US Doctrine and the Baltics

Few remember that the intention of the American military was clear long before Crimea joined Russia. This may well seem fabricated, but that’s how it really is. What do I have in mind? The concept of U.S. air and naval paratrooper exercises and the American Joint Concept for Entry Operations.* Under this American military policy, not only Russia, but China, considered an adversary as well, would both be surrounded by bases from which it would be possible − even without warning − to invade “enemy lands.” And that’s why a further NATO doctrine has developed, by the way, providing for a preventive, i.e., first, strike. When we put these facts together with the deployment of American forces and other NATO satellites, it becomes clear that mastery over the Baltics has been a significant step toward a prospective attack on Russia.

St. Petersburg, for example, is within firing range from this area, as is Kronstadt and its naval complex. The same goes for Moscow. If Russia hadn’t appended Crimea, Russia’s Black Sea fleet would have been paralyzed and Volgograd, the city that makes an advance possible into the Urals, would have been just a short distance down the road. That’s why the Americans needed it, and why all its satellites must sing the same tune about annexation, even though there was no annexation in this case. It is indeed interesting how the word annexation is constantly repeated with regard to Crimea, but no one mentions Kosovo, which came before – or if they do, they insist it’s an altogether different case. That’s not true, but as we know, a lie that is constantly repeated eventually becomes the truth.

Crimea joining Russia has foiled many American military plans. Apparently, so have recent good relations between Russia and Turkey, as well as weapons that turned out to be more modern than those possessed by the Americans and NATO. Their effectiveness has been tested in battle against the anti-government coalition and the Islamic State in Syria. Also, developing positive relations with other Middle East countries have prevented the Americans from closing the southern circle around Russian. Georgia, from this standpoint, isn’t very stable, and moreover it faces the buffer zone of South Ossetia and good Russian-Armenian relations.

Only the Baltic region fulfills American doctrine. That is certainly a great danger to peace, because we cannot rely on American generals − or such obedient representatives of NATO like Gen. Petr Pavel** – to refrain not only from provocations, but also from carrying out Washington’s NATO schemes, i.e., not ordering a “preventive” first strike. That’s why NATO and U.S. troops in the Baltics today are an immense threat, and all who care about peace and positive hopes for the future would do well to realize that.

*Editor’s note: The Joint Concept for Entry Operations is an official policy document that describes in broad terms the United States Joint Chiefs of State’s vision for how joint forces will enter onto foreign territory and immediately employ capabilities to accomplish assigned missions.

**Translator’s note: Gen. Pavel is a Czech army officer and chair of the NATO Military Committee.