Putin to Europe: Screw You! Arms Buildup! Wooo!

[MKSheppard]

Linka

(Adds quotes from Lavrov, background)

OSLO, April 26 (Reuters) - NATO expressed grave concern at Russian President Vladimir Putin's decision to freeze Moscow's commitments under a European arms control pact on Thursday.

NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov confirmed Putin's announcement suspending Russia's implementation of the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) pact to NATO ministers at a meeting in Oslo.

"That message was met by concern, grave concern, disappointment and regret," de Hoop Scheffer told a news conference. "The allies are of the opinion that the CFE is one of the cornerstones of European security," he added.

Minutes later, Lavrov defended the Russian move at a separate news conference.

"I think that we cannot be unconcerned by the fact that NATO military infrastructure is creeping up to our borders," he said.

Lavrov said Russia had been complying with the treaty and it was time for NATO to show it was serious about it, warning: "Unless our partners do that we will withdraw from the treaty."

The CFE Treaty was negotiated in the months after the Cold War among the then-22 member states of NATO and the Warsaw Pact countries with the goal of achieving verifiable reductions in conventional military equipment. Only Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia and Ukraine have so far ratified an adapted 1999 version.

NATO has for long insisted that Russia withdraw its remaining troops from Georgia and Moldova before its members ratify a revised version of the CFE.

[DrMckay]

Soooo. Looks like Putin wants to go out with a bang. How long until we start flying the Nuclear-armed bombers and massing armor at the Fulga Gap again? (Oh. wait. It's all in Iraq. My bad.)

Bets anyone?

[Stuart Mackey]

Thatcher for PM!

Ressurect Reagan!

The Good ol days are back
Lets hear it for the Great Game.

[Ritterin Sophia]

Yes! I only got to experience the last two years of the Cold War! W00t conventional enemies FTW.

[Ritterin Sophia]

Edit: Also, I think it's time to release our Reagan/John Paul II Hybrid Clonetroopers.

[Darth Raptor]

This cannot be! I was told that Russia was Good now. I was told that they loved freedom, and money, and Jesus!

More seriously, one can't pragmatically fault a major world power for doing this; what with the land grabs the US and China are making. In fact, I daresay the EU would be well-advised to follow suit, lest they be at a disatvantage when this all goes down. WWIII I mean. It won't be between East and West. It will be a five-way free-for-all.

[wolveraptor]

Although this could turn into an arms race, at least there's no stupid idealogical battle between the forces of righteousness and evil communism. That really blew. America set up a fuckton of right-wing dictators to counter the Soviet left-wing ones. Now half of those countries are in shambles.

[Ritterin Sophia]

EU would be more advantaged by keeping the US as an ally if WW3 comes, no one likes glow-in-the-dark cities. Then there's the Navy...

[Darth Raptor]

Although this could turn into an arms race, at least there's no stupid idealogical battle between the forces of righteousness and evil communism. That really blew. America set up a fuckton of right-wing dictators to counter the Soviet left-wing ones. Now half of those countries are in shambles.

Not to mention permanently skewing politics in the US itself far to the right. A lot of our current Dominionist problems stem from an overcorrection made in the effort to be Not Communist. But that's only a bad thing if you don't love Jesus.

[Tanasinn]

Is this even a realistic move for a nation as poor as modern day Russia?

[starfury]

This cannot be! I was told that Russia was Good now. I was told that they loved freedom, and money, and Jesus!

More seriously, one can't pragmatically fault a major world power for doing this; what with the land grabs the US and China are making. In fact, I daresay the EU would be well-advised to follow suit, lest they be at a disatvantage when this all goes down. WWIII I mean. It won't be between East and West. It will be a five-way free-for-all.

Cool, will see any alliance similar to the Humanist Inheritance world of Redimperator's story, which had for me a rather shocking China-EU alliance as the new Axis Powers, instead of lame old China-islamic-Russia Axis

[Omega18]

Is this even a realistic move for a nation as poor as modern day Russia?

Only to a limited degree.

Russia's ability to actually effectively threaten most of Europe really sucks at this point, and is getting worse as European nations continue to acquire new military equipment. The reality is Russia's conventional military is continuing to deteriorate as the older equipment produced in large numbers while Russia was still the USSR becomes non-functional. The new equipment is not being acquired at a rate even close to compensating for this. The other reality is that any attempt to move West militarily has to deal with the practical reality that countries such as Poland are now in Russia's way.

[K. A. Pital]

Big fuss over nothing. We just want to have our hands untied in questions of building and selling military equipment. Europe refuses - well, too bad. We have asked not to implement american interceptors in Europe, Europe refused. Here's our little demarsch.

[Vympel]

The reality is Russia's conventional military is continuing to deteriorate as the older equipment produced in large numbers while Russia was still the USSR becomes non-functional.

This deterioration of which you speak is restricted to aircraft and ships, and that's about it. In terms of aircraft, it's not a very realistic "threat" since they didn't do much flying for over a decade and so much of the old stock was retired and nothing but the last generation was left.

The ground equipment is absolutely fine, there's no "deterioration" going on there, unless you count the dismantling of T-55s/T-62s/T-64s at tank repair plants as some sort of loss they can't sustain. Those same plants continue to run the current ground force equipment through regular refit to like new condition, and now, modernization (combined with new production).

[K. A. Pital]

This deterioration of which you speak is restricted to aircraft and ships, and that's about it.

RVSN as well, sadly. Especially since air craft and ships are both parts of the nuclear triade.

[Gustav32Vasa]

The reality is Russia's conventional military is continuing to deteriorate as the older equipment produced in large numbers while Russia was still the USSR becomes non-functional.

This deterioration of which you speak is restricted to aircraft and ships, and that's about it.

How about the ordinary soldier? I have heard horror stories that they haven't got paid for months, getting raped in "games" and so on. What is the state of the army?

[K. A. Pital]

What is the state of the army?

In short, moral breakdown. Not least due to lack of discipline, corruption, cuts in funding and Chechnya. The Army is still capable of running a small war I think, but de-facto it's only slightly less corrupt than the police. And the police by now is corrupt completely.

[Gustav32Vasa]

What is the state of the army?

In short, moral breakdown. Not least due to lack of discipline, corruption, cuts in funding and Chechnya. The Army is still capable of running a small war I think, but de-facto it's only slightly less corrupt than the police. And the police by now is corrupt completely.

How true is the horror stories I've heard? How is it reported in Russian news?

[Omega18]

This deterioration of which you speak is restricted to aircraft and ships, and that's about it. In terms of aircraft, it's not a very realistic "threat" since they didn't do much flying for over a decade and so much of the old stock was retired and nothing but the last generation was left.

The ground equipment is absolutely fine, there's no "deterioration" going on there, unless you count the dismantling of T-55s/T-62s/T-64s at tank repair plants as some sort of loss they can't sustain. Those same plants continue to run the current ground force equipment through regular refit to like new condition, and now, modernization (combined with new production).

The point is that if Russia theoretically actually does attempt to outright invade the West, the loss of the older equipment still impairs its ability to actually pull it off. The T-55s and T-62 are admittedly basically truly mostly useless at this point, but T-64s are a different story and could have potentially had some degree of value in a invasion where the goal of Russia would be to use sheer numbers to defeat and overwhelm its opponents. While I have not studied this in detail, I also wonder about the actual condition of some of the older T-72 tanks at this point since they are certainly not new equipment. Even if technically considered in service or available in the reserves, if a bunch of older T-72 promptly break down when used in a military confrontation, that obviously reduces their practical value.

I'm not saying the Russian military is about to be completely helpless by any means, just that its becoming less comparatively powerful than it used to be since it doesn't have the sheer numbers of tanks and the like that it used to have the ability to bring against an opponent. (Obviously the numbers are still substantial for the moment, but they are much more potentially manageable for NATO than they used to be.)

[K. A. Pital]

I'm not saying the Russian military is about to be completely helpless by any means, just that its becoming less comparatively powerful than it used to be since it doesn't have the sheer numbers of tanks and the like that it used to have the ability to bring against an opponent.

Russian defense minister Ivanov is incidentally of the same opinion. He says that the CFE has tipped the balance in NATO's favour, especially given the worsening state of the Russian Army.

How true is the horror stories I've heard? How is it reported in Russian news?

The "dedovshina" is a very serious problems. Many soldiers end up commiting suicide, running away, or being mutilated by the "deds" (elders). A rather vicious, as someone said "half-prison" environment has been especially prevalent in the inner forces (those who have not been guarding borders or taking action in "hot spots"). This pretty much causes a lot of younger Russians to avoid Army service.

[Vympel]

The point is that if Russia theoretically actually does attempt to outright invade the West, the loss of the older equipment still impairs its ability to actually pull it off. The T-55s and T-62 are admittedly basically truly mostly useless at this point, but T-64s are a different story and could have potentially had some degree of value in a invasion where the goal of Russia would be to use sheer numbers to defeat and overwhelm its opponents.

The reason I include the T-64s is because they were only ever built in Ukraine and so rely on a now-foreign production base. Hence why they're not in service and are being taken apart for scrap.

(they were also a less reliable than other Soviet tanks anyway)

While I have not studied this in detail, I also wonder about the actual condition of some of the older T-72 tanks at this point since they are certainly not new equipment. Even if technically considered in service or available in the reserves, if a bunch of older T-72 promptly break down when used in a military confrontation, that obviously reduces their practical value.

I wouldn't think they're in bad shape. The Russians deployed masses of T-62s with no problem in Chechnya from 1999, you'd think they'd be much worse off than any T-72.

I'm not saying the Russian military is about to be completely helpless by any means, just that its becoming less comparatively powerful than it used to be since it doesn't have the sheer numbers of tanks and the like that it used to have the ability to bring against an opponent. (Obviously the numbers are still substantial for the moment, but they are much more potentially manageable for NATO than they used to be.)

From point of view of sheer size, you're right, but then I think this CFE Treaty move is as Stas says not really part of some larger resurgence of a threat, it's just being difficult as a payback.

Of greater concern is pulling out of the INF Treaty. The return of Russian MRBMs is scarier (can threaten Europe and China without wasting ICBMs and SLBMs which should be reserved for the US).

[K. A. Pital]

The main argument against the CFE is that it's a void treaty which no one really follows. Unlike the ABM treaty or the INF treaties which were actually working mechanisms. But you will have to admit, all this shit started with US unilaterally pulling out of the ABM treaty, then trying to put ABM in Europe. This greatly surprised Russia and the CIS, and the civilian and military leadership of several countries was, well, angered to say the least.

[Omega18]

The reason I include the T-64s is because they were only ever built in Ukraine and so rely on a now-foreign production base. Hence why they're not in service and are being taken apart for scrap.

(they were also a less reliable than other Soviet tanks anyway)...

I wouldn't think they're in bad shape. The Russians deployed masses of T-62s with no problem in Chechnya from 1999, you'd think they'd be much worse off than any T-72.

Basically the point about the T-64 is especially given most of those that were in service had undergone some upgrades since initially produced, they could have remained potentially effective when facing off against NATO's tanks.

In fact, if facing off against one of Poland's T-72s or PT-91 derivative of the design, the gap between them is clearly not that large (there are other members of NATO which still have T-72s in service as well) and for the moment there are still members of NATO such as Norway who still have Leopard 1A5s in service, which are clearly somewhat outclassed by the T-64s which would have been in Russian service. The fact even the basic T-64 model had composite armor also means the tank has some degree of survivability against the less sophisticated antitank missiles many NATO members still employ to a significant extent. Why there are reasons they are being dismantled, this does measurably reduce the Russian Army's overall potential power.

My understanding is the T-62 remained in production historically for the USSR until 1975 with some factories, while the T-72 initially entered production in 1971. While I obviously would need to do some research to find out for sure, I suspect the age difference between some of the T-72s available to Russia and the T-62s in question is not all that great. It has also been 8 years at this point since the 1999 event you're talking about, which increases the odds that some of the T-72s we're talking about are in fact older than the T-62s employed in Chechnya were at the time. The T-72s are also significantly not getting any younger as additional time passes, which was a key component of my initial point.

[Ritterin Sophia]

But you will have to admit, all this shit started with US unilaterally pulling out of the ABM treaty, then trying to put ABM in Europe.

I thought the ABM Treaty said we could have one ABM System? And Russia's the only country that has nukes advanced enough to warrant any worry.

[Mange]

The Russian leadership is paranoid. Putin's rants about the missile defense being part of the "strategic nuclear system" is pure and utter bullshit. It's defensive, not offensive, non-nuclear weaponry. How is that threatening Sovi... Russian interests?