The State of Affairs in Russia

[Razgovory]

Right, Ukraine is an example of this. If Russia were to invade the Baltics (I do not think they would), it will be the same way they've invaded Ukraine.

That's the fear.  I think there is a real chance of getting disenfranchised Russians in Latvia to rise up.  If there is a separatist revolt I fear it could paralyzed NATO.

[Martinus]

If only Assburgers was a lethal disease...

That would help with Putin, too.

[Martinus]

Right, Ukraine is an example of this. If Russia were to invade the Baltics (I do not think they would), it will be the same way they've invaded Ukraine.

That would mean the end of NATO.

Incidentally, that would also mean the end of EU/Eurozone. All of Baltics have Euro as their currency. If the entire region was invaded (with no military response from NATO/EU), that would make Euro tumble down like a house of cards.

[Martinus]

The more I think about it, the more I am convinced that it is just a harebrained idea that the Ukrainian scenario could be successfully repeated by Russia in the Baltics.

Even discounting the geopolitical aspects of it (membership in NATO, EU and Eurozone), Baltics are not like Eastern Ukraine in anything, except for the Russian minority. Baltics are small, urbanised, densely populated. If one of them starts to get internal trouble with "little green men" and even if NATO chooses not to formally respond, it is pretty clear that the remaining Baltic states, Poland (which has population more than 10 times that of Lithuania but only 70% that of Ukraine) and also possibly some of the Scandinavian countries would send peacekeeping troops in, if requested to do so. And given the size of a potential theatre of military operations, this would not even need to be a sizeable force. Russia would then need to escalate this into an open conflict - which would deprive NATO of its fig leaf.

Now, I am not saying that Putin won't try something or that he would not risk an open war with NATO, but the Ukrainian scenario would just not work there.

[Jacob]

I don't know what it translates into, but the Scandinavians - at least the Danes, Swedes, and Finns - are pretty attached to the Baltics. I'd expect some willingness to put troops and planes in harm's.

It's also a whole lot closer - according to google maps it's less than a 19 hour drive from Copenhagen to Riga in Latvia - so the logistics of getting involved could be somewhat easier.

I expect Poland would be pretty willing to get involved as well, and it's not like it's far from them either.

If NATO left the Baltics out to dry over Putin trouble, I think it would lose pretty much all credibility in Denmark and probably Poland.

I'd expect a "little green men" scenario would be a little harder to sell too, since the various elections in the Baltics are a whole lot less questionable than the transition in the Ukraine.

[Martinus]

Yup. But to me the main point is the size/logistics.

Eastern Ukraine is a huge, undeveloped, empty space. You can easily "hide" an army there and play the game of cat and mouse, at least with the public opinion (if not with the US spy satellites). And it lends itself very well to protracted destabilisation effort.

This is just undoable in the Baltics, which can be policed much more easily.

Perhaps the differences are not as profound, but it is a bit like comparing fighting terrorism in Afghanistan to fighting terrorism in France.

[Martinus]

If NATO left the Baltics out to dry over Putin trouble, I think it would lose pretty much all credibility in Denmark and probably Poland.

Oh, definitely. Pretty much both main political parties (PO and PiS) (and their supporters) see a potential conflict in Baltics as a litmus test for NATO's usefulness. Of course, Poland would probably not leave NATO over this, just because there would be no point, but would start to see NATO the same way it sees the UN.

Now, it's not like Poland would have a lot of alternatives, but I can see there being at least an attempt to develop some sort of regional pact, either to the South (e.g. with Turkey and possibly some of the Balkans/Hungary, depending on the political climate there) or to the North (e.g. with Sweden). Possibly try to involve (whatever is left of) Ukraine.

[Eddie Teach]

I can see there being at least an attempt to develop some sort of regional pact ... to the North (e.g. with Sweden).

lulz

[Martinus]

Actually, Sweden has been taking security in the region quite seriously lately. I'd rather Poland allied with, say, Sweden and Denmark than Germany and France.

[Solmyr]

Sweden also has no army.

[The Brain]

Sweden has no armed forces and is self-destructing as a society. There will be no help from us.

[Martinus]

Sweden has no armed forces and is self-destructing as a society. There will be no help from us.

Oh well, I guess time for Poland to stand up to the task and become a regional power.

[OttoVonBismarck]

My argument is that if the major NATO powers--America, Britain, France and Germany, wanted to actually protect the new eastern editions we would have troops permanently stationed there. The lack of said troop presence to me, signals to both Putin and the rest of the world that there is not a serious umbrella of protection over those countries. The decision to expand NATO into those countries was one taken too quickly, with little thought to what it meant. I do not see any scenario in which Merkel and Hollande deploy a single soldier in defense of the Baltics. They probably would over Poland, but I don't think Putin would mess with Poland. I do not believe Obama will commit American ground forces against Putin essentially "in any scenario", perhaps a future President would. I think Hillary would, but Obama wouldn't. So if this were to go down before Obama leaves office NATO would not have America to lead the efforts against Putin. I don't have much of a read on David Cameron's foreign policy and military positions so I am unsure how he would respond.

Germany and France naturally like cozying up to terrible regimes for economic reasons and do not like fighting to defend anything, so in a scenario where the American President isn't putting 100% of the weight of his office on the leaders of Germany and France to respond to a military crisis in the East, I cannot see either country acting. Keep in mind that Merkel and Hollande are mostly concerned right now with their trade relationship with Putin, if not for the vague pressures of the NATO community on them I doubt they'd even bother with arguing with Putin over Ukraine. They want to get to a point where they can get all sanctions dropped so they can resume trade with Putin, and they feel like these sham peace meetings allow them to do that without pissing off Obama too much.

That's three out of the four major NATO countries that I believe would be against action, or at least in favor of "dithering" (Angela the Ditherer would be an apt name for her, both in how she has handled the Greek crisis and the Ukrainian crisis.)

[Martinus]

Otto, would you say NATO should be disbanded or does it still have a purpose, and if so, what would it be?

[Sheilbh]

There's something perverse about watching the leaders of great powers discuss the dismemberment of an Eastern European country in Munich