Is Russia picking a fight with NATO... really?
Russian drones over NATO countries raise the risk of disaster
Good morning – here is your Saturday newsletter.
In peace,
Steve
Close calls have brought NATO and Canada nearer to a disastrous armed conflict with Russia than ever before.
What is Russia up to?
You may have heard the news this week that in a bizarre, high-risk move, Russia sent drones into the airspace of NATO members Poland and Romania (Russia has denied attacking NATO).
The scale of the incursion – 19 drones into Poland’s airspace and another drone over Romania – is too many to be just an accident.
On September 9 and 10, Poland scrambled F-16 fighter jets, as well as Danish fighters, and managed to shoot down four of the 19 Russian drones. Four days later a Russian drone flew over Romania and a Romanian F-16 monitored the drone until it left its airspace.
Poland invoked Article 4 of the NATO treaty to convene a meeting of NATO members – a step just short of the famous NATO Article 5 which declares an attack against one NATO member is an attack against us all – including Canada.
The CBC and others may be drawing the wrong conclusions about Russia’s intent, as described in this report.
How will NATO respond to Russian drones?
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte joined with the head U.S. General in NATO at a press conference to address the incursions. Mr. Rutte noted that while this was the largest concentration of violations of NATO airspace, “what happened on Wednesday was not an isolated incident. Russia’s recklessness in the air along our eastern flank is increasing in frequency.”
Some European powers have dedicated fighter aircraft to NATO’s “Eastern Sentry,” a military plan aimed to bolster NATO’s posture along the eastern flank, according to a release, focussed on countering Russian drone incursions.
Is NATO really under attack from Russia?
Many fear that Russia is preparing for war. Their concerns may have been confirmed Friday when Russia sent three fighter aircraft into Estonian airspace without permission and stayed there for 12 minutes. Estonia is a NATO member.
But long-time military analyst Gwynne Dyer says Russia is not looking for a new war. “Of course not. Don’t be silly,” he writes in this week’s The Hill Times. “Half the Russian army is already fully committed to the invasion of Ukraine, and three-and-a-half years into the war they are knee-deep in Ukrainian drones and making very little headway.”
He points out that the drones used by Russia were unarmed and made of flimsy Styrofoam-like material, the kind of drones that are typically used as decoys to confuse and overwhelm Ukrainian defences.
What is Russia’s real motive?
Dyer says the most plausible answer as to why Russia has launched these incursions comes from retired Col. Richard Kemp, writing in Britain’s The Telegraph.
It wasn’t a “provocation,” he said, and Russia wasn’t testing NATO’s reaction, either. “Putin has no need to test our response to drones entering NATO airspace because he already knows exactly what it will be. Nothing.”
Putin’s real goal, Kempt argued, is to stampede NATO’s European countries into spending large amounts on their own national defence, and particularly their air defences, instead of continuing to send arms to beleaguered Ukraine.
If Kempt and Dyer are correct, then plans to dramatically increase defence spending, as Canada is doing, could redirect funding for Ukraine (military support that Dyer supports, strongly) to more domestic programs for National Defence. If this happens in other major donors, it might assist Russia in its grinding war of attrition in Ukraine.
Is war between Russia and NATO even possible?
Our friend Cesar Jaramillo, who has founded a new research group called the SANE Policy Institute, says that the presence of nuclear weapons has established a “deterrence ceiling” that no amount of military weaponry can overcome.
“Russia’s nuclear arsenal… imposes a ceiling that no amount of conventional firepower or political resolve can break,” writes Jaramillo. “At the end of the day, the possibility that nuclear weapons might be used constrains how far Ukraine’s ‘Coalition of the Willing’ [i.e. NATO allies] can deter or respond, even if hundreds of billions are spent and dozens of nations pledge support.”
NATO and Canada can boost military spending as much as they want, “Yet the same limitation applies: more spending may improve readiness and capabilities, but it cannot lift the nuclear ceiling,” says Jaramillo.
What’s the plan to end the war?
We can only hope that wise people with all the information have a plan to end the war. But more than three and a half years into the conflict, Europe and the broader international community still lack a cohesive, workable plan for how it might end. “Many thousands of lives have been lost, billions of dollars spent, yet there is still no clear answer to the most basic question: what is the endgame?” says Jaramillo.
It seems that answers are in short supply, while the risk of a terrible mistake with potential nuclear consequences, only grows.
Leave a comment explaining your vote.
The federal budget has readers on edge
The Carney government has announced its first budget will be tabled in Parliament on November 4. Last week I asked you, “Are you concerned about the upcoming federal budget from PM Carney?”
By far, most people expressed some degree of concern, with 3/4s of people responding they were “very concerned” (74%), with others somewhat concerned (19%). Less than one of out ten said they were not concerned (7%).
Did you miss last week’s newsletter?
Viewed 1.84k times
Thank you for everything you do for peace.
Steve
Yes. They are in a pre-war phase of probing of defences followed by massive conventional incursion. Its jn their history. Their military doctrine