NATO is planning to approve a military plan to defend Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia in the event of a supposed Russian attack.
This plan is a logical step in the framework of the US-NATO’s ongoing miltiarization of Eastern Europe under a pretext of detering the so-called Russian threat and under a cover of cosntant MSM histeria over ‘evil Russkies‘. NATO seeks to get a formal approval of this plan by all 29 member states during its 70th anniversary summit in London in early December.
In line with the provisions of the North Atlantic Treaty of 1949, an armed assault on one of the signatories of the pact is equal to an attack on all NATO countries. Therefore, the only purpose of the new plan is to get an additional legal pretext for war preparations against Russia.
So far, Turkey appears to be the only state refusing to back this plan. However, the reason, according to Reuters, is not the ‘friendship’ with Russia, but Ankara’s will to get more political support for its fight against Kurdish YPG militia in northern Syria.
“Ankara has told its NATO envoy not to sign off on the plan and is taking a tough line in meetings and in private conversations, demanding the alliance recognize the YPG as terrorists in the formal wording, the sources said.
Turkey’s NATO delegation was not immediately available for comment. Turkey’s defense and foreign ministries did not respond to requests for comment,” Reuters reported.
Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland are already spearheading the US-backed push against Russia in the region in media, diplomatic, economic and military spheres. These states, as the agents of the Anglo-Saxon establishment in Europe, fuel the regional confrontation, make agressive statements and actions towards Russia, and contribute every possible effort to support the Kiev regime’s agressive behavior against the people’s resistance in eastern Ukriane thus undermining efforts to de-escalate the armed conflict.
Just recently in Tallinn, Estonian and Ukrainian defense ministries signed a memorandum, in which Estonia promised to help Ukraine to boost its security.
“As part of the visit of Ukrainian Defense Minister to the Republic of Estonia on November 26, a meeting of Andriy Zagorodnyuk with Minister of Defense of Estonia Juri Luik took place in Tallinn. The parties discussed current areas of cooperation between the defense departments of the two countries and outlined further steps for cooperation. Following the meeting, the declaration of intent to cooperate in the field of territorial defense was signed,” the Ukrainain Defense Ministry reported.
The document defineed cooperation in the field of development of the territorial defense concept of Ukraine and practical implementation of a pilot project in this field within the designated territorial-administrative units of Ukraine. The Ukrainian defense minister also visited the Cooperative Cyber Defense Centre of Excellence, where he discussed with Estonian colleagues promising areas for further bilateral cooperation and exchange of experience in the field of cyber defense.
Additionally, the foreign ministers of Estonia, Lithuania, Sweden, as well as Ukraine itself, issued a joint statement in support of the Kiev regime.
“We urge Russia to respect international law and its fundamental principles and reverse moves that contravene these principles. We strongly condemn the clear violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity by acts of aggression by Russian armed forces since February 2014, and the illegal annexation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol to the Russian Federation, which we will not recognize. We shall remain committed to implement the non-recognition policy, including through restrictive measures,” the statement said.
The increase of the Ukrainain cooperation with European proxies of the global establishment took place amid a new round of escalation in eastern Ukraine. Over the past week, pro-Kiev forces have resumed a daily shelling of positions of self-defense forces of the Lugansk and Donetsk People’s Republics. The DPR and the LPR already reported over two dozens of such incidents.
The intensification of the Ukrainian military activity followed a withdrawal of forces in the areas of Petrovskoe, Zolotie and Stanica Luganskaya on the contact line between the Ukrainian Army and DPR/LPR forces. Under the agreement aimed at de-escalating the situation, these areas were turned into a ‘neutral zone’. This netural zone is now under a threat of an offensive by the Ukrainian Army and illegal armed groups loyal to the Kiev regime.
At the same time, pro-DPR and pro-LPR forces report an increase of the activity of foreign instructors at Ukrainian Army positions close to the contact line.
The Ukrainian offensive in the area of the withdrawal of forces could lead to a new large-scale round of escalation in the region. One of the possible scenarios of the escalation is the following:
Under some formal pretext, the Ukrainian Army resumes its offensive and captures the demilitarized area because DPR and LPR units have been withdrawn from it.
The Ukrainian forces accompanied by foreign instructors and support units of Baltic states or Poland (with are increasingly active in Ukraine) start fortifying their positions. It’s unlikely that foreign personnel will be deployed directly on the frontline. However, as always, foreign advisers will be presented in HQs and provide key logistical, intelligence, cyber warfare and propaganda assistance. The Ukrainian advance is covered by a large-scale propaganda campaign by mainstream media outlets and Western diplomats.
Forces of the DPR and the LPR answer to the agression and launch a counter-offenisve to retake the captured area. The resumption of hostilities in eastern Ukraine endangers or even causes damage to NATO personnel deployed in the framework of the ‘assist and advice’ mission there. Using this as a pretext, NATO (which already prepared a new ‘plan’ to ‘defend’ Ukraine, Poland and Baltic states) provides Ukraine with additional assistance to ‘fight back the Russian agression’. Additional NATO personnel (mostly consisting of Polish and Baltic states forces) are deployed in eastern Ukraine. These personnel backs the Ukrainian Army fighting DPR and LPR forces.
After this, the Ukrainian Armed Forces openly backed by NATO kicks off a large-scale offensive to eliminate the DPR and the LPR. Without Russian support, the local self-defense forces will likely not be able to repel such an attack for a long period of time. Russia has two response options:
- to react to the NATO agression in the diplomatic and media sphere only, accept millions of refugees from eastern Ukraine and close the border preventing the infiltration of NATO-Ukrainian units into Russia;
- to start actively supporting the DPR and the LPR with military supplies, advisers and maybe even a limited military action. This scenario will eventually lead to an open conflict between NATO and Russia that will turn to a big regional war, or in the worst-case scenario a global war.
The new round of escalation likely be synchronous with some important political and diplomatic developments, like the 2020 presidential election in the United States, the Russian legislative election in 2021, or some new crisis with a Russian gas transit through Ukraine. The upcoming Normandy format talks to settle the conflcit in Ukraine will not likely lead to any breakthrough. Sides may agree on some practical stepts to de-escalate the sitaution and, in some format, re-integrate the DPR and the LPR into Ukraine as a some kind of autonomy. Nonetheless, the implementation of these steps will as always face notable obstacles – first of all, the agressive attitude of the Kiev regime and its foreign sponsors.
Chances of a new round of tensions in the region will be especially high in the period between April-May 2020 and March-May 2021. This new crisis will play into the hand of the Western financial elites and the Washington establishment that are now searching opportunities to avoid an expected devastating impact of the upcoming global economic crisis. They are interested in seizing new markets that may arise on territory of Russia in the event of its desintegration, looting of Russian natural resources and destroying economies of European states with strng industries that may challenge the US dominance in the field.