also add the political will to send a major mechanised force after the Russians right on their doorstep.

 

That's not deterrence, that's defence. You can build an economy of force line in the Baltics through minefields and fortifications which would work better than a few mech brigades, but that just forces the enemy to go around them and are a waste if the enemy doesn't intend to invade (which, to be fair, seems to be the case...).

 

For deterrence to work you need enough forces to show that national pride will take the place of guns and involve a more resilient enemy than can be tackled easily. If these are too few (TF Smith, NP 8901) you are daring your opponent to try to do something. If these are too big, they are unsustainable.

[Stuart Galbraith]

 

... But its not been demonstrated that it can fulfill that role, particularly in a highly jammed environment...

 

Jamming works both ways. I know that some "old school" Slovenians that were on NATO maneuvers few years ago were shocked how much reliance is placed on the radio network, w/o any attempt to use non-jammable backup. Plus a blatant use of the mobile phones, which is a security leak of it's own.

The Russians DO have some impressive kit for jamming. More to the point, it seems to be in rain near every manoeuvre Brigade. Yes, NATO probably is vulnerable in that area.

[Chris Werb]

I think you misunderstand me RETAC. To me deterrence is making invading not worth the expenditure. Mines would not be used in fields (except on rare occasions) as the terrain really favours their use in making advances along roads with demolitions along them even more unprofitable, especially when covered with direct and indirect fire. There is not a lot of scope for going round them. You can make an enemy advance costly and then retreat to interdict supply which would have to come in by obvious long and vulnerable routes with plenty of cover either side.

 

Stuart, when I said arm their population, I meant it. Even on mobilisation none of the Baltic Republics would mobilise more than a small percentage of their population. Estonia, for example has an estimated population of 1,324,820. In 2017 the Estonian Defence League had a strength of 25,968 of which only 15,218 were active (1 in 87 of their population). They would be spread very thinly in wartime and I can't believe they have "weapons coming out of their ears".

[RETAC21]

I think you misunderstand me RETAC. To me deterrence is making invading not worth the expenditure. Mines would not be used in fields (except on rare occasions) as the terrain really favours their use in making advances along roads with demolitions along them even more unprofitable, especially when covered with direct and indirect fire. There is not a lot of scope for going round them. You can make an enemy advance costly and then retreat to interdict supply which would have to come in by obvious long and vulnerable routes with plenty of cover either side.

 

Stuart, when I said arm their population, I meant it. Even on mobilisation none of the Baltic Republics would mobilise more than a small percentage of their population. Estonia, for example has an estimated population of 1,324,820. In 2017 the Estonian Defence League had a strength of 25,968 of which only 15,218 were active (1 in 87 of their population). They would be spread very thinly in wartime and I can't believe they have "weapons coming out of their ears".

 

I din't meant tactically, but operationally. A Maginot line in the Baltic countries may mean an amphibious invasion, not an overland assault.

 

Re. deterrence, sure, but you can do that upfront with boots on the ground or make the potential invader think twice about the consequences of an invasion with less force, but enough that cannot be discounted (ie a tripwire)

[Stuart Galbraith]

I think you misunderstand me RETAC. To me deterrence is making invading not worth the expenditure. Mines would not be used in fields (except on rare occasions) as the terrain really favours their use in making advances along roads with demolitions along them even more unprofitable, especially when covered with direct and indirect fire. There is not a lot of scope for going round them. You can make an enemy advance costly and then retreat to interdict supply which would have to come in by obvious long and vulnerable routes with plenty of cover either side.

 

Stuart, when I said arm their population, I meant it. Even on mobilisation none of the Baltic Republics would mobilise more than a small percentage of their population. Estonia, for example has an estimated population of 1,324,820. In 2017 the Estonian Defence League had a strength of 25,968 of which only 15,218 were active (1 in 87 of their population). They would be spread very thinly in wartime and I can't believe they have "weapons coming out of their ears".

 

Which doesnt sound like a lot, but it is when you are trying to push a mechanised force through an urban area, and then a Forest, which is what Estonia actually is. More to the point, if tensions rise with Russia, they are going to be getting a lot more people running to the flag, just as happened for us in 1940 with the Home Guard.

 

We just have to make it look incredibly unattractive to ever do such a thing for Putin. The realism of it is distinctly secondary to the deterrence value, which when you think about it is just the case with what we were doing all through the cold war. This isnt any different imho.

[bd1]

actually , mobilisation reserves are around 60.000 in estonia, the ~25000 are fully equipped, armed , ammunition provided etc. rest would be older folks (like me), equipped like ´´capbadge+rifle´´ style.

 

chris, the general population numbers include non-citizens and russian citizens too. some of them might come under our flags too, but that is questionable (something like 25% pro-west, 33-40% pro-rus, rest would try to be uninvolved according to some polls)

 

a lot more atgm and arty would be welcome of course

Edited October 23, 2019 by bd1

[Stuart Galbraith]

There is the probability there are number of formed 'stay behind' parties, which both Britain and NATO used in their time. They would fit well into Estonia and the Baltic states history of resistance, and they wouldnt be on the books naturally.

 

Speaking of which, there was a good podcast on Operation Gladio to be found here. It was far more extensive and had far more people in it than we ever thought. Including neutral nations like Finland and Sweden remarkably.

https://www.coldwarvault.com/blog/2019/9/25/ep23-operation-gladio

[bojan]

Is there any doctrine for stay-behind units today?

Are there any light infantry units, other than a token number of SF trained for that?

Do those units study local terrain, navigation w/o GPS, movement and survival and tactical operations w/o or with only irregular radio contact to a higher level, survival w/o higher level logistics?

Are they briefed to the realities of what "stay behind" actually means?

Are they conscious of the fact that in case of war, their major supply will be taking food from a civilian population (willing or otherwise)?

Guerilla warfare is a horribly messy thing, and only thing worse than guerilla warfare is a poorly organized "feel good" guerilla warfare.

Edited October 23, 2019 by bojan

[Stuart Galbraith]

There is a question whether they should even be military, or paramilitary. For example, if you listen to the podcast there, the one that became NATO rolled units were actually setup by the CIA. As were the stay behind units set up in Alaska (though even the FBI had a role there)

Quite what the intelligence Community would make of that ive no idea. The CIA clearly isnt what it was when it comes to paramilitary operations, and has not been since the 1970's.

 

In the UK case, the stay behind units were organized around a supply stockpile whcih would not be replenished. i think the intention was that they would probably be dead by the time they used it up, and their role was really just a speedbump against an invasion. It may be that any units ought to be viewed the same way in the Baltic context, they couldn't be expected to last long. And wouldn't necessarily HAVE to last long, as long as they targeted useful targets in the start of a conflict.

 

Its a useful thing to have in ones pocket in a war, but its of course useless as a deterrent factor. Obviously he only way it works is if you keep the whole thing secret.

[bojan]

There is a question whether they should even be military, or paramilitary

Why do you see "stay behind" as a paramilitary? Is the light infantry concept really that strange to you?

You need both - heavier units to act as a speedbump and buy a time for a mobilization, light units to secure rear (if lines are stable), fight attempts on insurgency and operate in the enemy rear if main defense is overrun. Thing is that for a superpower quick war might be acceptable, since minor nation can never match it, but a long term occupation with constant attacks might not be. Especially if it is supported by a 3rd party.

 

 

...

Its a useful thing to have in ones pocket in a war, but its of course useless as a deterrent factor. Obviously he only way it works is if you keep the whole thing secret.

If none knows about it than it is not useful deterrent.

Edited October 23, 2019 by bojan

[Stuart Galbraith]

 

There is a question whether they should even be military, or paramilitary

Why do you see "stay behind" as a paramilitary? Is the light infantry concept really that strange to you?

You need both - heavier units to act as a speedbump and buy a time for a mobilization, light units to secure rear (if lines are stable), fight attempts on insurgency and operate in the enemy rear if main defense is overrun. Thing is that for a superpower quick war might be acceptable, since minor nation can never match it, but a long term occupation with constant attacks might not be. Especially if it is supported by a 3rd party.

 

 

...

Its a useful thing to have in ones pocket in a war, but its of course useless as a deterrent factor. Obviously he only way it works is if you keep the whole thing secret.

If none knows about it than it is not useful deterrent.

 

 

 

Like I say, listen to the podcast. The stay behind parties were more than you think.

 

The yanks saw the stay behind parties actually fulfilling 2 roles. The first we know, obviously, was staying behind after an invasion. The one that is less well known was based on a perception of what happened in Czechoslovakia. That a coup might occur in the host European country, or at the very least, a long running subversion campaign to bring the country down. The involvement of the CIA brought the latter into focus, because it was feared that some European nations, if they were not invaded, could easily be brought down by subversion. As we saw with Operation Gladio, some operations very similar to this was actually enacted against Socialist groups in Italy, to the point where a Gladio group launched at least one terrorist attack that brought retribution down on radical Italian left wing radical groups.

http://www.truthmove.org/content/operation-gladio/

 

This is obviously something of a contradiction with the NATO aim of mutual defence, but it is the role the CIA founded these groups for, or at least, one of the aims. Whilst they were given to NATO, some of them clearly didnt change that mindset.

 

The Alaska stay behind parties were even more different, apparently less like soldiers, and far more like spies or saboteurs.

https://coldwarvault.podbean.com/e/ep22-left-behind-the-alaskan-staybehind-agents/

 

 

So do you actually want this to 'just' be light infantry, or do you want this tertiary role as well as a hidden hand to strike down subversion before it emerges? Id prefer the former, but hand on heart, looking at what happened in Ukraine and the historical subversion Russia has been running against the Baltic states, the latter might actually prove more useful if it came to it.

 

Yes, thats my point, its a contradiction. If its secret, it would be actually useful in war. If its not secret, it would be a damp squib, but it might prove some tertiary role in deterrence. After all, the myth of francs tireurs was more powerful in 1914 than the actual reality.

Edited October 23, 2019 by Stuart Galbraith

[Roman Alymov]

 

So do you actually want this to 'just' be light infantry, or do you want this tertiary role as well as a hidden hand to strike down subversion before it emerges? Id prefer the former, but hand on heart, looking at what happened in Ukraine and the historical subversion Russia has been running against the Baltic states, the latter might actually prove more useful if it came to it.

What "happened in Ukraine"? Oligarch president who pretended to be in war with Russia (while having business in Russia) became so deeply rooted in corruption he was replaced by standup comedian* (on payroll of another corrupt oligarch) in land slight vote?

* I'm afraid the word " standup comedian" is not enough to describe the type of comedy he was making for years - so below is example, by the way from big festival in Jūrmala, Latvia, in September 2016. It is in Russian, but i am sure you will get the idea without knowing the language

 

What exactly type of " historical subversion"? Buying cold swamps on the shore of cold sea from German, Danish and Swedish landlords of local half-slave peasdants, or defeating this landlords in wars?

[JWB]

Who is this other oligarch?

[Roman Alymov]

Who is this other oligarch?

Igor Kolomoysky, once "most patriotic man of Ukraine" (sponsored Nazi battalions in 2014) but then lost his fight against Poroshenko and fled to Israel (since he, as well as Zelensky, are Soviet Jews). Yse Ukraine is the place where rich Jew could own Nazi battalion, and ethnic Jewish commedian, grandson of decorated Soviet war hero (and NKVD\Soviet police colonel in his post-WWII life) could claim anti-semitic nationalists as national heroes

 

Zelensky on the grave on his grandfather

Edited October 24, 2019 by Roman Alymov

[JWB]

You say he is on Igor Kolomoysky pay roll. Not so fast:

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/20/privatbank-ukraines-president-zelensky-and-the-oligarch-kolomoisky.html

[Stuart Galbraith]

Only on Tanknet could you have a discussion of Ukrainian Jewish Nazi's. You heard it here first folks.

[bd1]

.....who are all really just russians, as roman claims. don´t forget that. so it´s russian ukrainan jewish nazis

Edited October 26, 2019 by bd1

[Stuart Galbraith]

And rich too, so its Russian Ukrainian Jewish Nazi Oligarchs.

Edited October 27, 2019 by Stuart Galbraith

[Roman Alymov]

You say he is on Igor Kolomoysky pay roll. Not so fast:

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/20/privatbank-ukraines-president-zelensky-and-the-oligarch-kolomoisky.html

Fast enough as for me

https://carnegie.ru/commentary/79972

Ukraine’s President Can’t Avoid Showdown With His Oligarch Backer

[Roman Alymov]

.....who are all really just russians, as roman claims. don´t forget that. so it´s russian ukrainan jewish nazis

Yes, all this people are "Russians" in broad meaning of this word, and all this situation is another episode of Russian Civil war - what is ethnic difference between Russian Fireign minister Lavrov (who is ethnic Armenian with roots inTbilisi, Georgia) and Ukrainian internal affairs minister Abvakov (who is ethnic Armenian from Baku, Azerbaijan)? And Avakov is defending Azon nazis he is master of against US Congress

https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/avakov-dismisses-criticisms-of-azov-battalion.html?cn-reloaded=1

Avakov dismisses criticisms of Azov battalion

 

I'm sure you are perfectly aware about how artificial is this "ethnic" separation into "Russian" and "Ukrainian" - is you are not for some reason, then at least your Gov minister is not (let me repeat my post from Sep 11, 2019 http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=41820&p=1447549

Interior minister Mart Helme (EKRE) says he has ordered an inquiry into the lifting of visa-free entry into Estonia for Ukrainian citizens. Since 2017, a visa waiver agreement between Ukraine and the European Union has allowed freer movement, which Helme said is putting pressure on Estonia's eastern border.

In Estonia, because of its location and history, migration from the east has become a bigger and bigger issue, especially from Ukraine," Helme stated on the Conservative People's Party of Estonia's (EKRE) own portal Uued Uudised, ERR reported on Wednesday.

"We have to take a serious look at the situation, and we have taken legal advice," he continued.

Helme said that his party had already predicted the uptick in the number of people from Ukraine entering Estonia ahead of the agreement with the EU coming into effect, and notes that the development constitutes a "trojan horse", primarily for Russian influence in Estonia.

"This trojan horse works, among other things, on Russia's behalf, since those who have been coming here are not Ukrainians so much as Russians from eastern Ukraine, or Russians from Russia*, or simply 'homo sovieticus'," Helme said, referring to a disparaging term for an average, conformist and largely Russian-speaking person from the former Soviet Union as a whole.

Helme added that he is also working on removing immigration exemptions and redesigning the current rules on temporary agency work. Many workers from Ukraine are reportedly employed in the construction sector in Estonia in particular.

"Underlying this migratory pressure is a whole bunch of our businessmen who use Ukrainians for cheap labor: Our real estate agents and developers who are building blocks of flats in Tallinn, who see immigrants from the east [as a source of labor]," Helme continued.

Helme was echoing comments he had already made on ERR's Russian-language TV channel, ETV+.

"Visitors from Ukraine are not our people. They are economic migrants who want to get better conditions in Estonia and higher earnings than is possible in Ukraine. For Estonia, these people are a problem; they take jobs from local residents and are willing to work for less. Thus, they create pressure on local earnings in general," Helme said, speaking on ETV+ current affairs show Svoya pravda on Tuesday.

 

* Interesting in Russian text it is not "Russians from Russia" but "Russified Ukrainians" https://rus.err.ee/9...zda-v-jestoniju

[bd1]

but he has no power to enforce such legislation. it´s rhetoric from populist politician, like zhirinovsky ​

 

but, as usually, there´s a hint of truth there. back in 2013 i think , at least before russian-ukrainian war, there was a newspaper that polled ukrainians attitudes, should they come to work here or immigrate , something like that. anyway, the poll showed that they would not integrate into society , but would still be part of russian-speaking (but not necessarily pro-russian) community, the hairdressers and plumbers would advertise in facebook, targeting audiences they could understand etc. and, as usually in eastern slavic culture, they would do that unofficially, without paying taxes. so it would just be enlarging current minority with new population, without solving any problems that we already have with current ones. well, maybe bit more infighting between rushists and pro-western ones. and how would we screen the normals from rushists? ´´ti moskal ili hoholl ??´´ ​

 

why would we want them here ?

 

ps. personal experience with ukraianans - last summer there was a crew unloading containers at my workplace. idea was to put boxes on europallets on certain pattern and quantity. my department of company has 4 people working here, me and 3 other dudes. since i was at vacation and only other one who could speak russian was a russian kid, 22 years old , so he had to do it. as a result, the crew ignored him, did it how they wanted and basicly, flushed him down the toilet. so, week later i was back , and new container came and the russian kid asks me to communicate with them. which i did, successfully.

whatever the problem was- seniority, machoism, political, whatever, point is without ´´my way or the highway´´-attitude they were useless.

[JWB]

 

You say he is on Igor Kolomoysky pay roll. Not so fast:

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/20/privatbank-ukraines-president-zelensky-and-the-oligarch-kolomoisky.html

Fast enough as for me

https://carnegie.ru/commentary/79972

Ukraine’s President Can’t Avoid Showdown With His Oligarch Backer

 

No where does that article claim any payments from the oligarch to the new President. Zelensky has several former associates of Kolomoisky. There more than one reason for Zelensky to appoint those men.

[carrierlost]

Ex Tractable tanks arrive to Valga, Estonia.

https://www.facebook.com/1618014695101534/posts/2447630832139912/

[Stuart Galbraith]

Looks like a company's worth of tanks, which is interesting. Last I heard the British battle-group only had 4. I guess Gav Williamson was feeling particularly butch that day.