Threat Assessment in Baltic

[Mad Russian]

Interesting article and some of the conclusions drawn from 'wargame' results.

http://warontherocks.com/2016/04/outnum ... eats-nato/

Good Hunting.

MR

[Zakalwe101]

"NATO’s European members must begin making the necessary investments to fulfill their commitments to the alliance’s collective defense; as this is not just America’s problem."

World Bank Data 2011-2015
Germany military expenditure as percentage of GDP == 1.2% (decreasing)
France == 2.2% (STATIC)
UK == 2% (decreasing)
Belgium == 1% (decreasing)
Netherlands == 1.2 % (decreasing)
Poland == 1.9% (increasing)

USA == 3.5 % (decreasing)
Russia == 4.6% (increasing)

Obviously if the "cake" (GDP) gets bigger Military expenditure need not rise as a percentage to see a real terms increase in budgets but the fact is that European economies have not been increasing dramatically to see rises in budgets to offset decreases in the percentage share.

Russia's economy must be suffering from the sanctions and the price of oil dramatically falling, but I don't see the oligarchs ruling Russia changing their economic model of massive state expenditure on arms to making washing machines and microwave ovens.

Consider the Crimea as the Saar/Ruhr land, the Donbass region of Ukraine as the Sudentenland ? The Baltic states have measureable Russian minorities, plus the Kaliningrad Oblast ?

Best not say more or I will end up with Polonium in my tea.

If we want Peace we should prepare for war.

[governato]

ORIGINAL: Zakalwe101

"NATO’s European members must begin making the necessary investments to fulfill their commitments to the alliance’s collective defense; as this is not just America’s problem."

World Bank Data 2011-2015
Germany military expenditure as percentage of GDP == 1.2% (decreasing)
France == 2.2% (STATIC)
UK == 2% (decreasing)
Belgium == 1% (decreasing)
Netherlands == 1.2 % (decreasing)
Poland == 1.9% (increasing)

USA == 3.5 % (decreasing)
Russia == 4.6% (increasing)

Obviously if the "cake" (GDP) gets bigger Military expenditure need not rise as a percentage to see a real terms increase in budgets but the fact is that European economies have not been increasing dramatically to see rises in budgets to offset decreases in the percentage share.

...

Let's compare the military budgets in absolute dollar terms and not just percentages. To do this I just included each country GDP into the equation.

NATO = 3.5% x 16T (US) + 2% x 16.3T (EU) + 2% x 2.2T (France) = 0.93Trillion US$
Russia = 4.5% x 2T* = 0.09 Trillion US$
China = 2% x 9T 0.18 Trillion US$

So the Western military budget is about TEN times that of the Russian Federation. The US military budget is three times that of China. I would not worry about increasing the military budget, but about spending it better.

*in 2012...probably close to 1.5T now.

the data are here: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS

[Rincovsk]

Why has Russian defense spending fallen?

April 13, 2016 NIKOLAI LITOVKIN, RBTH

Russia is no longer among the world’s top three military spenders, say experts from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Why has this happened and how does it compare to global trends?

http://rbth.com/defence/2016/04/13/why- ... len_584397

[Zakalwe101]

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... ration.pdf
Wales Summit Declaration
Issued by the Heads of State and Government participating in the
meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Wales from 4 to 5 September
2014
ARTICLE 14, clearly 2% of GDP was felt to be relevant target.

[TheWombat_matrixforum]

The best deterrent to any Russian adventurism in the Baltics is diplomatic and economic. Unless seriously provoked, I can't really think that Moscow would undertake such a dangerous and potentially devastating--in diplomatic and economic terms--course of action. It is also necessary to have credible physical forces available, but given the risk/rewards balance here, I'm not losing much sleep over these things in the short term. Of course, I don't live in the Baltics, either....

In the long term, I do worry about the USA's constant tendency to fight the last war. We swung so far in the direction of light forces and counter-terrorism that we have lost a lot of our edge in conventional ground combat.

[Rincovsk]

See your point Wombat. The "enemy" is not stupid. Why would Russia roll over the Baltics and Europe now? That didnt happen back in the Cold war when it was supposed to had a window of opportunity sometime during that period. Since 2008 Russia is getting back on track in the international arena and wants its interests to be considered. Regarding its military the focus is on reform and modernization. It is a change of posture from the almost zombi state back in the dark 90s. In my humble opinion this is all too much of a rusophobia with some obscure intetests. Western governments and specially USA will have to learn how to deal with this new country. US has a strong diplomacy, I am sure with some will they can find a way to collaborate again. We have already had some nice examples. Both can win a lot with that. Although I cant deny it is important to have a strong army just in case, specially for the big world players. As I say for health ensurance, better have it and pay for it but hope not to use it. [:D]