10) jl The fundamental geopolitical reality in Central and Eastern Europe is the inherent imbalance of power between Russia and its immediate and near neighbors. and direct military dominance over the mis-named "Commonwealth of Independent States. and has refused to define its thousand-mile border. Russia has repeatedly and brutally threatened the three Baltic Republics.M." Indeed. 1997 that Russian Foreign Minister Y. and a new Submarine-Launched Ballistic Missile--all already in development or production. so too will NATO membership help diminish longstanding animosities between Central European nations. Portugal. the mere prospect of NATO membership has helped promote settlement of outstanding issues predating the Second World War between Germany and the Czech Republic. Lithuania will be the only landbridge between the two.. Primakov stated at a cabinet meeting that "Russia should not be afraid to use economic sanctions" to in disputes with former Soviet republics over the status of their Russian minorities. there is clear evidence of a revival of Russian expansionism: Russia has achieved a "reunion" with Belarus.M.. or even military infrastructure on the soil of those new members Moscow is prepared to countenance. Italy. as well as significant units of the former Soviet Black Sea fleet." Russian spending for research and development of high-technology weapons has increased nearly sixfold over the past three years. Primakov have opened negotiations with the following demands: That NATO accept a 10-year moratorium on the accession of any other Central European nation after the entry of Poland. So too will NATO membership today lend stability to states still trying to revive or create capitalism and democracy after generations of Communist autocracy. That no former Soviet Union republic--including the Baltic states forcibly annexed by the USSR as part of the infamous 1939 Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact--ever be considered for NATO membership. Already.5 million the size of Romania. either individually or in combination. a small state physically separated from Russia by 325 miles of Ukrainian territory. NATO proved essential to fostering democracy and the rule of law in Germany. Even today. tactical nuclear weapons." Russia maintains significant military forces in the Kaliningrad enclave bordering Lithuania and Poland--forces not restricted by the CFE Flank Agreement limitations. And while tolerating dramatic deterioration in its Soviet-era force structure. NATO expansion might fairly be characterized as a Western response to accelerating Russian efforts to revive the Soviet imperium. including a new strain of anthrax which antibiotics cannot counteract. The union will again bring Russian power. Russian commentators stressed that the "union" was a riposte to NATO expansion. to the eastern borders of Poland and the Baltic states--700 miles farther west. And just as membership in NATO helped abate the historic rivalry between Germany and France and contain disputes between Greece and Turkey. the Baltic nations.
should deter Russia from attacking any of the allies. Moscow might be tempted to try it in the Baltics as a way of testing Nato's resolve. NATO armies will invade Belarus and western Russia. change the domestic policy because human rights are allegedly encroached on. President of the Academy of Geopolitical. August 23. "I think that Russia does have designs on the Baltic states.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/2609100/Troop-surge-strategist-Fred-Kagan-calls-forbeefed-up-Baltic-defences-against-Russia. November. air defense components. Freeman 8 (Colin. And their worries about Moscow¶s intentions are shared by the Nordic countries.pdf] AD: 7/7/10)JM Are allies right to worry about a war? Some new NATO countries hold fears of Russia dating back to the Cold War. Turning each country into a defensive "porcupine". and only secondly to fight if war breaks out. The second scenario involves a warning from the Kremlin to the United States that continuation of the aggression will trigger retaliation with the use of all weapons in nuclear arsenals.org.uk/pdf/wp_929_nato_nov09. 78. journalist for the Telegraph. parts of the Caucasus and Caspian region. The Russians knew that Georgia would be easy.html] AD: 7/7/10)JM Although any Russian action against a full Nato member would be a far greater act of aggression than its recent incursion into Georgia. one for all¶ clause. It will stop the war and put negotiations into motion. So can all fears of Russia be put down to historical animosities? And what precisely do the North and Central Europeans worry about? Does NATO have adequate measures in place to deter a potential conflict with Russia or defend against it? In principle NATO¶s µall for one.1 Equally. Russia will refuse and its objects (radars. [. NATO deters Russia and stops escalation. known as Article V." he said.". Defense and Security.Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010 Scholars 71 Russia Core Impact Defense ± NATO Contains Russia Russia won¶t start a war ± it knows NATO will smack it down. Refusal to bow to the demands will be met with a mass aviation and missile strike at Army and Navy assets. but I would like them to know that somewhere like Estonia would be very hard.cer. The acceptance will be followed by talks over the estrangement of the Kaliningrad enclave. Two turns of events may follow that. Once this phase is over. July. he argues. [. An ultimatum will be sent to Russia: say. and they have established a precedent in Georgia where they think they can use force to defend Russian minorities in other countries.telegraph.2 And so should NATO¶s military superiority. as one NATO insider put it. an even stiffer ultimatum will be presented demanding something up to the deployment of NATO "peacekeepers" on the territory of Russia. But could Russia have reasons to doubt that NATO would respond collectively to an attack on a Central European ally? And what is the state of NATO¶s preparations for the defence of a member-state in Central or Northern Europe? NATO is enough of a threat to contain Russia. infrastructure) will be wiped out by guided missiles with conventional warheads and by aviation. international control over the Russian gas and oil complex. infrastructure.co. command posts. or give Western businesses access to oil and gas fields. and it is not obvious that these can be ³exorcised through contingency planning´. knowing that the alliance might dither about deploying even conventional forces straightaway. would make such a move almost unthinkable in the first place. "The whole purpose of Nato is to deter war. director of foreign policy & defence @ CER. Ivashov 7 (Leonid. Moscow may accept the ultimatum through the use of some device that will help it save face. Everything may begin as a local conflict that will rapidly deteriorate into a total confrontation. Valasek 9 (Tomas. and objects of defense industry. ³Will America Fight Russia?´)JM Ivashov: Numerous scenarios and options are possible. the Central Europeans have suffered real harassment and occasional µsoft¶ attacks (like cyber-strikes) from Russia in recent years. and NATO control over Russian nuclear forces.
for others to ensure regional security. [. in History from the U of Chicago. Germany's Minister of Defense. Ex-Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt wrote that Russia's Baltic policy is a litmus test of its European and security policies. states cannot keep looking. for building the Europe we want to see. while forsaking Latvia and Estonia. the relations between the United States and its European allies..mil/pubs/summary. is already eroding. as they are now tempted to do. in general.12 Accordingly. Germany could incline further to make a bilateral deal with Russia over Central and Eastern Europe. Failure to do so will have grave consequences. which is already weakened due to NATO and the EU's reluctance to expand. knowing or believing that some other state or organization can or will formulate solutions for major issues like Baltic security. effectively abstains from serious participation in the solution. If free riding pervades an entire alliance as in the 1930s. and lead the non-NATO littoral states and Europe's other security organizations.16 Volker Ruhe. Estonia follows suit regarding its future entry into the EU and supports admitting at least one Baltic state into NATO so that others might later gain a hearing. reassure.Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010 Scholars 72 Russia Core Impact Defense ± NATO Contains Russia NATO is deterring Russia now. wrote that the Baltic states are the practical testing ground for meeting the challenges of reshaping NATO's missions. European security organizations must deter and reassure Russia while enhancing the security of the littoral states.14 Regional cooperation. to stabilize the Baltic region.15 Russia could then be tempted to extend an unwelcome protectorate over the Baltic states. Free riding occurs when one or more states.11 These organizations must also jointly share in any Baltic security plan so that no state or organization obtains a free ride. but as a Central European one that seeks unilateral entry to European organizations. and. not as a Baltic state. To prevent such outcomes and protect the Baltic states. Lithuania poses. will further decrease where free riding and renationalized agendas prevail. too.strategicstudiesinstitute. As it is. Free riding undermines Baltic integration in Europe by dissolving the cohesion of the new NATO-led security system. the EU and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). toward regional as well as European military-political integration. Ph. the hoped for partnership with Russia. territorial scope.17 German Foreign Minister Klaus Kinkel also stressed these states' importance for future European security. security guarantees are devalued and could even become worthless.cfm?q=146