For a couple of years Russia has been warning Finland and Sweden from joining NATO. Moscow’s message to them was simple – join NATO and the Russian will attack. Why? Prior to the Soviet Union’s collapse, Moscow agreed to dismantle the Warsaw Pact (a pact similar to NATO) and destroy the Berlin Wall in exchange for promises from the West.
The NATO alliance had promised not to expand eastward to challenge Russia. Additionally, Russia’s interests in regions within its geopolitical sphere of influence would be respected. Of course, NATO under the influence of United States couldn’t care less about the promises and had deployed its military bases in several former Soviet republics.
The landscape changes with a weak Obama administration but an ambitious Putin regime. In a new NATO report for 2015, Sweden actually believes the country could be hit by Russia, anytime between 2016 and 2020. This is the first time a Swedish Army chief – Anders Brannstrom – is dead worry about an invasion from the Russian after 200 years of peace.
It’s not hard to see why the Swedish is having cold sweat. It would take between 36 – 60 hours for 27 Russian battalions to occupy the Estonian and Latvian capitals of Tallinn and Riga. Despite the West’s propaganda, NATO is actually very weak and under-prepared for any potential attack launched by Moscow.
It got so bad that Sweden has re-militarised an old Cold War frontier base on the island of Gotland. In case you didn’t know, just like Switzerland, Sweden managed to maintain its official neutrality throughout the World War II. So, the Swedish have been living in peace since the end of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815.
According to several war games scenarios conducted by a US think-tank done between 2014 and 2015, an advancing Russia troops would be unstoppable even with a combination of US and Baltic troops with US air support. NATO’s 12 battalions, amusingly, have no battle tanks (only one heavily armoured Stryker battalion), while all of Russia’s 27 battalions have heavily-armoured battle tanks.
That’s one of many reasons why Vladimir Putin easily annexed Crimea 2-year ago without facing any military retaliation from the U.S. or NATO. Of course, President Obama had warned, bitched, whined and moaned about the annexation but that’s all he managed to do. Putin was grinning from ear to ear while NATO was in disarray.
Many are still scratching their heads over Russia’s sudden intervention in Syria. To say badass Vladimir Putin woke up one fine morning and suddenly decided to help monster Bashar Assad is laughable. Such military operation requires years of planning, preparation, transportation and whatnot thus only idiots would say the U.S. and NATO were caught in surprise.
Russian political analyst Sergey Karaganov has revealed in an interview that Russia has been monitoring Middle East for years and concluded that the region would eventually experience a series of disasters. With the exception of Iran and Israel, the Middle East will fall apart within the next 20 – 30 years. And the havoc created by ISIS is an example why the region is falling apart.
One has to remember that ISIS was not Russian’s creation but the CIA and Saudi royal family. While the Saudi happily funding multiple groups of terrorists, the U.S. gladly making money selling military hardware and gadgets to both parties. The best part was when the rest of the panicky Middle East nations started pouring petro-dollar on defence expenses.
Therefore, the first reason Russian decided to step into the Syria War was to contain the situation after the U.S. and its Gulf brothers failed to terminate the Islamic State. Russia must have figured that if they didn’t do so now it would be too late. It would be better for Russia to kill before the terrorists reach an uncontrollable level and terrorizing the country’s borders.
The second reason was related to Sunni-vs-Shia war. Neither Sunni nor Shia can be allowed to win and control Syria for obvious reason. Russia thinks it’s better to let President Bashar Assad, an Alawite, controls Syria. Iraq is a classic example how chaotic the situation can be with the execution of Saddam Hussein, as do in Libya after the termination of Gaddafi.
The third reason wasn’t rocket science. Russia does want to be a great power, the same way America enjoys its privilege today. What the U.S. couldn’t do in the Middle East under Obama administration, the Russia wanted to prove its capability in eliminating the Islamic State under Putin regime.
The fourth reason has everything to do with Ukraine and the political analyst wasn’t shy to admit Russian’s involvement in Syria could divert attention from it. So, why does Russia continue to provoke Sweden, for example, by conducting mock attacks, other than to intimidate the Swedish not to join NATO?
It is a good strategy to test the limit and capability of NATO and U.S. if Russia decides to strike NATO (such as Turkey) one fine day. It is also to maintain the present split within NATO whereby some countries are eager to work with Russia instead of the U.S. Most importantly, attacking NATO could be a good strategy to divert attention from Syria as well as Russia’s internal economy.
Other Articles That May Interest You …
- Berkshire Annual Letter – Billionaire Buffett Reveals 7 Important Messages
- Did Najib Pawn & Drag Malaysian Soldiers Into Syrian War For RM2.6 Billion?
- Why China Can “Take” Any Island In South China Sea … And Get Away
- Here’s Why Turkey Could Be Alone In A “Nuclear War” With Russia
- Russian Jet Shot Down – How Putin Brilliantly Turns It To His Advantage
- From Russia With Love – Putin Sent “Bear”, “Backfire” & “Blackjack”
- Russian Airstrikes Prove Why Putin Is A Better Leader Than Obama
|
|
March 12th, 2016 by financetwitter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comments
Add your comment now.
Leave a Reply