Parents from both nations. So i served 4½ years in the Bundeswehr och 10 years in the Försvarsmakten.You served in both armies? How come?
Conscript time in Germany and later joined the Swedish Army or vice versa?
Sweden/Soviet Union provocative actions
- Thread starter rattmuff
- Start date
Sandbox
Sometimes you need to provoke a littlebit in order to get some reactions... and I guess I succeeded with that. What disturbes me is that much of the discussions are very much "my penis" is longer than yours - it reminds me when I was 5 and I was playing with toy soldiers. Fun, but it was long ago.
Many people that are in these discussions have no knowledge at all about strategic security policies or what is happening right now in this part of the world, so it can be quite tiring to read "all" the fact about specific weapons or weapon system when you alo see that the person who writes this has no clue about the context where this weapon/weapon system will be used.
Now gentlemen, when it comes to security policy in the Nordic - where Russia is percieved as the major threat, what actually is happening is that Sweden and Finland are merging their defence resources. Sweden and Norway are also in that process. The Swedish and Norwegian supreme commanders issued a joint statement about that, where they described how they wanted to increase their cooperation - taking it quite far with joint support units. Also, the norwegian supreme commander also stated, this was just a few days ago, that from now Norway can´t rely on Nato for potential conflicts over oil & gas with Russia. This means that it will be even more important for Norway to increase cooperation with Sweden and Finland.
Read (put www first): .aftenposten.no/english/local/article1967984.ece
Arms development and production are now coordinated between the nordic countries - Sweden has much of the electronics know how, radar technology, aircrafts, IFVs, missiles, anti tank and subs. Finland has wheeled IFVs and artillery, Norway, anti air and ammunition. Sweden and the UK initiated the work with Meteor, Sweden also coperates with germany about IRIS-T and cluster bombs. Sweden and France cooperates about anti tank and UAVs. Sweden and US cooperates over the whole spectra.
Germanys role and influence:
Germany, under Schroeder, agreed with Russia to build a gas pipeline in the baltics, from Viborg to Greifswald but no other countries in the Baltic region was consulted. After the sacking of Schroeder as German chancelor, he became chairman of "Nord Stream", the company that is going to build and operate the pipeline. Basically all other Balic states, headed by Swden, are against this pipeline as it has an negative impact on their security and defence. Germanys inability to understand this or just to neclect it has undermined Germanys influence in the region. And then, Waylander, you can count how many aircrafts you want, Germanys influence/power has decreased due to mismanaged foreign and security policy.
The Nord Stream gas pipeline:
If you follow the developments regarding the pipeline, it´s quite interesting, you will understand how orchestrated the resistance to the pipeline is...
- Sweden has said no to a compressor station on Swedish waters
- Estonia has forbidden Nord Stream to investigate Estonian sea bottom for this pipeline.
- Finland has urged Nord stream to draw the pipeline on lanmd instead
Gerhardt Shroeder, who wanted to meet the Estonian PM had been turned down and also got the message that he is "persona non grata" in Estonia.
The pipeline is not going to be built due to Swedens, Finlands, Estonias, Latvias, Lithuanias and Poland strategic interests. Germany has ignored these countries security interests and will face the consequenses. The major consequense are of course less say, i.e. less power.
Now this are part of the realities that are the context when we talk about defence and security in the Nordic.
As for "Rythm" comments - they are worthless. I did my military training in the northern part of Sweden. The battalion where all CV90 and much of the training was in -25 degress celsius with peaks on under -40 degrees celsius. I don´t give much credit for his so called knowledge in these matters. Also, when it comes to guts - how did the german soldiers perform in Kosovo?
Read this and then praise the german soldiers and officers courage and skils... (put www first) .dn.se/DNet/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=2502&a=664670
Have a good day!
Sometimes you need to provoke a littlebit in order to get some reactions... and I guess I succeeded with that. What disturbes me is that much of the discussions are very much "my penis" is longer than yours - it reminds me when I was 5 and I was playing with toy soldiers. Fun, but it was long ago.
Many people that are in these discussions have no knowledge at all about strategic security policies or what is happening right now in this part of the world, so it can be quite tiring to read "all" the fact about specific weapons or weapon system when you alo see that the person who writes this has no clue about the context where this weapon/weapon system will be used.
Now gentlemen, when it comes to security policy in the Nordic - where Russia is percieved as the major threat, what actually is happening is that Sweden and Finland are merging their defence resources. Sweden and Norway are also in that process. The Swedish and Norwegian supreme commanders issued a joint statement about that, where they described how they wanted to increase their cooperation - taking it quite far with joint support units. Also, the norwegian supreme commander also stated, this was just a few days ago, that from now Norway can´t rely on Nato for potential conflicts over oil & gas with Russia. This means that it will be even more important for Norway to increase cooperation with Sweden and Finland.
Read (put www first): .aftenposten.no/english/local/article1967984.ece
Arms development and production are now coordinated between the nordic countries - Sweden has much of the electronics know how, radar technology, aircrafts, IFVs, missiles, anti tank and subs. Finland has wheeled IFVs and artillery, Norway, anti air and ammunition. Sweden and the UK initiated the work with Meteor, Sweden also coperates with germany about IRIS-T and cluster bombs. Sweden and France cooperates about anti tank and UAVs. Sweden and US cooperates over the whole spectra.
Germanys role and influence:
Germany, under Schroeder, agreed with Russia to build a gas pipeline in the baltics, from Viborg to Greifswald but no other countries in the Baltic region was consulted. After the sacking of Schroeder as German chancelor, he became chairman of "Nord Stream", the company that is going to build and operate the pipeline. Basically all other Balic states, headed by Swden, are against this pipeline as it has an negative impact on their security and defence. Germanys inability to understand this or just to neclect it has undermined Germanys influence in the region. And then, Waylander, you can count how many aircrafts you want, Germanys influence/power has decreased due to mismanaged foreign and security policy.
The Nord Stream gas pipeline:
If you follow the developments regarding the pipeline, it´s quite interesting, you will understand how orchestrated the resistance to the pipeline is...
- Sweden has said no to a compressor station on Swedish waters
- Estonia has forbidden Nord Stream to investigate Estonian sea bottom for this pipeline.
- Finland has urged Nord stream to draw the pipeline on lanmd instead
Gerhardt Shroeder, who wanted to meet the Estonian PM had been turned down and also got the message that he is "persona non grata" in Estonia.
The pipeline is not going to be built due to Swedens, Finlands, Estonias, Latvias, Lithuanias and Poland strategic interests. Germany has ignored these countries security interests and will face the consequenses. The major consequense are of course less say, i.e. less power.
Now this are part of the realities that are the context when we talk about defence and security in the Nordic.
As for "Rythm" comments - they are worthless. I did my military training in the northern part of Sweden. The battalion where all CV90 and much of the training was in -25 degress celsius with peaks on under -40 degrees celsius. I don´t give much credit for his so called knowledge in these matters. Also, when it comes to guts - how did the german soldiers perform in Kosovo?
Read this and then praise the german soldiers and officers courage and skils... (put www first) .dn.se/DNet/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=2502&a=664670
Have a good day!
What is your problem?
You were the one starting to name some weapon systems, technologies and companies. Now that one mentiones how wrong this approach is you come up with this:
What is your target? Starting a p***** contest and when someones says to you that it is BS you try to blame him for being involved in such a contest?
Tell me how Sweden is going to be THE partner in case of a crisis for Norway when it does not even has access to the atlantic.
In case of an attack onto Norway it can rely on NATO.
For sure the northern countries are expanding their partnership. This is defenitely good and is going to enhance their capabilities in case of a crisis.
The Generals are right when stating that combined procurement projects and training operations are going to help both countries.
But I don't see them mentioning that Norway isn't relying onto NATO anymore.
I don't see any big political statements in this article but the meaning of two generals about reducing costs.
And I stated it often enough before. In the real world Germany doesn't use it's armed forces to support it's projects in the baltic sea.
So talking about the pipeline in anything else than an economic or political context is ridicolous.
So if the political and economic problems are solved the pipeline is going to be build and if not than there will be no pipeline.
I ask you again, do you think that Sweden is going to interrupt this pipeline by using force if the political and economic pressure failes?
I don't think so...
One last question.
Do you have any problems with Germany or Germans or do you just like to talk in an insulting way about other nations?
You were the one starting to name some weapon systems, technologies and companies. Now that one mentiones how wrong this approach is you come up with this:
Before that you started babbling about superior Swedish subs, missiles and electronics as well as about the bad germans and russians.
What is your target? Starting a p***** contest and when someones says to you that it is BS you try to blame him for being involved in such a contest?
Tell me how Sweden is going to be THE partner in case of a crisis for Norway when it does not even has access to the atlantic.
In case of an attack onto Norway it can rely on NATO.
For sure the northern countries are expanding their partnership. This is defenitely good and is going to enhance their capabilities in case of a crisis.
The Generals are right when stating that combined procurement projects and training operations are going to help both countries.
But I don't see them mentioning that Norway isn't relying onto NATO anymore.
I don't see any big political statements in this article but the meaning of two generals about reducing costs.
And I stated it often enough before. In the real world Germany doesn't use it's armed forces to support it's projects in the baltic sea.
So talking about the pipeline in anything else than an economic or political context is ridicolous.
So if the political and economic problems are solved the pipeline is going to be build and if not than there will be no pipeline.
I ask you again, do you think that Sweden is going to interrupt this pipeline by using force if the political and economic pressure failes?
I don't think so...
One last question.
Do you have any problems with Germany or Germans or do you just like to talk in an insulting way about other nations?
Grand Danois
Entertainer
NATO is the primary guarantor of Norwegian, Danish, Polish, German, Estonian, Latvian, Lithuanian security - way above and beyond anything Sweden is or will be able to offer.
The statements made are infinitesimal compared to that.
Joint exercises (and consolidation of defence industries) are one thing, yet the current cooperation internally in NATO, say between Norway and UK or Denmark and Lithuania, is much more massive as integration of command and force structures is deep.
Sweden is watching on the sideline with its neutrality, though it has some interaction vis a vis the Nordic Battalion.
The statements made are infinitesimal compared to that.
Joint exercises (and consolidation of defence industries) are one thing, yet the current cooperation internally in NATO, say between Norway and UK or Denmark and Lithuania, is much more massive as integration of command and force structures is deep.
Sweden is watching on the sideline with its neutrality, though it has some interaction vis a vis the Nordic Battalion.
Last edited:
Nato and the Baltics
Waylander - I like germans... for supper! No, just kidding. Sometimes you get arrogant and start to blur up numbers of equipment - have seen russian and US members of the community do the same.
The main thing is the context, the big picture, and not nitty gritty details. Sometimes, of course, the details are important too.
However, I feel sad when I notice that so many people doesn´t have a clue about the reality that they are living in.
Take for example "Grand Danois" - He stated that Sweden was on the sideline regarding the Baltic countries and their defence. No other country has given more weapons and other defence material to the baltic countries as Sweden.
We also train officers from all Baltic countris at our military academies.
By the way Grand Danois, Sweden has been non allied, not neutral as you stated, since WWII, never neutral. It´s Switzerland that is neutral. If you can show me an official swedish document saying that Sweden is neutral than I would be extremely surprised/ashamed. But your statement is bulls eye, you lack the knowledge and you "think" - get the facts straight! Too many amateurs on this board!
Back to the Baltics... When it comes to financial and political support, Sweden is on the forefront. The first ambassador that went to the Estonian embassy when it was under siege in Moscow was the swedish ambassador. Swedish banks are now the largest ones in the baltics countries. Sweden is the largest investor in the baltic countries etc etc.
You have to put everything into consideration if you talk STRATEGY.
Also, regarding Norway - Since you are no that updated about Norway, read this:
(put www first) .norwaypost.no/cgi-bin/norwaypost/imaker?id=103169
***Text deleted - non compliance with DT rules***
Good day!
Waylander - I like germans... for supper! No, just kidding. Sometimes you get arrogant and start to blur up numbers of equipment - have seen russian and US members of the community do the same.
The main thing is the context, the big picture, and not nitty gritty details. Sometimes, of course, the details are important too.
However, I feel sad when I notice that so many people doesn´t have a clue about the reality that they are living in.
Take for example "Grand Danois" - He stated that Sweden was on the sideline regarding the Baltic countries and their defence. No other country has given more weapons and other defence material to the baltic countries as Sweden.
We also train officers from all Baltic countris at our military academies.
By the way Grand Danois, Sweden has been non allied, not neutral as you stated, since WWII, never neutral. It´s Switzerland that is neutral. If you can show me an official swedish document saying that Sweden is neutral than I would be extremely surprised/ashamed. But your statement is bulls eye, you lack the knowledge and you "think" - get the facts straight! Too many amateurs on this board!
Back to the Baltics... When it comes to financial and political support, Sweden is on the forefront. The first ambassador that went to the Estonian embassy when it was under siege in Moscow was the swedish ambassador. Swedish banks are now the largest ones in the baltics countries. Sweden is the largest investor in the baltic countries etc etc.
You have to put everything into consideration if you talk STRATEGY.
Also, regarding Norway - Since you are no that updated about Norway, read this:
(put www first) .norwaypost.no/cgi-bin/norwaypost/imaker?id=103169
***Text deleted - non compliance with DT rules***
Good day!
Last edited by a moderator:
Grand Danois
Entertainer
Karoliner,
You claim others are ignorant, yet you are entirely missing that the security environment in the Baltic area is not one of spheres of influence, but a sphere of shared security - which Sweden is not formally a part of as non-aligned.
Ignoring the things that matter a magnitude more than the anecdotes you provide, is the hallmark of the amateur.
Despite Sweden being non-aligned, it had to conform to NATO during the Cold War, and join the PFP afterwards - because NATO is the player, through collective security. There is no thing as a Swedish sphere of influence in todays Baltic defence context.
I knew you would mention donations of materiél. This is insignificant compared to command and force structure. See above comment on orders of magnitude. Further, you underestimate the amount materiél donated by others, just as Baltic officers train and study in academies across Europe.
An example; the Lithuanian Iron Wolf Bde:
International Joint Projects
* ARTBALT, a joint project with Denmark to create an artillery battalion in Lithuania
* BALTBAT, a multinational project aimed to create and train a joint infantry battalion between Lithuania's, Latvia's, and Estonia's militaries. The project is executed in cooperation with several Scandinavian nations, Great Britain, and the USA.
* LITPOLBAT, a project to create a joint battalion with Poland's military.
* LITBAT, a project aimed to reorganized the Grand Duke Algirdas Battalion into a mechanized infantry battalion, capable of operating together with NATO forces. Executed with the help of Denmark's military instructors.
* Grunwald Wind, a biannual military practice in Poland. The Brigade's HQ and the Duchess Birtutė Battalion take part in those.
* The biannual Amber Hope military practice, together with other BALTBAT members.
* The NATO military practice Strong Resolve 2001 and Strong Resolve 2002 in Poland.
* The Cooperative Lantern 2002 military practice in the Netherlands, attended by soldiers from the Brigade HQ and the King Mindaugas Battalion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/'Iron_Wolf'_Mechanised_Infantry_Brigade
Notice who is absent here? And what are the contexts?
Lastly, trying to character assasinate me with your comment re neutral vs non-aligned reveals an unvillingness to discuss substance and trying to divert from your lost argument - it is lateral displacement of discourse - another mark of the amateur.
You claim others are ignorant, yet you are entirely missing that the security environment in the Baltic area is not one of spheres of influence, but a sphere of shared security - which Sweden is not formally a part of as non-aligned.
Ignoring the things that matter a magnitude more than the anecdotes you provide, is the hallmark of the amateur.
Despite Sweden being non-aligned, it had to conform to NATO during the Cold War, and join the PFP afterwards - because NATO is the player, through collective security. There is no thing as a Swedish sphere of influence in todays Baltic defence context.
I knew you would mention donations of materiél. This is insignificant compared to command and force structure. See above comment on orders of magnitude. Further, you underestimate the amount materiél donated by others, just as Baltic officers train and study in academies across Europe.
An example; the Lithuanian Iron Wolf Bde:
International Joint Projects
* ARTBALT, a joint project with Denmark to create an artillery battalion in Lithuania
* BALTBAT, a multinational project aimed to create and train a joint infantry battalion between Lithuania's, Latvia's, and Estonia's militaries. The project is executed in cooperation with several Scandinavian nations, Great Britain, and the USA.
* LITPOLBAT, a project to create a joint battalion with Poland's military.
* LITBAT, a project aimed to reorganized the Grand Duke Algirdas Battalion into a mechanized infantry battalion, capable of operating together with NATO forces. Executed with the help of Denmark's military instructors.
* Grunwald Wind, a biannual military practice in Poland. The Brigade's HQ and the Duchess Birtutė Battalion take part in those.
* The biannual Amber Hope military practice, together with other BALTBAT members.
* The NATO military practice Strong Resolve 2001 and Strong Resolve 2002 in Poland.
* The Cooperative Lantern 2002 military practice in the Netherlands, attended by soldiers from the Brigade HQ and the King Mindaugas Battalion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/'Iron_Wolf'_Mechanised_Infantry_Brigade
Notice who is absent here? And what are the contexts?
Lastly, trying to character assasinate me with your comment re neutral vs non-aligned reveals an unvillingness to discuss substance and trying to divert from your lost argument - it is lateral displacement of discourse - another mark of the amateur.
Last edited:
You started with numbers (For example 150 Gripens). And when talking about military capabilities numbers ARE a factor besides many other factors.
But as I said before in the baltic the military capabilities of the western countries are not important or do you think Germany and Sweden are going to fight over problems like the pipeline?
Leaving politics aside and talking just about pure military capabilities as represented by technology, training, logistics and numbers I just don't see why you seem to insist on Sweden being the big player in the baltic sea. They are for sure not a minor country there but they are also not able to dominate it even if they would try.
He is right. In the end Norway as well as the baltic countries are NATO members. Norway is for a long time fully integrated into NATO strctures and the new baltic members are on their way.
On who do you think they rely the most when it comes to their defense? Sweden or NATO?
The baltic states integrate their command and support structures into NATO's and not into Sweden's standards and train to work together with other NATO formations.
Okay.
CIA World Factbook:
I=Import E=Export
Germany Sweden
Estonia I: 12,4%; E: 5,1% I: 9%; E: 12,4%
Latvia I: 15,4%; E: 9,8% I: 5%; E: 6,3%
Lithuania I: 14,9%; E: 8,7% I: <4,8% (not on the list); E: 4,6%
And this is just Germany. For sure Sweden is an important economic partner to the baltic states but as before you make it look bigger bigger than it actually is.
This article describes the opinion of one general. He might think that Norway cannot rely on NATO during possible clashes with russia over fishing rights and oil fields and he might be right with it when these clashes take place outside of Norwegian waters.
But what kind of support could Sweden give to Norway besides political pressure (Which is for sure not bigger than the political pressure of Norways other allies)?
Send some Gripens to bases in northern Norway? Redeploy some ships to Norwegian harbors in the north? Attack some russian ships as a warning/retalitation in the baltic sea?
Sweden does not even has a coast with the areas this general talked about while NATO battlegroups operate regularly in these waters.
I am not going to commend on your comments on larger groups of Germans...
Some facts
Waylander,
I find you a serious person to talk to so I'll be more polite. Regarding investments in the Baltic countries, something that also gives influence, the situation is like this:
Estonia: (source: Bank of Estonia)
Foreign investment in Estonia - Figures 30/6 2007
Sweden 40,2%
Finland 25,5%
Netherlands 3,8%
Denmark 3,6%
Norway 3,1%
Other 23,8%
Also this from the Estonia goverment:
Sweden is Estonia's largest foreign investor, whose volume of direct investments as of 31.12.2006 reached nearly 100 billion kroons (51.4% of the total volume of investments). The major part investments have been made into the banking, transport and communications sector. The Swedish investors consider Estonia attractive primarily due to its qualified, motivated and productive labor as well as due to its economic climate, flexible and open to innovations and renewals. Upon accession to the European Union, the access to the EU funds has added attractiveness.
Latvia:
Biggest foreign investors (ackumulated to 2006): Source; Swedish trade
1. Sweden 17%
2. Estonia 13%
3. Germany 11,7%
Lithuania:
Biggest foreign investors (ackumulated to 2006): Source; Swedish trade
1. Sweden 14%
2. Denmark 13,5%
3 Germany 13,3%
4. Russia 12,1%
5. Finland 8,2"
Soo - I guess I made my point there.
Regarding this "one norwegian general" - It was Norways supreme commander and the views represented the Norwegian defence. Sweden has no naval capability in the arctics but we have one of the most modern air forces i Europe. The thought is not that Sweden will take over Natos commitment to defend Norway in a full scale war with russia, but there are a grey zone in between where Norway will need support and where they feel unsure that they will get that support from Nato. It took for example Germany some time to come out and defend Estonia when Russia was intimidationg Estonia this summer. Sweden reacted immidiately.
The main problem right now in the northern region is that russia is trying to divide different countries with each other. Here, germany went into the trap when they signed a bilateral gas agreement with russia, instead of doing this on behalf of EU. Swedens objective is to try to keep together the countris in the Baltic region to counter the russian move to get more influence. The Nord Stream pipeline is in this context a key issue. Sweden is doing all it can to stop the pipeline and you should hope that we succeed.
As for "Rythm", I´ll swith to swedish...
**Text Deleted***
Good evening!
Hmm. I know 6 languages & Swedish happens to be one of them. This very foul, insulting ad hominem does certainly not comply with the rules of this board, and with everything considered, an astonishing lack of conduite has been displayed by you.
Permanent ban. No need for responses. I will clean it up.
Enjoy.
/GD
Waylander,
I find you a serious person to talk to so I'll be more polite. Regarding investments in the Baltic countries, something that also gives influence, the situation is like this:
Estonia: (source: Bank of Estonia)
Foreign investment in Estonia - Figures 30/6 2007
Sweden 40,2%
Finland 25,5%
Netherlands 3,8%
Denmark 3,6%
Norway 3,1%
Other 23,8%
Also this from the Estonia goverment:
Sweden is Estonia's largest foreign investor, whose volume of direct investments as of 31.12.2006 reached nearly 100 billion kroons (51.4% of the total volume of investments). The major part investments have been made into the banking, transport and communications sector. The Swedish investors consider Estonia attractive primarily due to its qualified, motivated and productive labor as well as due to its economic climate, flexible and open to innovations and renewals. Upon accession to the European Union, the access to the EU funds has added attractiveness.
Latvia:
Biggest foreign investors (ackumulated to 2006): Source; Swedish trade
1. Sweden 17%
2. Estonia 13%
3. Germany 11,7%
Lithuania:
Biggest foreign investors (ackumulated to 2006): Source; Swedish trade
1. Sweden 14%
2. Denmark 13,5%
3 Germany 13,3%
4. Russia 12,1%
5. Finland 8,2"
Soo - I guess I made my point there.
Regarding this "one norwegian general" - It was Norways supreme commander and the views represented the Norwegian defence. Sweden has no naval capability in the arctics but we have one of the most modern air forces i Europe. The thought is not that Sweden will take over Natos commitment to defend Norway in a full scale war with russia, but there are a grey zone in between where Norway will need support and where they feel unsure that they will get that support from Nato. It took for example Germany some time to come out and defend Estonia when Russia was intimidationg Estonia this summer. Sweden reacted immidiately.
The main problem right now in the northern region is that russia is trying to divide different countries with each other. Here, germany went into the trap when they signed a bilateral gas agreement with russia, instead of doing this on behalf of EU. Swedens objective is to try to keep together the countris in the Baltic region to counter the russian move to get more influence. The Nord Stream pipeline is in this context a key issue. Sweden is doing all it can to stop the pipeline and you should hope that we succeed.
As for "Rythm", I´ll swith to swedish...
**Text Deleted***
Good evening!
Hmm. I know 6 languages & Swedish happens to be one of them. This very foul, insulting ad hominem does certainly not comply with the rules of this board, and with everything considered, an astonishing lack of conduite has been displayed by you.
Permanent ban. No need for responses. I will clean it up.
Enjoy.
/GD
Last edited by a moderator:
Not everything has to go through the EU. This gas pipeline will also connect to Finland, the Netherlands and ultimately the UK. The Netherlands are actually buying a 10% stake in Nord Stream.
See it as an expression of the more recent German attitude that we should "ignore" the EU periphery a bit more.
Sweden is pissed because Russia claims that the Baltic Fleet would patrol the pipeline, some 30-40 nm east of Farö and Gotland and could "spy" on Sweden? Seriously, get a clue, guess just where the Baltic Fleet could actually park its surveillance ships if it wanted to, fully legally?
Ehh - you mean the embassy? Right. But the swedish approach was more the surveilance over and under the baltic sea. However, this is the tiny part of it. The objective for russia is to get western europe dependant of russian gas. It would potentially block more environmental energy sources like wind power, bio energy etc if russia dump the gas price. Having Europe dependant on russian energy would be nice ace for the russians if they would have a dispute with EU/germany - maybe over some of the Baltic countries, human rights, Georgie and so on.
LNG in the EU, examples:
Germany:
- Consumption: 100.2 bn m³
- Local production share: 9.4%
- Russian import share: 39%
France:
- Consumption: 44.7 bn m³
- Local production share: 17.2%
- Russian import share: 25.7%
Italy:
- Consumption: 79.7 bn m³
- Local production share: 12.8%
- Russian import share: 29.6%
Austria:
- Consumption: 9 bn m³
- Local production share: 6.6%
- Russian import share: 74.4%
Finland:
- Consumption: 4.9 bn m³
- Local production share: 0%
- Russian import share: 100%
(source: BBC)
Any questions?
People here in the forum seems to be sceptical about cooperation between sweden and US during the 60´s. Here is a link
Link
First Paragraph
Development of society and technology go hand in hand. In the 1960s, the United States rapidly developed the missile-armed Polaris nuclear submarine, which patrolled the Scandinavian coast. At the same time, the United States issued a security guarantee for Sweden. In the event of a Soviet attack, the United States would support Swedish defence with military resources.
By Nils Bruzelius
Link
First Paragraph
Development of society and technology go hand in hand. In the 1960s, the United States rapidly developed the missile-armed Polaris nuclear submarine, which patrolled the Scandinavian coast. At the same time, the United States issued a security guarantee for Sweden. In the event of a Soviet attack, the United States would support Swedish defence with military resources.
By Nils Bruzelius
Grand Danois
Entertainer
I'm not out to belittle US-Swedish Cold War cooperation which I recognize to be considerable and significant, but...
In the same year, 1960, the US National Security Council, chaired by President Eisenhower, formulated a security guarantee for Sweden. In the event of Soviet aggression against Sweden, the United States would support Sweden’s defence with military resources.
...hardly constitutes a security guarantee. Unless actual military planning for the deployment of assets [units] or directly supportive military actions can be pointed to.
If unearthed, it would be convincing.
Another point:
There were strong links in the research between the Polaris project and Sweden. Swedish researchers at the Royal Institute of Technology and Uppsala University made significant efforts to improve the missiles' performance. At KTH, the researchers in 1960 succeeded for the first time in determining the exact shape of the Earth, knowledge which was necessary to be able to calculate missile trajectories correctly. Uppsala University took part in a world-wide project to determine the location of the continents in relation to one another. This research was funded by the US Department of Defence.
As to geophysics in the sixties... breakthroughs were achieved all the time across the globe, as so much was oriented towards describing the Earth in order to improve ballistic missile accuracy; the Swedes may be emphasising themselves a bit too much on this point, however it is a very very minor point of criticism.
But some very fine and interesting observations. They do support that Sweden was unofficially in the Western block.
US-Swedish cooperation on the intelligence side is perhaps the strongest argument in support of this view.
I never realized that Skagerak was a SSBN salient in the sixties.
In the same year, 1960, the US National Security Council, chaired by President Eisenhower, formulated a security guarantee for Sweden. In the event of Soviet aggression against Sweden, the United States would support Sweden’s defence with military resources.
...hardly constitutes a security guarantee. Unless actual military planning for the deployment of assets [units] or directly supportive military actions can be pointed to.
If unearthed, it would be convincing.
Another point:
There were strong links in the research between the Polaris project and Sweden. Swedish researchers at the Royal Institute of Technology and Uppsala University made significant efforts to improve the missiles' performance. At KTH, the researchers in 1960 succeeded for the first time in determining the exact shape of the Earth, knowledge which was necessary to be able to calculate missile trajectories correctly. Uppsala University took part in a world-wide project to determine the location of the continents in relation to one another. This research was funded by the US Department of Defence.
As to geophysics in the sixties... breakthroughs were achieved all the time across the globe, as so much was oriented towards describing the Earth in order to improve ballistic missile accuracy; the Swedes may be emphasising themselves a bit too much on this point, however it is a very very minor point of criticism.
But some very fine and interesting observations. They do support that Sweden was unofficially in the Western block.
US-Swedish cooperation on the intelligence side is perhaps the strongest argument in support of this view.
I never realized that Skagerak was a SSBN salient in the sixties.
Please read further
Security guarantee from the United States
In the same year, 1960, the US National Security Council, chaired by President Eisenhower, formulated a security guarantee for Sweden. In the event of Soviet aggression against Sweden, the United States would support Sweden’s defence with military resources. The two NATO members Norway and Denmark at the same time received sharply increased military support. The Norwegian naval fleet was boosted by the addition of 56 vessels. Denmark also had new vessels added to its fleet. A command unit with the task of closing off the outlets of the Baltic Sea was formed in 1961. The unit was under Danish command, but had a significant element of US personnel.
Well..As to geophysics in the sixties... breakthroughs were achieved all the time across the globe, as so much was oriented towards describing the Earth in order to improve ballistic missile accuracy; the Swedes may be emphasising themselves a bit too much on this point, however it is a very very minor point of criticism.
... might be..the study ware mayby done more for conformation purpose.Grand Danois
Entertainer
I did read further, it does not expand, only repeats the same vaugue formulation.Please read further
Perhaps. Confirmation/validation via differing methods/perspectives/approach hold true value.Well..