Russia examines 1991 recognition of Baltic independence

[Larry1]

This seems like ominous news for Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania:

Russia examines 1991 recognition of Baltic independence

The Russian chief prosecutor's office is to examine whether the Soviet Union acted legally when it recognised the Baltic states' independence in 1991.

The investigation was described as an "absurd provocation" by Lithuania's Foreign Minister Linas Linkevicius.

Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania were occupied by Soviet communist forces in 1940. The USSR broke up in 1991.

Last week Russia's chief prosecutor declared illegal the transfer of Crimea from Russia to Ukraine in 1954. At the time Russia and Ukraine were republics of the USSR, under communist leader Nikita Khrushchev.

... There are large ethnic Russian minorities in Estonia and Latvia, while Lithuania has a smaller ethnic Russian minority.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33325842

Russia has a far larger military than the Baltic republics.  But they are NATO members and NATO members are obliged to come to the defense of any member who is attacked. It would be an interesting question what NATO members would do if Putin sent his "little green men" (Russian soldiers with their insignia removed) into the Baltic republics, all the while denying that they were Russian troops, as he did in Ukraine.

[Photo Guy]

Also, keep in mind, that the Budapest Memorandum required the US and the United Kingdom to give security assurances to Ukraine. Maybe NATO will also look the other way.

[ML]

. . . if Putin sent his "little green men" (Russian soldiers with their insignia removed) . . . all the while denying that they were Russian troops, as he did in Ukraine.

Come on Larry, you must be making this up concerning Putin's lack of honesty.

No such liar could command the respect of his citizens.

[jone]

Come on Larry, you must be making this up concerning Putin's lack of honesty.

No such liar could command the respect of his citizens.

ML, you would be surprised at the amount of support the Russian government has for making those claims within its own populace.

If you go to Narva, however, the Kremlin is not so popular with the Russian nationals.

[Faux Pas]

Russia has a far larger military than the Baltic republics.  But they are NATO members and NATO members are obliged to come to the defense of any member who is attacked. It would be an interesting question what NATO members would do if Putin sent his "little green men" (Russian soldiers with their insignia removed) into the Baltic republics, all the while denying that they were Russian troops, as he did in Ukraine.

For Putin to engage the Baltics would be sending a far different message than he was sending in the invasion of Ukraine. A response from Europe and NATO would be far different than it was from an unaffiliated Ukraine. If or when Putin initiates any kind of military action in the Baltics would mean he is engaging war with the West

[jone]

Both the Chief Prosecutor's office and the upper level Kremlin personnel have rejected the call for re-evaluation.  Lavrov claimed that there were treaties in place recognizing the Baltic Countries.

[2tallbill]

For Putin to engage the Baltics would be sending a far different message than he was sending in the invasion of Ukraine. A response from Europe and NATO would be far different than it was from an unaffiliated Ukraine. If or when Putin initiates any kind of military action in the Baltics would mean he is engaging war with the West

However, NATO couldn't stop him before he did the deed and then would the current
US president do anything except have John Kerry send strongly worded messages to
Russia on TV? who in Europe would send troops to oust them? Obama might say, look
these countries who spend less than 2% of their budgets on military need to help
protect themselves. That's what he told the regime in Iraq.

Yes, the risk for Putin would be there, but against the current Yahoo's in NATO and US
State Dept it probably wouldn't be insurmountable. France is going to send troops? more
than ten? more than a hundred? would Belgium send some bomb recovery dogs? and
some first aid workers?

Look again at the dismal performance of Obama regarding ISIS. The USA totally destroyed
the military of a country (Iraq) and now Obama is telling they are on their own except
the USA will do a little bit of targets bombing each week.

Would England send their fleet of aircraft carriers? if they had any? Russia is a significantly
more serious opponent than ISIS. Would Obama blink? The entire massive US military
apparatus can't move a finger without his say so. My guess is that there would be enough
blinking to send messages in Morse code. Would Putin guess differently? 

[2tallbill]

Here are a number of articles that question that exact question. I'm sure some
of these articles have been posted elsewhere.

Putin could attack Baltic states warns former Nato chief
Vladimir Putin could mastermind a hybrid attack on a Baltic state to test whether
Nato would mobilise, warns Anders Fogh Rasmussen
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/11393707/Putin-could-attack-Baltic-states-warns-former-Nato-chief.html


VLADIMIR Putin has been warned it would be “suicidal” for Russia to attack the Baltic States.
Czech president Milos Zeman rattles a saber
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/572001/Russia-Vladimir-Putin-attacking-Baltic-states-SUICIDAL

NATO Has A Plan….
http://breakingdefense.com/2015/03/putin-wont-blitz-baltic-states-but-nato-has-a-plan/

[Faux Pas]

However, NATO couldn't stop him before he did the deed and then would the current
US president do anything except have John Kerry send strongly worded messages to
Russia on TV? who in Europe would send troops to oust them? Obama might say, look
these countries who spend less than 2% of their budgets on military need to help
protect themselves. That's what he told the regime in Iraq.

Yes, the risk for Putin would be there, but against the current Yahoo's in NATO and US
State Dept it probably wouldn't be insurmountable. France is going to send troops? more
than ten? more than a hundred? would Belgium send some bomb recovery dogs? and
some first aid workers?

Look again at the dismal performance of Obama regarding ISIS. The USA totally destroyed
the military of a country (Iraq) and now Obama is telling they are on their own except
the USA will do a little bit of targets bombing each week.

Would England send their fleet of aircraft carriers? if they had any? Russia is a significantly
more serious opponent than ISIS. Would Obama blink? The entire massive US military
apparatus can't move a finger without his say so. My guess is that there would be enough
blinking to send messages in Morse code. Would Putin guess differently?

Well it's certainly anyone's guess but I would venture, Yes, he would do something. What, who the fack knows? It's not Islamists as a possible foe as is the case elsewhere. I personally don't think Obama has an aversion to death and destruction. If he does, why hasn't he done more in Ukraine? IMO, he has a big aversion to any death and destruction against muslim groups or countries. Ukraine is still not Europe proper and not worth (in his view) his own capital. The Baltics clearly NATO members and solidly Europe.

I disagree with you on the response. There could be a very quick one to aggression against the Baltics unlike Eastern Ukraine. Such a move by Putin could and would escalate very quickly. There would be no mistaking, such a move by Putin is a move on the West and specifically, Obama. I think everyone is aware of that

[2tallbill]

I disagree with you on the response. There could be a very quick one to aggression against the Baltics unlike Eastern Ukraine. Such a move by Putin could and would escalate very quickly. There would be no mistaking, such a move by Putin is a move on the West and specifically, Obama. I think everyone is aware of that

I hope you are right. I don't know what Obama would do, but getting it wrong would
be consistent with 98.99% of his history.

[Faux Pas]

Here are a number of articles that question that exact question. I'm sure some
of these articles have been posted elsewhere.

Putin could attack Baltic states warns former Nato chief
Vladimir Putin could mastermind a hybrid attack on a Baltic state to test whether
Nato would mobilise, warns Anders Fogh Rasmussen
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/11393707/Putin-could-attack-Baltic-states-warns-former-Nato-chief.html


VLADIMIR Putin has been warned it would be “suicidal” for Russia to attack the Baltic States.
Czech president Milos Zeman rattles a saber
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/572001/Russia-Vladimir-Putin-attacking-Baltic-states-SUICIDAL

NATO Has A Plan….
http://breakingdefense.com/2015/03/putin-wont-blitz-baltic-states-but-nato-has-a-plan/

My thinking is more in line with the Czech Pres. The NATO "plan" per se' is military commanders ideas and don't mean much when conflict starts.

I surmise, (MHO Only) as much as many on this forum don't want to hear it, Eastern Ukraine wasn't worth the conflict with Putin, to the West. Ukraine was worth pumping money into in order to gain political position but not worth a war in the East against Putin, essentially Russia. The Baltics are in a much different position. The NATO alliance (Europe and the US) will defend that ground without debate is my guess.

edit to add: If Nato did not immediately defend the Baltics, NATO falls apart and Putin has Europe

[Larry1]

edit to add: If Nato did not immediately defend the Baltics, NATO falls apart and Putin has Europe

If Putin successfully invaded the Baltic Republics he will have achieved two objectives: reclaiming a piece of territory that was lost when the USSR fell apart, and helping to diminish NATO.

My opinion is that before NATO admitted the Baltic republics to its membership it should have thought more about how it would defend against a Russian invasion. Poland is much easier to defend than the Baltic republics are. In addition, Poland has a much larger army than the tiny Baltic republics have. Even if Russia were reckless enough to invade Poland (and I think it will not invade), it wouldn't be nearly as easy as invading Ukraine.

[Faux Pas]

If Putin successfully invaded the Baltic Republics he will have achieved two objectives: reclaiming a piece of territory that was lost when the USSR fell apart, and helping to diminish NATO.

My opinion is that before NATO admitted the Baltic republics to its membership it should have thought more about how it would defend against a Russian invasion. Poland is much easier to defend than the Baltic republics are. In addition, Poland has a much larger army than the tiny Baltic republics have. Even if Russia were reckless enough to invade Poland (and I think it will not invade), it wouldn't be nearly as easy as invading Ukraine.

I would venture to guess that as soon as the fomenting started in Poland or the Baltics there would be an immediate action from the country involved and a military back up from NATO. Putin would know this, too. If Putin did instigate such an action at that point, Putin and Russia would be "all in".

Speaking of which, that would also be an excellent place for a false flag operation to incite Putin for any Western power that wished to draw him in.

[fathertime]

Speaking of which, that would also be an excellent place for a false flag operation to incite Putin for any Western power that wished to draw him in.

Why would a Western power want to draw Putin/Russia into a war, where everything could be laid to waste?


Fathertime!   

[fathertime]

I surmise, (MHO Only) as much as many on this forum don't want to hear it, Eastern Ukraine wasn't worth the conflict with Putin, to the West. Ukraine was worth pumping money into in order to gain political position but not worth a war in the East against Putin, essentially Russia. The Baltics are in a much different position. The NATO alliance (Europe and the US) will defend that ground without debate is my guess.

Agree with all of this....although many here may think we (The US) want to spread freedom, and free peoples and that is 
what we care about most..
Fathertime! 

[BillyB]

This seems like ominous news for Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania:

  But they are NATO members and NATO members are obliged to come to the defense of any member who is attacked.

Not true. NATO members are not obliged to come to the defense of any member who is attacked. They can help their fellow members with whatever means they want. Greece is real cozy with Russia right now. If the Baltics were attacked, they may send them blankets and coffee or no help at all.


You can be sure Russia will test NATO. It's his only chance in breaking them up, by exposing their weaknesses and creating animosity among members. League of Nations broke up after WW1. I'm sure Putin studied the reasons why.

It would be an interesting question what NATO members would do if Putin sent his "little green men" (Russian soldiers with their insignia removed) into the Baltic republics, all the while denying that they were Russian troops, as he did in Ukraine.

If Putin can trick the world that one or more of Baltic nations are having a revolution which is an internal conflict, not an attack from an external source, most NATO members, if not all, would stay out of it. You can be sure Putin's spies are in the Baltics recruiting disgruntled citizens or ones lusting for power and willing to risk their lives to overthrow their current governments.