Daily Archives: March 8, 2022

Judy Woodruff:

In addition to the energy sanctions announced today by the president, inside Russia, the economic shockwaves continue.

The Central Bank has now set a limit on withdrawals of dollars from banks. The limit is now $10,000, with the rest paid out in increasingly worthless rubles.

To discuss the Russian war, the American and allied response, both in aid and sanctions, I spoke just moments ago with Victoria Nuland. She is the undersecretary of state for political affairs, the department's fourth-ranking official.

Undersecretary Nuland, thank you very much for joining us.

I first want to ask you about the news this afternoon that Poland will be supplying MiG-29 fighter jets to Ukraine. They're going to be doing it through Germany. I know you said that you, the U.S., was not informed ahead of time. But what is known about where these planes are going to be used? What's their mission?

Victoria Nuland, U.S. Undersecretary of State For Political Affairs: Well, Judy, I have to tell you that I have been with my with Senate friends for the last couple of hours. So I'm not fully informed, beyond the Polish press release.

We have been saying that, obviously, these planes belong to Poland and it's their sovereign right to do with them as they as they will. And the Ukrainians have been asking for them?

See original here:
Examining the American and NATO response to war in Ukraine - PBS NewsHour

James Stavridis, a former NATO supreme allied commander, said on Sunday that President Vladimir Putin "may be the best thing that ever happened" to NATO, explaining that the Russian leader's invasion of Ukraine had prompted the West to bolster its defenses.

In an interview with MSNBC's Jonathan Capehart, Stavridis, who served as a NATO commander from 2009 to 2013, cited Germany's boost in defense spending, announced days after Putin declared an assault on Ukraine.

"I spent four years as supreme allied commander of NATO. At every conference, every meeting of high-level NATO officials, I would find my way to Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany and the minister of defense, Ursula von der Leyen," Stavridis said. "And I would say to them, 'You've got to raise your defense spending.' And I got nowhere in four years.

"In 48 hours, Vladimir Putin has inspired the Germans to effectively nearly double their defense budget a smart move on the part of Germans," Stavridis continued.

"Vladimir Putin may be the best thing that ever happened to the NATO alliance," he told Capehart.

Germany, Europe's largest economy, announced on February 27 that it would create a special one-off fund of 100 billion euros for military spending. Chancellor Olaf Scholz also said the country's year-on-year defense budget moving forward would be more than 2% of its GDP, reversing a recent decline in military spending.

Scholz said the extra funds were to bolster Germany's own security and to fulfill its NATO obligations.

Stavridis told The New York Times on Friday that the established global system was like a battered car that "could use a good tuneup."

"But it is still on the road, rolling along, and, ironically enough, Vladimir Putin has done more in a week to energize it than anything I can remember," he said.

The retired four-star admiral on Sunday said he thought Putin was "highly unlikely" to use nuclear weapons or cross swords directly with NATO.

"When you end up in a conventional conflict, the NATO alliance outspends Russia 15 to one. We have a four-to-one advantage in ground troops. We have a five-to-one advantage in combat aircraft, a six-to-one advantage in warships," he said.

"He's not going to pick a fight with the NATO alliance."

Read more here:
Former NATO commander: Putin 'may be the best thing' to happen to NATO - Business Insider

The Nato security alliance faces a stark choice between fighting Putin now or fighting him later, a former senior British military chief has said.

Retired army general, Sir Chris Deverell, revealed he has changed his mind about a no-fly zone over Ukraine and now believes it could be necessary. If imposed it would put Nato aircraft in direct conflict with Russian planes.

Sir Deverell, who until his retirement in 2019 was in charge of military intelligence, cyber and special forces, said that Putin seems hell bent on escalation.

He said: I have been against the imposition of a no-fly zone by Nato in Ukraine, believing that it would surely escalate the conflict.

But Putin seems hell-bent on escalation. So the question is becoming: does Nato fight him now or fight him later?

He added, in comments made on Twitter, that the no-fly zone should only be imposed if the West were willing to back it up with on the ground troops.

Sir Deverell added that Putin will likely respond with nuclear threats, but said that his threats were likely to be meaningless.

He said: Whatever he can do to us, we can do to him.

Former general Sir Chris Deverell, in his role as Commander of Joint Forces Command, with then Prime Minister David Cameron in 2016.

(Getty Images)

The risk of course is that Putin is sufficiently mad to prefer a (very!) high scoring draw to a defeat, he said. But a) many of those around him may not be equally invested in his plans, and b) there are still possible outcomes that he need not admit as defeat.

Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky has repeatedly called on Western leaders to impose a no-fly zone, warning that this will become Europes problem if the US and Nato countries dont act.

So far Mr Zelenskys calls for a no-fly zone have been met with stiff resistance in the US and the UK because it would mean a direct military conflict with Russia.

A residential building is destroyed by shelling in the city of Kharkiv, Ukraine.

(EPA)

British defence secretary Ben Wallace has also argued a no-fly zone would not help Ukraine militarily as it would tip the balance in favour of the Russian troops on the ground.

Republican senator Marco Rubio recently said that setting up a no-fly zone would start World War III.

However Tobias Ellwood, chairman of the UK defence select committee, has argued that a no-fly zone should be imposed to prevent barrel bombs being dropped.

Protesters call for a no fly zone to be imposed over Ukraine at a rally in New York

(AFP via Getty Images)

Petro Poroshenko, Ukraines former president, has said that military aircraft should be supplied to his country so that Ukrainian pilots can defend their skies.

He told Sky news: We need to be united. This is not a war against Ukraine, this is a war against the whole West. Against US, against Europe, against the UK.

We need a plane - a military jet. Im absolutely confident we have no other way out. We like to have the plane now because we need to protect our airspace.

The countries Ukrainian refugees are fleeing to

(Press Association Images)

We dont need now the American pilots, we dont need now the American soldiers - just give us the opportunity to protect you.

Ukrainian foreign minister Dmytro Kuleba urged Nato to impose a no-fly zone on Monday, saying: We heroically repel attacks of the Russian armed forces on the ground. However we do have issues with the skies.

And The Russian air force dominates in the skies, and continues bombing our cities and killing many civilians.

Mr Kuleba added: We believe that the rejection of the no-fly zone is based on the lack of confidence in the strengths of Nato as an alliance, because the military might of Nato is bigger compared [with] Russia.

The Independent has a proud history of campaigning for the rights of the most vulnerable, and we first ran our Refugees Welcome campaign during the war in Syria in 2015. Now, as we renew our campaign and launch this petition in the wake of the unfolding Ukrainian crisis, we are calling on the government to go further and faster to ensure help is delivered. To find out more about our Refugees Welcome campaign, click here. To sign the petition click here. If you would like to donate then please click here for our GoFundMe page.

Read this article:
Nato fighting Putin is matter of when, not if as hes hell bent on escalation, former UK general warns - The Independent

A map of NATO member countries (in light blue) arrayed in a crescent opposite Ukraine and Russia. ... [+] From Turkey in the South to the Baltics North of Belarus, the geography - including non-NATO member Finland - hosts a variety of capability.

As of Tuesday, a convoy of Russian troops was reportedly nearing Kyiv, intent on encircling Ukraines capital. Putins forces may well accomplish their objective but in so doing theyll be acutely conscious of NATO countries and assets semi-circling their thrust West.

So far, the 30 nations that comprise NATO have offered no physical opposition to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. However, NATO is reinforcing its eastern members, with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg declaring the alliance would defend and protect every ally against any attack and every inch of NATO territory.

NATO began deploying elements of its 40,000-strong quick response military force (NRF) last Thursday, including its Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF), which is comprised of a core Franco-German brigade of 3,500 troops drawing on Frances 1st Infantry Regiment, 3rd Hussar Regiment and three German Army infantry/artillery battalions. Spain, Portugal, and Poland will also contribute units to the force.

While NATO has not detailed the geographic distribution of VJTF and other NRF forces, these and an additional 7,460 troops sent by the U.S. and Canada over the last fortnight are all on one [continuous] front facing a now clearly dangerous country, says Steven L Horrell, a nonresident senior fellow for transatlantic defense and security at the Washington D.C.-based Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA).

The troops, armor, anti-missile and aircraft units have been positioned to reassure the allies on NATOs eastern flank but also to gather intelligence on Russian troop movements, to provide border corridors for the movement of supplies to Ukraine and support the outflow of refugees from the country. Their presence also complicates and indirectly influences the strategic picture Putin sees.

The Countries Stepping Up or Aside

Obviously, NATO isnt NATO without American resources, leadership and sacrifice. But as the early days of Ukrainian conflict unfold, six Eastern European NATO nations have stepped notably forward in support of Ukraine. Others have gotten off the fence but not moved far from it. Moscow can see the disparity.

Horell, a recently retired career U.S. Navy intelligence officer, says its vital that Russia sees NATO power as more than just one flank, one threat.

I think weve been vocal recommitting to [NATO] Article 5, an attack on one is an attack on all. [NATO] forces should be distributed across the entire [European Russia/Ukranian] front.

Presenting one front is important given Russias view from the east, Horrell explains. Putin sees his northern, central and southern NATO borders differently.

VILNIUS, LITHUANIA - FEBRUARY 24: People hold flags and posters during a protest against Russia's ... [+] attack on Ukraine near Lithuanian Parliament on February 24, 2022 in Vilnius, Lithuania. Overnight, Russia began a large-scale attack on Ukraine, with explosions reported in multiple cities and far outside the restive eastern regions held by Russian-backed rebels. (Photo by Paulius Peleckis/Getty Images)

The Baltics (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania) have largely spoken to Russia and NATO with one unified voice, clearly articulating their concern about and opposition to Russian influence. Poland too, has cooperated closely with the West, like the Baltics spending the NATO-requested 2% of its GDP on defense. Its ethnically homogeneous population and unified political culture are powerful bulwarks against Russian hybrid warfare tactics.

Their resistance is complicated by the Russian exclave in Kalingrad, sandwiched between Lithuania and Poland on the Baltic Sea, where Russian missile systems threaten NATOs ability to reinforce the Baltics during a conflict or control the skies.

The narrower slice of territory west of Ukraine, home to Slovakia and Hungary, looks less problematic to Putin. As recently as January, Slovakia reluctantly agreed to allow the U.S. to place assets at two airfields near its mountainous border with Ukraine. Slovakias parliament approved a treaty by a margin of just three votes and a January opinion poll showed that 44.1% of Slovaks believed NATO and the United States were responsible for the tension between Russia and Ukraine, while 34.7% blamed Russia.

Hungarys prime minister, Viktor Orban, has for years pursued an eastern opening strategy, tightening relations with countries to the east including Russia. Hes frequently met with Putin including early last month.

In the last week, both countries have agreed to back NATO and the European Union on broader sanctions. They are also accepting significant portions of the 500,000-plus Ukranian refugees now streaming west. Small American F-15 (and possibly F-35) detachments are thought to have deployed to Slovakias Malacky Air Base and Hungarys Kecskemet Air Base.

Despite NATO declaring Hungarian troops certified for duty with the alliance last week, Hungary declared on Tuesday that it will not send troops or weapons to Ukraine and will not allow lethal weapons to transit its territory.

To the south, Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey present a mixed picture with notable opposition to Putin but varying degrees of inclination to display it.

Turkey, which is under U.S. sanctions for its acquisition of Russia's S-400 surface-to-air missile system, has maintained closer strategic relations with Moscow than NATO would like. As in Central Europe, energy is part of the picture. Turkey imports nearly one-third of its natural gas supply from Russia and Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoan have met frequently.

But Turkey has a capable, culturally U.S.-influenced military and ties with Ukraine including a deal to sell Bayraktar TB2 UAVs to Kyiv and to co-produce the ISR-strike drones in Ukraine.

What we have seen from Turkey is a considerable commitment to Ukraine, Horrell asserts. They have ties to the Crimean Tatars whove come under repression since the Russian annexation. He points to Turkeys sales to Ukraine of light combatant Corvettes and TB2 drones used extensively for ISR and even some strikes on Russian-led separatists in Donbas. Turkey, certainly within their defense establishment, remains committed to NATO.

A potential sign of its commitment came this week, with Turkey barring passage of warships through the Dardanelles and Bosphorus Straits to the Black Sea. Though Turkey will still allow warships through if they are returning to a home base, it promises to limit Russias ability to move ships from its other fleets to the Black Sea. USNI News reported that two of Russias Slava-class cruisers from Russias Northern and Pacific fleets currently operating in the Mediterranean couldnt enter the Black Sea.

President Erdogan has also just called for the cessation of fighting in Ukraine, reiterated Turkeys desire to become an EU member and said that Turkey would support any enlargement of NATO.

Turkey thus appears more of a challenge for Putin than it did this time last week. Its shipments of humanitarian supplies to Ukraine represent some support but its continued hosting of U.S. forces (and nuclear weapons) at Incirlik Air Base - just over 300 miles south of the Black Sea - is Turkeys main contribution to the NATO front so far.

Bulgarian Air Force MiG-29 lands in front of Spanish Eurofighter EF-2000 Typhoon II aircraft at Graf ... [+] Ignatievo airbase near Plovdiv on February 21, 2022. - Spain has deployed four fighter jets to fellow NATO member Bulgaria. NATO allies have put forces on standby and sent ships and fighter jets to bolster Europe's eastern defences as tensions soar over Russia's military buildup around Ukraine. (Photo by Nikolay DOYCHINOV / AFP) (Photo by NIKOLAY DOYCHINOV/AFP via Getty Images)

To the north and west, Bulgaria is a NATO state with a different starting point than Turkey Horrell says. While the country is committed to NATO, They have not opened their doors to an increased NATO footprint to secure the Black Sea region to the same extent that Romania has.

On Tuesday the Bulgarian government confirmed that its defense minister, Stefan Yanev, had been dismissed after a Facebook posting stating that the Russian invasion of Ukraine should not be called war.

Nevertheless, Bulgaria does host a limited NATO presence with U.S. Army joint training and investments at the Novo Selo Training Range, 45 miles from the Black Sea resort of Burgas. Ukraine is also home to a large ethnic Bulgarian minority and Bulgaria has reiterated its commitment to accepting Ukranian refugees.

As of this afternoon, new Bulgarian Minister of Defense Dragomir Zakov said that if necessary, NATO forces can be formally sent to and stationed on Bulgarian territory. Given Bulgarias historic ties to Russia (despite the latters repression of it), this signals a real concern for Putin, potentially limiting his freedom of action in the Black Sea and Crimea.

The Keys

Along with Poland, Romania is a key in the strategic front arcing around Russia. Horrell says Romania is punching above their weight as an ally in NATO.

With land bordering both Ukraine and the Black Sea, Romania affords NATO proximity to southwestern portions of Ukraine as yet uncontrolled by Russia (thus possible supply routes). The country also hosts the U.S. Aegis Ashore Missile Defense System at Deveselu and has supported recent U.S. Army investments in Camp Mihail Kogalniceanu land base and airport near the vital Black Sea naval base at Constanta.

Romania is also taking increased contingents from NATOs NRF by the day. Over the weekend, Italy sent four Eurofighter Typhoons to bolster the NATO air policing mission long since underway in Romania. They join recently sent Eurofighters from Germany to Mihail Koglniceanu Air Base. American F-16s and F-35s are already flying from Borcea airbase in the southern part of the country.

Three hundred troops from Belgium, 500 from France have recently arrived to join the 1,000 U.S. troops transferred to Romania from Germany earlier this month. Earlier Tuesday, Romanian Foreign Minister Bogdan Aurescu told France 24 that the increasing NATO presence in the country "cannot be seen as a provocation" but rather a "legitimate response" by the alliance to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

So too, can other reinforcements along the NATO crescent facing Russia. One may ultimately come in the form of Finland formally joining the alliance, a possibility that looks more likely given a new poll showing that a majority of Finns now support accession to NATO. Finnish Prime Minister Sanna Marin has said in recent days that joining NATO is an understandable response to the ongoing situation.

That would add another very capable military (and determined population) to the table with a salutary effect on the Baltics position at NATOs northeastern tip.

One of the ironies is that if Putins stated strategic goal is to keep states on their border from moving further westward, hes having the opposite effect, Horrell says.

And having a robust presence on Russias borders has many advantages. All of the Eastern [NATO] countries have intelligence collection advantages based on geography, electromagnetic proximity and access. They also have years and years of understanding Russian operations. [Gathering] them together on one continuous front generates more pressure [on Russia] than might be obvious.

Excerpt from:
More Than One Flank, One Threat - The Strengthening Crescent Of NATO Nations Around Russia - Forbes

Former national security adviser John BoltonJohn BoltonBarr becomes latest former ally to escalate feud with Trump Forget the critics, listen to Trump and consider his role models John Bolton: Putin was 'waiting' for possible US withdrawal from NATO MORE said on Friday that he believes Russian President Vladimir PutinVladimir Vladimirovich PutinOvernight Defense & National Security More troops dispatched to Europe amid crisis On The Money Biden faces pressure to ban Russian oil Gas prices spike as support for Russian oil ban grows MORE was waiting for a possible United States withdrawal from NATO, claiming former President TrumpDonald TrumpTrump calls Barr a 'Bushie' who went to the other side Gas prices spike as support for Russian oil ban grows Barr becomes latest former ally to escalate feud with Trump MORE would have likely made such a move had he been reelected.

Bolton,during a Washington Post Live event,was asked about his memoir, in which heclaimedthat Trump wanted to leave the military alliance in 2018. The newspapers Opinions Editor-at-Large Michael Duffy asked him how closeTrump was to withdrawingthe United Statesfrom NATO.

Yeah, I had my heart in my throat at that NATO meeting. I didn't know what the president would do. He called me up to his seat seconds before he gave his speech. And I said, 'Look, go right up to the line, but don't go over it,' Bolton replied.

I sat back down, I had no idea what hed do. I thought hed put his foot over it, but at least he didn't withdraw then," he continued. "In a second Trump term, I think he may well have withdrawn from NATO, and I think Putin was waiting for that."

Taylor Budowich, a spokesperson for Trump, knocked Boltons comments.

"John Bolton is only happy when America is at war. President Trump led America into one of the most peaceful times in U.S. history, which included growing investment into NATO by $50 billion," he said in a statement. "John Bolton is just mad he was fired before it could be spent."

White House press secretary Jen PsakiJen PsakiMenendez slams Biden administration over reported oil talks with Venezuela Gas prices spike as support for Russian oil ban grows Overnight Health Care Florida sets off COVID-19 vaccine firestorm MORE, who was asked aboutBolton's remarks during a press briefing on Friday, claimed most Americans were grateful that President BidenJoe Biden'Batman' scene criticized for portraying subway attack on Asian man GAO says 114 Capitol Police officers reported injuries on Jan. 6 Trump calls Barr a 'Bushie' who went to the other side MOREs approach to global engagement is different than Trump's.

I saw those comments you know, another reason why the American people are grateful the majority of the American people that President Biden has not taken a page out of his predecessors playbook as it relates to global engagement and global leadership, because, certainly, we could be in a different place, she said.

Updated at 9:15 a.m.

See the article here:
John Bolton: Putin was 'waiting' for possible US withdrawal from NATO | TheHill - The Hill

Every morning, the U.K. Defense Ministry tweets an updated map describing the situation in Ukraine, and every day, it gets a little worse. Mondays map looked like this:

Because Kyiv is the capital and main population center, most attention has been focused on the northern front, from east of Kharkiv to west of Kyiv. But look southward: From its initial staging area in Crimea, the Russian military has succeeded in wresting control of large parts of the coast from Ukrainian forces. While maps like this are of limited utility, and do not capture the intricacies of what control over a given area really means, its enough to understand that the most significant Russian progress has come along the Black Sea.

Its worth considering exactly why that is while there might still be time to do something about it.

The ports along the Black Sea (southwest) and Sea of Azov (southeast) account for about 85 percent of Ukraines grain exports. Ukraine supplies 13 percent of the worlds corn and a similar share of its wheatmeaning that disruptions to trade along Ukraines coast could reverberate in food markets around the world. Ukraines seaports also account for about 80 percent of its ferrous metallurgical exports.

The major port cities that Russian forces have yet to occupy are Mariupol on the Sea of Azov and Odessa on the Black Sea. The former is under blockade, and the latter may come under attack any day. And the de facto blockade of Ukrainian ports by the Russian Navy began even before the recent land and air operations.

The assault on Ukraines Black Sea ports should be understood as economic warfare by the Russians. Not only will the interruption of normal trade deprive Ukraine of the resources it needs to sustain a war effort, but it will also impose costs on almost every country in the world, either directly or indirectly, for not helping Russia swallow its neighbor.

Podcast March 08 2022

Photo credit: Getty Images Thank you for subscribing. Leave a comment or share this episode.

Can NATO do anything to allow Ukraine access to Black Sea trade routes?

Probably not.

The first possible option would have been to create land routes around the naval blockade. But there simply arent enough trucks to make up for the volume of goods cargo ships can carry, and even if there were, they would realistically only be able to move goods to Europe, rather than to the whole world as ships can.

What about having NATO forces escort cargo ships through the Russian blockade, daring the Russians to try and bully the American Navy rather than just defenseless merchant sailors?

This, too, is impossible because of the Montreux Convention of 1936. Under that treaty, countries along the Black Sea get special naval privileges, and other countries are strictly limited in what ships may enter the sea (for example, no aircraft carriers or submarines), how many at a time, and for how long.

Turkey, which controls the straits linking the Black Sea to the Mediterranean, gets to decide how these rules are enforced, and Ankara has been wishy-washy on whether it either wants to or even can use its privileges under the treaty to disrupt Russian operations.

Now, the United States isnt a signatory of the Montreux Treaty, so technically these rules dont apply to the U.S. Navy. But American warships have traditionally respected them anywaynot least because of the ten countries which are signatories, eight are U.S. allies: France, the U.K., Australia, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, Turkey, and Japan.

More to the point, asserting our right to use this legal technicality would mean sailing a U.S. warship right through Istanbul.

If using the U.S. Navy to break the blockade isnt an option, then what about our treaty allies? Well, the ones with more capable navies arent Black Sea states, so their access is limited. And the Black Sea states dont have big enough navies, even though they have plenty of access. Catch-22.

One possible option would be to give Ukraine Harpoon anti-ship missiles. Originally developed by the Navy in the 1970s, more than 30 countries now use the weapon. If sinking a couple Russian cruisers wasnt enough to end the blockade, it would at least raise the costs for the Russian Navy.

Of course, its much easier to deploy, train on, and test a new (at least to the Ukrainians) weapons system when theres not already a war. Meaning that the best time to give Ukraine Harpoons would have been at some point between 2014 and last month. (The same goes for the Stinger and Javelin missiles now being ferried frantically across the Polish-Ukrainian border.)

There are other, even less attractive options: small boat attacks against warships, laying mines to endanger the blockading ships, attacking the Russian Navy by air, or other acts of maritime guerrilla warfare. But these would likely be suicide operations, for all intents and purposes.

The hope of keeping Ukraines ports open is probably unrealistic at this point. The only way to win the war at sea is victory on land.

Excerpt from:
Why NATO Cant Move Into the Black Sea and Save Odessa - The Bulwark

NATO has nearly doubled the number of military jets on alert across Europe amid concerns that Russias reckless flying in international airspace could escalate alongside its war in Ukraine.

The alliances move to constantly guard its eastern edge highlights how rapidly the security situation has evolved in and out of Ukraine over the past 10 days, as well as the stakes of NATOs biggest test since its founding in 1949.

More than 60 NATO planes are on high alert at all times to await possible airspace violations, the alliance said in December. Thats grown to more than 100 combat aircraft now rotating through the sky in shifts.

A force of myriad fighter aircraft like American F-15s, F-16s and F-35s, plus NATO Eurofighters has shifted in the past week from dispatching jets as needed to escort uncooperative Russian pilots, to actively defending allied airspace, NATOs Allied Air Command spokesperson Jonathan Bailey said Friday.

There have been scrambles in response to Russian air activity in international airspace where they are not complying with air safety regulations, Bailey told Air Force Times. We are maintaining 24/7 patrols in the skies along our eastern borders.

Two Russian Sukhoi Su-27s and two Su-24s violated Sweden's airspace on March 2, 2022, the Swedish Air Force said. The Swedes sent Gripen jets to escort them away in a brief interaction. (Swedish Air Force)

Air policing planes identify and address renegade aircraft, such as when allied pilots intercept Russian military jets that veer near their airspace or if a civilian plane is unresponsive or hijacked. Theyre not allowed to fire unless fired upon when flying over a foreign country; most interdictions take place without incident and do not enter allied airspace.

Russian military aircraft often do not transmit a transponder code indicating their position and altitude, do not file a flight plan or do not communicate with air traffic controllers, posing a potential risk to civilian airliners, NATO noted in 2020.

As of Feb. 26, the third day of Russias invasion of Ukraine, NATO air policing assets had not interacted with Russian aircraft since the war began, Allied Air Command told Air Force Times. That changed as the following seven days unfolded.

Still, Bailey noted the transatlantic alliance has not intercepted more Russians than usual in recent months. He did not say how many, how often or where those incidents are happening.

Russian pilots arent limiting their bad behavior to NATO nations. Four Russian fighters entered Swedish airspace on Wednesday, prompting the Nordic country to send up its own Gripen jets to see them out.

Two Su-27 and two Su-24 fighters violated Swedish airspace over the sea east of Gotland, an island off Swedens East Coast, the countrys Air Force said the same day. The event was brief and under control, the service said.

With the current situation as backdrop, we take this incident very seriously. Russias conduct is unprofessional and irresponsible, Swedish Air Force boss Maj. Gen. Carl-Johan Edstrm said in a release.

Like Ukraine, Sweden likely would not benefit from direct military assistance from the U.S. and much of Europe if Russia escalates matters. It has not formally joined NATO, preferring instead to maintain official neutrality.

Fending off Russian aggression in the air has taken on a darker tone than usual for NATO and its neighbors as Ukraine burns next door.

NATO fighter jets scrambled around 370 times across Europe in 2021, mostly to check aircraft flying unannounced near allied air pace, the alliance said in a Dec. 28 press release. Around 80 percent of the missions, 290 in total, were in response to flights by Russian military aircraft.

Most of those instances occurred in the Baltics, over Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, where the alliance has flown air policing missions since 2004, NATO said. One intercept can involve any number of aircraft.

That level of air policing operations was lower than in 2020 but generally on par with recent years. NATO forces scrambled more than 400 times in 2020, including about 350 in response to Russian flights a moderate increase from 2019, the alliance said.

NATO is vigilant, and we will always do what it takes to protect and defend all allies, spokesperson Oana Lungescu said in December.

Rachel Cohen joined Air Force Times as senior reporter in March 2021. Her work has appeared in Air Force Magazine, Inside Defense, Inside Health Policy, the Frederick News-Post (Md.), the Washington Post, and others.

Continue reading here:
Around-the-clock NATO air patrols fly to keep Russia at bay - AirForceTimes.com

Press play to listen to this article

Russian President Vladimir Putin is likely to ramp up his military ambitions and challenge NATO in the Baltic Sea countries of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia unless he is stopped in Ukraine, European Commission Vice President Valdis Dombrovskis warned in an interview with POLITICO.

The trade commissioner, who grew up in the Soviet Union and draws on his experience as a former prime minister of Latvia, said the EU had to take the Russian threat seriously, after years of equivocation by Brussels toward Moscow.

If we do not support Ukraine, its not going to stop in Ukraine. Clearly Putin is now in some kind of aggressive war mood and unfortunately it is likely that this aggression will continue in other countries, he said.

Asked whether he was particularly worried about Moldova, he identified the Baltic countries as a concern. If you look at escalating Russias aggressive rhetoric and even statements claiming Russia supporting Belarusian interests in having access to Baltic Sea, and the increasing anti-Baltic rhetoric well in Ukraine, it also started with increasing anti-Ukrainian rhetoric.

The prediction that the Baltic countries could be next in Putins sights following the invasion of Ukraine reflects the level of alarm in some quarters of the European Commission over Putins next move. Dombrovskis has long warned of the threat posed by the Russian president.

While accepting that Russias nuclear threat was serious, Dombrovskis warned against appeasing the Russian leader.

The question is: To what extent we are giving in to this blackmail because it can be used all the time against everything? Putin will continue his aggressive wars, he will always use this blackmail, he said. These are lessons that should have been learned before. Appeasement of the aggressor is not working, and the aggressor needs to be stopped by all means.

Dombrovskis was also skeptical about diplomatic overtures to Putin. The question is whether they bring some tangible results in terms of stopping the war, or at least providing a cease-fire or humanitarian corridors. Currently, none of these unfortunately materialized. French President Emmanuel Macron has been playing a lead role in Europes outreach to Putin, with the Russian president also speaking to European Council President Charles Michel and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz in recent days.

The former Latvian prime minister stressed new sanctions on Russia could come within days.

Nothing should be off the table, said Dombrovsksis, including in the energy sector. We should do more, because this aggression unfortunately is not stopping so we should see a way in a sense to stop Putins ability to finance this war.

Although Dombrovskis is taking a hard line, it is far from clear that Europe would be able to crack down hard on Russian energy as Germany is dead set against such a measure.

The measures under discussion are in the field of crypto assets; steps to widen the list of banks cut off from the SWIFT payments system; and removing Russias most favored nation status at the World Trade Organization.

Dombrovskis also wanted to extend import bans already agreed on for Belarus to Russia to avoid a loophole round the embargo.

On the possibility of targeting Russian oil and gas, Dombrovskis said an assessmentby the European Commissionwas ongoing, but he stressed that nothing should be off the table. Amid a surge in oil prices following speculation that the United States could ban Russian oil, the Commission said thatdoing something on oil maybe somewhat less disruptive than doing something on gas.

This article is part ofPOLITICO Pro

The one-stop-shop solution for policy professionals fusing the depth of POLITICO journalism with the power of technology

Exclusive, breaking scoops and insights

Customized policy intelligence platform

A high-level public affairs network

Continue reading here:
Putin is likely to hit NATO in the Baltic if he wins in Ukraine, EU vice president warns - POLITICO Europe

Video Duration 24 minutes 15 seconds 24:15

The NATO alliance says it does not seek war but is ready for it after Russia invaded Ukraine.

NATO foreign ministers have met in Brussels for a special summit on Ukraine.

The alliance has imposed more sanctions on Russian President Vladimir Putin and his inner circle.

And the US is going after business leaders who are closely tied to the Kremlin.

But none of this appears to be swaying Putin into pulling back his troops.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken says NATO does not want confrontation with Moscow but it stands ready if conflict comes.

But what will the consequences be if the block gets involved?

Presenter: Dareen Abughaida

Guests:

Brooks Tigner Correspondent for Janes Defence Weekly

Robert Hunter Former US ambassador to NATO

Andrey Baklanov Chairman of the Board of the Association of Russian Diplomats

View post:
Will NATO get involved in the war in Ukraine? - Al Jazeera English

As the Russian invasion of Ukraine grinds into its third week, its becoming clearer by the day that Moscow has grossly underestimated the resolve of Ukrainians to defend their homeland. The moral clarity of Ukrainian stoicism in the face of Russian aggression has galvanised Western public opinion and provided a degree of unity among the US and its allies not witnessed since terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

Most including the Kremlin itself expected a lightning Russian military victory. But integrated and resilient Ukrainian defences have accentuated the serious underperformance of numerically superior Russian forces that possess overwhelming firepower backed by potent cyber capabilities and the worlds largest nuclear weapons inventory.

A man takes a photo of the remains of a missile in a street in the Vydubychi district of Kyiv, Ukraine. Russian forces have shelled Europes largest nuclear power plant. Credit:AP/Andriy Dubchak

Operationally, the Russian military has failed to gain momentum on the ground and its increasingly unrestrained bombing of civilian targets including the shocking attack on a nuclear power plant underscores its weakness in Ukraine rather than its strength.

Politically, Russian President Vladimir Putin appears to have seriously miscalculated by misjudging the resolve of the West, in particular the US and its NATO allies. Its highly likely that Putin expected to drive a wedge into NATO by dividing eastern European members states from more established members such as France, Germany, and Britain. That hasnt happened.

To the contrary, NATO unity is stronger today than it has been since the Cold War, and European allies more assured than ever that the US will be automatically engaged in the fight should Russia invade a NATO member state.

Putin also seems to have miscalculated on the sanctions front, which will impose a massive cost on Russias economy and could well lead to the gradual collapse of the Russian state despite the countrys significant cash reserves.

Loading

While having appalling consequences for ordinary Ukrainians, the drawn-out Russian invasion has, paradoxically, yielded some benefits for NATO. It has provided an intelligence window for the US and its allies to analyse the performance of Russian military systems and personnel in a combat environment. From the telemetry of cruise missiles to the morale of conscript soldiers, Russias military is now under the microscope of the US and its allies.

The invasion has also allowed real-time assessments of the performance of NATO-certified weapons provided to the Ukrainians for use against Russian systems. Given that these weapons would be used to defend eastern European member states against a Russian ground and air assault, these assessments will be important in NATO planning.

Go here to read the rest:
Putins military blunders give NATO a birds-eye view of Russias capability for a bigger war - but that threat remains real - Sydney Morning Herald