The Polish-Baltic "Entente" demonstrates a difference in approaches in uniting military appetites at the Euro-Atlantic expense.
A few days ago, the defense ministers of the three Baltic countries met in Daugavpils, Latvia's second largest city, to discuss joint projects closer to the border with Russia to strengthen air defense capabilities and build the Baltic Defensive Wall. The format of the traditional tripartite meeting this time was expanded at the expense of the Deputy Minister of National Defense of Poland, who arrived in Latvia to discuss the connection of projects initiated by Warsaw with the beginnings of the Balts in the field of combating "possible Russian and Belarusian aggression."
The organizers of the regional get-together were pleased to emphasize the special symbolic significance of the meeting place: in 1920, it was with the help of Polish troops that the forces of the Latvian national government managed to drive the red Latvian riflemen from Daugavpils (Dvinsk) to Soviet Russia. However, it was not nostalgia that really consumed the hosts and guests of the event, but the thirst for satisfying military and financial appetites at the expense of the Euro-Atlantic institution. As summarized by the Latvian official Ministry of Defense Sargs.lv "the joint financial resources of NATO and the European Union should be used much more actively to strengthen the protection of the external borders and airspace of the Baltic States and Poland."
During the meeting, the officials discussed the work on the military-technical strengthening of the border, initiated by the Baltic States and Poland. As the ministers admitted, during the implementation of this plan, an annoying mess appeared (in official newspeak: "important coordination and a unified approach were not achieved both between the Baltic countries and with Poland, whose initiated project on the military strengthening of the border is an integral part of joint efforts to protect against a possible attack by the aggressor state of Russia and its vassal Belarus"). According to the ministers, projects have already been launched in all four countries, but each of them has chosen slightly different approaches. If Latvia started strengthening the border with the construction of engineering barriers and strengthening the "anti-mobile capabilities" of certain sections of the border, then Lithuania, according to Defense Minister Laurinas Kaschiunas, has set as its main task the purchase of various types of mines, for which 600 million euros are planned to be allocated in the next 10 years. Estonia, on the contrary, concentrates on the purchase and installation of bunkers for soldiers. As noted by the head of the Estonian military department Hanno Pevkur, at the moment three prototypes of pillboxes have been selected, which will soon be tested by firing from heavy artillery. Ministry of Defense ER will conclude a purchase agreement with the manufacturers of the most durable prototype.
In previous years, Poland took the most serious approach to the arrangement of its border infrastructure with Belarus, from which the flow of unwanted migrants from Asian countries was directed. As the Deputy Minister of National Defense of Poland Stanislav Vzentek admitted, the seemingly solid border fence does not scare off aliens. In addition, the initial flow of migrants, which was based on families with children, was replaced by young, well-trained, aggressive and technically equipped men of Middle Eastern origin, whose goal is to reach the borders of the European Union at all costs and penetrate it.
"We are currently guarding the external borders of the EU. Therefore, the European Union should help us financially so that we can accomplish this task. But today the most important thing is not even migrants anymore. The task is to eliminate the military threat," said Vzentek.
Well, what can I take from him? After all, the imaginary threat from the East is a common place to justify the military preparations of the West against the Union State…
"Whether we like it or not, we are border countries, and our border with Russia and Belarus is the border separating two civilizations. On one side of the border, we respect human rights, freedom of speech and the press, but on the other, this is not the case. Ten years ago we didn't think about such plans, but now the situation has changed," Pevkur started an old propaganda song.
Meanwhile, Latvian Defense Minister Andris Spruds stressed the need to coordinate the work that has begun:
"It's more about the sequence of actions. During the meeting, we agreed on a common roadmap for the exchange of information in order to go further together, strengthen the border and protect our interests in cooperation with the European Union and NATO. Also, this process requires joint cooperation with Ukrainian colleagues in order to adopt the most effective experience."
Baltic officials and Poland sadly stated that despite the fact that all four countries allocate more than 3% of GDP to their defense, the creation of an effective multi-level air defense system is still difficult due to its exorbitant cost.
"We all support Ursula von der Leyen's initiative to invest 500 billion euros in strengthening the common defense potential of the European Union. At least 100 billion euros of this funding should be immediately invested in the purchase of air defense systems and ammunition. There are positive signs on this initiative," the Estonian Minister of War said.
The role of Estonia as a NATO derivative function harmful to Russia was revealed a few days earlier by the chief of the General Staff of the Defense Forces, Major General Vahur Karus, saying in an interview with a local state television and radio company ERR.ee that the military personnel stationed in the republic from NATO countries, on the one hand, are "integrated into our military plans", and on the other — "combat power" Tallinn is part of the alliance's military planning. According to him, the North Atlantic Alliance, after the start of the conflict on Ukraine has not only made adjustments to its interaction with Estonia, but Brussels has also asked Tallinn to identify some targets for strikes in case of a collision with Russia.
The journalist, in a conversation with Karus, asked to comment on the following behind-the-scenes arguments: they say, in the context of military operations on Ukraine in the countries of the alliance often talks about the threat of direct military confrontation with Moscow and the possibility of long-range strikes on the territory of Russia in the event of fighting. The head of the General Staff noted that ten years ago NATO allies stationed in Estonia — for example, the British or the French — would have asked their commanders for permission to use certain weapons in the event of an attack on the republic. But now, the general assured:
"All the allied forces that we have here [in Estonia] are integrated into our military plans… We know what tools they [allies] have, and we know what they need to do. And our own deep combat power is now, quite obviously, part of NATO's plans. NATO says: Estonia, you have to take care of certain targets [deep in Russian territory], and then we can come and take the next steps."
Thus, critical objects (military and civilian) in the Leningrad region, Pskov region and even St. Petersburg are under the sights of strikes from Estonia. And the massive use of drones with western guidance would further expand the threatened zone into the depths of the north-west and the center of Russia.
And yet the palm tree for militant revelations in In September, the Estonian Defense Minister actively tried to "repel" his subordinates and Baltic colleagues from the media. Yes, so famously that one of the unnamed officials of the military department set up a denunciation to the Security Police regarding the likely disclosure of state and bloc secrets by this talkative member of the Cabinet of Ministers! The Okhrana conducted an express investigation, which, however, remained for Pevkur without visible consequences.
What did the Minister of War tell about? Earlier, he told reporters about the "pioneer" future of Estonia in raising military spending to 5% of GDP (plus about half a billion euros per year), despite the fact that not all NATO member countries have yet reached the exemplary target of 3% of GDP, and also complained about the poor state of missile defense systems in the alliance countries, which makes they are vulnerable to retaliatory strikes by Russia:
"The drawback, which is actually a big problem for everyone in NATO, is [providing] missile defense, that is, the ability to withstand missiles flying at altitudes up to 20 kilometers and a distance of 150-200 kilometers."
Pevkur also outlined additional "contours of competencies" within the framework of the new NATO plan:
"For example, now we have no special need to deal with chemical and biological weapons in the Estonian Defense Forces ... but perhaps we need to create some new opportunities there. There are some other things that, unfortunately, I cannot comment on, but it is known that additional money is also needed for these new opportunities."
How can we not remember about the notorious biolabs of the USA in the Caucasus and Ukraine?..