Alexander Zapolskis. Paper tiger NATO.

Коллаж ИА REGNUMChinese have such an apt expression a paper tiger. This is when visibility is considerably detached from the real situation. Ukrainian UNIAN news agency published a comparative analysis of the military capabilities of NATO and Russia conducted a Polish television channel TVN24. From his calculations, it follows that NATO in its capabilities conceals Russia as an elephant pug. Get at least a military budget of $ 950 billion. A year, the alliance and less than 90 billion dollars. In Russia. Or the total number of armed forces: 3.5 million NATO and 766 thousand. In the Russian Federation. In short, the paper comes out that the alliance is superior to the Russian Federation on all the articles. But is it really? In the end, on paper Ukraine in February 2014 to the number of soldiers and equipment is the sixth army of the world. However, for some reason she was defeated Donetsk militia troops commanded by former musicians, amateur theaters, and one kamnetёsy historic reconstructor.

If you keep all of the major indicators of the armies of countries members of the Alliance, in one electronic tablet, the picture is somewhat different offers. At first glance, all formally correct. The block consists of 28 countries with a total population of 888 million people. They all have a 3.9 million soldiers, more than 6 thousand. Warplanes, about 3.6 thousand. Helicopters, 17.8 thous. Tanks, 62,6 thous. Of various armored vehicles, nearly 15 thousand. Pieces, 16 thousand. mortars, 2.6 thousand. multiple rocket launchers and 302 warships main classes (including submarines). But the point is that all of the above is by no means NATO, because the said calculation gives much cheating.

Take, for example, France. Its armed forces are often included in the overall balance. While leaving behind the scenes of the fact that this country has long been out of the military structure of the block, or even in the ideal case would support it only a couple of leased” hull-scale foundations. Ie of the overall figures immediately disappear 64 million population, 654 thousand. officers and men, 637 tanks, 6,4 thousand. armored vehicles and so on. It would seem a trifle. Just think, even without the 600 French guns, NATO is still 14 th. Barrels. So, if you do not take into account that the vast majority of the listed weapons is mainly in warehouses and storage depots. In Ukraine, too, there were more than 2.5 thousand. Any tanks. But when it comes to war, it became clear that the real battle-ready are about 600, and more in real terms relative to remaining in the system can be put in the ideal “plus the same amount.” Others – trash. I will not argue. I hope that in Germany (858 MBT and 2002. BBM) or Spain (456 MBT 1102 and AFV) for storage of property should be better Ukrainians. But actually it does not change.

Tabulated figures do show a striking result. On paper, NATO has 55.6 thousand. (62 thousand. Minus 6.4 thousand. French) all kinds of armored fighting vehicles. Of these, 25.3 thousand. In the US, of which 20 thousand. Warehouses are long-term storage! However, the Americans would be okay. It turns out that the largest number of “reserves” BBM 11.5 thousand. Pc. Focused on warehouses in countries with armies numbering less than 100 thousand. Man. For example, a member of NATO – Bulgaria – contains all the armed forces of 34,970 people, and the legacy of the Warsaw Pact she got 362 tanks and 1,596 armored fighting vehicles. So the warehouses where they are almost all.

A similar pattern in the Czech Republic. Army 17,930 people, and on paper “has” MBT 175 and 1013 BBM. In general, even if you do not go into the complexity of logistics, supply of spare parts and obviously impossible, for example, to deploy a tank battalion based on the Soviet T-72 from some British reservists, still turns out that almost all the figures on armored vehicles and artillery can be safely divided by four. From 17.8 thousand. Tanks are” 4.45 thousand., Of which only half is the troops” and accurately on the move. The second half is still in warehouses under a thick layer of grease on the removal of which requires considerable time. For reference: Ukraine to deploy the army took 4 months. And that almost ideal conditions, when no one bothered her.

However, Ukraine has demonstrated another key point. The army is more than a mere collection of people, machines, tanks and armored vehicles. Army, primarily a structure. So, in a structural sense to NATO are not all national armed forces of member countries, but only about a third of them. And this third is also divided into three very different categories. Approximately 15% of units (ie, 15% of the 30% of the national armies that attributed to the alliance“) are the so-called “priority Forces engagement» (RNF). They are found in the states in 75-85% of war and are ready to begin the combat mission within 7 days of receipt of order. Another 25% are in the category of “operational readiness” (60% of the state) and can be used every 3-4 months. The remaining 60% is often required not less than 365 days to bring themselves in combat readiness. All other military units participating countries are contained in the states under their national military programs. Given the continuing reduction of military budgets, many of them, according to Soviet terminology, Crop”.

First and foremost this applies to the Eastern European States. If from 3.6 million of the army to take away 1.5 million Americans, as well as 350 thousand. French is still 1.75 million bayonets. Of which Germany, the UK and Italy account for only 654.3 thousand. People. Greek and Spanish army (156.6 and 128.2 thousand. Pers. Respectively) with confidence can not be considered.” As well as in serious doubt is the Turkish army (510 thousand. People). In light of recent gas and military agreements Istanbul unlikely to wish to be the Euro-Atlantic unity. And so it turns out that, in addition to 100 thousand. “Polish bayonets,” the other half of the 19 soldiers put the size of its army of 73 thousand. (Romania) to 4,700 persons (Estonia). Oh, yeah, it is important not to forget the sun in Luxembourg as part of 900 people!

It so happens that the “old” NATO in the face of the first 12 states too overdo samopiar. Once the history of glossy booklets actually reflect reality. In 1990, after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the Bundeswehr had only one 7 th. Tanks, 8,9 thousand. Armored vehicles, 4.6 thousand. Guns. Plus in Germany based 9.5 thousand. American tanks and 5.7 thousand. Their own infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers, 2.6 thousand. 300 artillery systems and combat aircraft. Now they are on German soil no. Almost all left Germany. In 2016 home leave, the last British soldiers. Of all the American forces were two brigadier bases without people and technology, and less than 100 aircraft. A Bundeswehr own sizes decreased to 185.5 thousand. People. This is 2.5 times less than the Turkish army on the people, 5.2 times less MBT, 2.2 times less in BBM. As they say in Odessa you’ll laugh but in warehouses in Poland tanks and armored vehicles worth more than in Germany! The Poles and 946 MBT 2610 BBM against 858 in 2002 and the Germans.

The irony is that all Eastern European and Baltic states into NATO sought, above all, to be a defensive umbrella USA, Germany, UK and Italy. In the first place, to be able to carry themselves not burdensome military expenditure. For defense – it is always very expensive. By the beginning of zero was a paradoxical situation. Only alliance includes more than two dozen countries, but defenses block continues to hold on dreams of military might of Germany and the United Kingdom on land to the sea. For example, the growth of aggressive rhetoric and behavior of some leaders of the Baltic states to this day based on the belief that “if thatprotect, say, Vilnius, primchatsya eight hundred German Leopard”.

Behind the scenes are dramatic changes that have taken place in NATO over the past 15 years. Brussels almost openly admits that existing alliance forces and resources will only last for two categories of problems. Limited participation in humanitarian operations (ie no war at all) and operations to ensure the embargo. And then, in the second case only to a small and weak country, rather than Russia. Even tasks such as the evacuation of the civilian population, support for counter-terrorism operations and a show of force, are no longer possible. As due to the limited powers of its own, and in the light of unacceptably high level of losses. A problem of the class “operation to resolve the crisis” and “providing immediate intervention” in general is beyond the capacity of the block. From the word at all.

Yes, in the past decade, NATO has participated in a variety of military operations. Iraq. Afghanistan. The Middle East. But in reality all fought primarily USA. NATO forces only “present.” And this is done cleverly. Germany and the UK, of course, sent to Afghanistan, some small units, but first and foremost they are the war, they say, gave to outsource! Ie paid money Lithuanians, Latvians, Estonians, Czechs, Poles and other “partners” so that they could send a “war onsome own contingents. There’s a company, then a platoon, battalion here, here and typing Mala Mala soldiers for combat tasks together Germans and Britons.

This nuance lies the answer to the question, every day more and more disturbing Ukrainians. Why the US and NATO are so many vkusnyashek promised last winter, and Nenka still fighting alone? It’s simple. Because on paper, NATO has, but in reality it is almost none. At all. Is it possible to revive the former power? Of course, you can. But only at the cost of reducing the European standard of living as 20-25 percent.
view

For the position of Business Ombudsman of Ukraine nominated former EU Commissioner
Retired Lugansk required to recognize the illegal cancellation of Kiev …
Snowden: My Life in Moscow is different from the former only in the absence

Again, the army it’s very expensive. The army does not produce anything, but eats a lot. As in the literal sense, in the form of budget funds for its maintenance, and indirectly, in the form of separation from the people working in the civil sector, thus turning them from the tax payers in nalogoproedateley. European countries are not interested in this option once. Mladonatovtsy so generally sought the alliance is to for his army not pay to have their protected stranger. German there or some Portuguese. A Portuguese totally not interested to give up their bread and butter to go to protect some Baltic states, which is not even any European map immediately able to correctly show.

It is time for this nuance of contemporary realities finally understand. And in the Baltic States and Ukraine. Tiger NATO, while he was still big and beautiful, but it has long paper. And this Tiger concerned primarily with their own internal problems. The rest are the only basis for a beautiful rhetoric on camera.

There are no responses yet

Leave a Reply

RSS for Posts RSS for Comments