NATO and Russia resume ties after war in Georgia | World | Deutsche Welle | 28.06.2009
... after having read this:
NATO's War Plans For The High North
Since the beginning of the year the United States and NATO have repeatedly indicated in both word and deed their intention to lay claim to and extend their military presence in what they refer to as the High North: The Arctic Circle and the waters connecting with it, the Barents and the Norwegian Seas, as well as the Baltic. Washington issued National Security Presidential Directive 66 on January 12, 2009 which includes the bellicose claim that "The United States has broad and fundamental national security interests in the Arctic region [which] include such matters as missile defense and early warning; deployment of sea and air systems for strategic sealift, strategic deterrence, maritime presence, and maritime security operations." [1] Later in the same month the North Atlantic Treaty Organization [NATO] held a two-day Seminar on Security Prospects in the High North in the capital of Iceland attended by the bloc's secretary general and its top military commanders.
Washington issued National Security Presidential Directive 66 on January 12, 2009 which includes the bellicose claim that "The United States has broad and fundamental national security interests in the Arctic region [which] include such matters as missile defense and early warning; deployment of sea and air systems for strategic sealift, strategic deterrence, maritime presence, and maritime security operations." [1] Later in the same month the North Atlantic Treaty Organization [NATO] held a two-day Seminar on Security Prospects in the High North in the capital of Iceland attended by the bloc's secretary general and its top military commanders.
Long but informative article, worth reading in full.
Norway, Sweden, Finland [the latter two likely soon to integrate Nato], with major, recent Nato war exercises in Northern Scandinavia, the Baltic Sea and the Barents ...
Jaap de Hoop Scheffer claims that "Russia needs NATO and NATO needs Russia". Sounds to me as though Russia needs Nato like it needs a hole in its head. .
Finland, anyway, is far more interested in China. You can't be me, I'm taken
On the day after the NATO conference in Finland's capital ended, the nation's police arrested six peace activists for painting NATO symbols in - blood - red on the walls of the Finnish Defence Command headquarters in Helsinki. The group, Muurinmurtajat, released a statement saying "it wanted to draw attention to how the practical work of bringing Finland militarily closer to NATO is being done at the Defence Command." [27] Five days later the NATO Consultation, Command and Control Agency (NC3A) signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Finland on defense technology. "Finland is a long-standing participant in the NATO Partnership for Peace programme with a strong track record of contributing to NATO missions and exercises. "Sweden was the first partner country to sign a similar agreement with NC3A in 2007." [28] On the same day the Finnish armed forces began "their largest military exercise in decades." Maanvyory 2009 (Landslide 2009) includes "18,000 service men, including 7,000 reservists from all three branches of the service." [29]
The group, Muurinmurtajat, released a statement saying "it wanted to draw attention to how the practical work of bringing Finland militarily closer to NATO is being done at the Defence Command." [27]
Five days later the NATO Consultation, Command and Control Agency (NC3A) signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Finland on defense technology.
"Finland is a long-standing participant in the NATO Partnership for Peace programme with a strong track record of contributing to NATO missions and exercises.
"Sweden was the first partner country to sign a similar agreement with NC3A in 2007." [28] On the same day the Finnish armed forces began "their largest military exercise in decades."
Maanvyory 2009 (Landslide 2009) includes "18,000 service men, including 7,000 reservists from all three branches of the service." [29]
Further:
"The Baltic Operations (BALTOPS) exercise is an annual event aimed at improving interoperability and cooperation among regional allies" and this years includes naval forces from the US, Britain, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Poland and Sweden."
That seems like a lot of activity for a simple 'observer'. .
It very much reminds me of the fact that the Swedish parliament has decided that no threat exists for the next ten years, which is the time they optimistically believe rearmament will take. The problem is of course when you start the 10-year countdown. As far as I'm concerned wer should have started it years ago, the Georgian War at the latest, or Zapad 2009 at the extremely latest.
The last time the Swedish parliament pronounced "no threat for at least 10 years" was in... 1936. Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
Do not make the mistake of equalising threat with a full scale invasion. That's the kind of binary idiocy we have here in Sweden as an excuse for a defence debate. There is a wide range of actions that can be taken to pressure the states around the Baltic to adapting their domestic policies without resorting to full scale war. Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
The fact that the Swedish Armed Forces are in complete disarray is another matter. Finland get 10-100 times the military strength we do for 2/3 of the budget. Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
