Defending the Baltics by Lind

[kaur3]

I recently returned from Estonia and the Baltic Defense College, where the Russian counterattack on Georgia had left a residual case of nerves. They have little to fear in the short run, unless they duplicate Georgia's folly and attack Russia. But the question of how the Baltics might be defended is worth considering, both in itself and in terms of what it means for defending other small countries.

http://www.antiwar.com/lind/?articleid=13432

[vk1]

Insurgency does not work out well against Russia. The Russians don't apply the same self-inhibitions as Western powers in insurgency, and defeat rebellions. Their costs are high, but not so high that the prospect of an insurgency could reliably prevent an invasion.

Lind is also wrong on his "toy army" argument. A conventional all-round army/navy/air force design is unsuitable as he wrote, but that does not exclude the possibility of a conventional warfare defense.

Those states cannot defend themselves against Russia, but they could delay an invading force if well-prepared to do so - this capability could offer sufficient deterrence in conjunction with credible reinforcement preparations by their NATO allies.


http://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.com ... nding.html

http://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.com ... -wars.html