I know it couldn't, it was such a surprise invasion and in a way no one expected that of course Ukraine couldn't fend it off, especially with the political turmoil it was in. Ukrainian officers switch sides, some bases were stormed by unarmed 'civilians' with armed paramilitaries following and then disarming the Ukrainian soldiers. The confusion created no real orders on what to do to low level leaders and then those leaders were affected by signals jamming making any unity of action difficult to say the least. It was a shocking take over which has caused many Eastern European nations with ethnic russians in their armed forces to look more into their loyalties, the issuing of holdout orders in places so that soldiers with no chain of command have at least some guiding principle.
My point was more that such a 'fait accompli' invasion by a great power like Russia makes reversing such an action extremely difficult.
What if that need is simply to demonstrate NATO as an empty shell east of Poland? Russia didn't want to lose its Sevastapol naval base to NATO. In the Baltic it's only all season port that doesn't freeze in winter (less frequently now though thanks to global warming)is in Kaliningrad Oblast which is now a Russian 'island' in a sea of NATO. Getting the baltic states out of NATO and back into the Russia sphere through some sort of 'Finlandization' is probably a desired goal of Russia but who knows what the timeline is. If the conditions are 'right' then I imagine they'd implement such an action without waiting for domestic clamor for such an action. Also the acquisition of territory is generally far more permanent than any threat of sanctions which always water down over time.Russian tanks in Riga: if it happens, it will be in order to fulfill a need - such as intense domestic pressure to invade (unlikely), or a gambit to deal a death blow to the American order/transatlantic alliance (many harmful knock-ons for Russia). Western decline would have to be much further along for such a thing to slip below risk thresholds, or something else dire, in which case we're in no position to be pondering military solutions anymore
I agree that he would probably prefer to buy such a government but nothing would undo NATO so quickly and dramatically as rapid invasion of any of the Baltic States with only impotent responses from NATO. It's less of a Fulda Gap scenario and more like a Falklands War scenario, failure to act would essentially unravel what little remained of the British 'empire' (think Hong Kong in the 80s). I also agree the west would need to decline a bit more but looking at the Trump effect and the distractions of Brexit and migrant crises I personally think that decline is speeding along quite quickly.
Our reaction if he essentially 'bought' a government would probably be pretty muted. I think Putin has bought Erdogan or at least got him on side. We've got sanctions on Turkey over a pastor, we are freezing their participation in the F-35 program because the Turks are buying Russian air defense systems, and Erdogan still says that the US tried to overthrow him through a coup and Fethullah Gulen somehow. Turkey is a vital nation to NATO and the US, I don't think we'd react more strongly in the case of Latvia, Estonia, or Lithuania which probably don't even register as countries to most Americans.
If the Russia achieves recognition of its annexation of Crimea and some sort of semi-autonomous status for eastern Ukraine it would probably make the Baltic States that much more worried about Western Betrayal and create domestic upheaval which could produce very anti-Russia policies that might require ethnic Russians to be protected by the motherland.
Guess I turn all threads into nato threads.....
Bookmarks