Quote:
Originally Posted by kato13
That chart was exactly what I was looking at when I suggested that some of the Baltic states might leave if a "1.6% of GDP must go to defense" was a new NATO requirement. That number would keep Estonia in but lose the others.
Then you could have Russia take Latvia and Lithuania without pressing the Article 6 button. Estonia now surrounded and Nato has few options to support (logistics wise).
|
That's an interesting idea. It seems a bit harsh for NATO to do that, especially since so few of its members states meet the defense budget requirements. I'm not sure that I can see NATO jettisoning those countries and then giving much of toss if Russia invaded Estonia. Also, Latvia and Lithuania are pretty firmly oriented towards the West- if NATO threatened to kick them out if they didn't raise their defense spending to the 1.6-2.0% requirement, I can see them making every effort to do so. If anyone needs NATO-backed security, it's those two countries, and they know it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rainbow Six
In most cases conscription was abolished over the last decade or so, so it's possible that as time goes by and new conscripts are not recruited some countries may see a reduction in the size of their reserve forces.
|
That's a really good point. It's also worth noting that although the Russian army is making steps towards professionalizing at least part of its force (most notably, its NCOs), it still maintains conscription. It also continues to maintain massive stockpiles of infantry weapons and AFVs. In the future, therefore, it would be easier and probably faster for the Russians to mobilize and equip reserve formations that it will be for most NATO armies.