Russia-NATO Cooperation

[Feanor]

I think this is a topic that is seriously underestimated by most people and it would help a lot to explore it further. What caught my attention recently was this article according to which Russia has now allowed the German Army to move military hardware over land through Russia. Previously NATO did move supplies through Russia, but only non-military ones.

http://www.russodaily.com/reports/R...ermany_army_shipments_to_Afghanistan_999.html

Russia-NATO cooperation is set to unfreeze in January iirc, since it's paralysis during the Georgian war, and the scale of that cooperation only became obvious right before the war when they started announcing cancellations of joint exercises, and it turned out that Russia and NATO had a joint exercise roughly every two weeks.

This is given that every Ukraine NATO exercise (which happen quite rarely) are met with huge protests and a campaign of lashing in the Russian press, might suggest that Russia has potential aspirations of one day being a NATO member. My opinion of it is fairly simple, it'll be the last nail in NATO's coffin. I'd love to hear some other opinions of members here.

 

[SkolZkiy]

I also think that if Russia enters NATO, it will be NATOs end =)

 

[kato]

Russia and Germany cooperate on supplies delivered to German troops in AFG. Primarily through transit flyovers for German military cargo aircraft, but Germany has been looking into moving part of this supply route to rail transport for a while now, and officially has had a contract for this for a while now.
Through Russia, Germany has a direct rail connection with the German Air Force Base in Termez, Uzbekistan, which serves as the regional logistics gate for RC(N) effectively. All supplies for the German and Dutch ISAF forces run through this route, by air and rail. Military goods so far primarily by air, as there was a restriction in the contract regarding that.

---

As joint operations and exercises go ... Georgia has disrupted a lot. For example the Russian Baltic Fleet was supposed to take part in "Open Spirit" in September for the first time (mineclearing off the Baltic coast, primarily Estonia) with two minesweepers, but this was cancelled of course. Would have been a real milestone for cooperation in the Baltic Sea.

 

[Feanor]

Is there a possibility of greater integration? And do you think it's likely? Given Russian interest in securing the near abroad and stabilizing CAR, I would think greater cooperation on the Aghan mission is a possibility. Maybe even deployment of Russian logistical troops or engineers to Afghan.

 

[kato]

Doubt it with regard to closer integration with Germany. Besides, especially on the logistics and engineering side, Germany is already "running" RC(N). And then there's also the warlords of course, which would heavily oppose any Russian troops in AFG...

I could see some possibility of Russian support in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan - they're not exactly unfriendly. Perhaps direct logistics support for the German and French air force bases in these countries or something like that. Of course especially in the Tajik case, the repercussions would have to be considered, with the very recent row over the potential Indian base there...

Of course one alternative could always be Kosovo. With the planned operational split there between EU forces and UN forces (the latter for the Serb territories), perhaps Russian troops could take on a bigger role again - relieving some EUFOR troops, which of course are exactly from those countries who have been claimed to "not contribute enough" in AFG (read: Germany, France, Spain) by certain NATO countries.
Same thing for EUFOR Bosnia (Althea), i.e. the MNBN near Sarajevo, or perhaps taking over a RCC there.
If that's considered politically too volatile, i could see e.g. an integration of say a Russian company of troops into the three KFOR/EUFOR OTH regimental reinforcement groups, especially for joint exercises.

 

[SkolZkiy]

I think that Russia has no need to help NATO and all international troops in AFG. It is their problem now. Ru soldiers die in Chechnya and now in South Ossetia. The second AFG company we don't need.

 

[nevidimka]

I dont see why any country would wanna get involved in AFG, let alone send its own troops now. The smart move is to not get involved as it is a huge mess. Nato countries are stuck in there because of US> The lack of enthusiasm shown by European countries in regards to Deploying to Afghanistan is a clear answer to getting involved in Afghanistan.

The reason Russia is opening up to European countries supplying their troops in Afghan is because Rusia doesn't want NATO to get out without fixing the problem there. A volatile and unfinished Afghan is a threat to Central Asia and Russia.

I dont know why you would wanna wish that Feanor.

 

[kato]

Well, Germany at least is in for the long run. Current planning until at least 2018-2020.

 

[Feanor]

Afghan is not so much a NATO problem as it is a problem for it's immediate neighbors. The CAR are part of the Russian near abroad, and CSTO members. Thus their security interests are at stake, and ultimately the illegal drug flow into Russia from CAR and Afghan. Russia has a definite interest in a stable and more or less peaceful Afghan.

EDIT: Kosovo is an interesting possibility though. Russia doesn't recognize it's independence. Would it be willing to deploy troops to defend that independence? And what about Russia-NATO cooperation on the issue of Somalian piracy. Russia has recently talked about sending additional ships from the Baltic and Black Sea Fleets to the area along with potential Spetznaz units to deal with piracy in the area, and iirc Rogozin proposed a joint Russia-NATO effort involving ground forces.

 

[waraich]

Afghan is not so much a NATO problem as it is a problem for it's immediate neighbors.

I dont agree with you sir.Afganistan is now also problem of NATO and there is futhure increase of this problem in next 10 years .USA have long term strategy in Afghanistan and NATO has to pay cost of friendship with USA.
Present financial crissis in USA further increases level of involvement of NATO not only USA need more NATO forces but also money.

 

[Feanor]

NATO doesn't consist of the US. It consists of the US, Canada, and European nations. While the US maybe preoccupied there, an ultimate withdrawal and tabandoning Afghan into another failed state will not have very large and immediate security reprecussions for most NATO members.

 

[waraich]

NATO doesn't consist of the US. It consists of the US, Canada, and European nations. While the US maybe preoccupied there, an ultimate withdrawal and tabandoning Afghan into another failed state will not have very large and immediate security reprecussions for most NATO members.

Afghanistan does not fit in fail state formula because they dont have direct link with international bank system.They have their own barter trade system based on islamic finance.
I dont think EU have any direct security treath from Afghanistan.We dont have any example that Talaban did some terrist activities in EU or other part of world before US lead afghan war.
Yes Al Qaida has targeted many time different europian countries

 

[SkolZkiy]

There is one GREAT THREAT in Afgan for everyone - it's a GEROIN. and since coalition troops are in Afgan the produce of this drug increased catastrophically in several times. but most of it is going to Russia, India and China - and US and other countries don't care about.
Today I was listening to news on Vesti channel and there an officer (I don't understand from what country he was) said that they do not intefere into the war against geroin, they only support Afgan police. I doubt that Afgan police can handle with this. So we have a great problem.
If I'm wrong then I'd be happy.

 

[waraich]

There is one GREAT THREAT in Afgan for everyone - it's a GEROIN. and since coalition troops are in Afgan the produce of this drug increased catastrophically in several times. but most of it is going to Russia, India and China - and US and other countries don't care about.
Today I was listening to news on Vesti channel and there an officer (I don't understand from what country he was) said that they do not intefere into the war against geroin, they only support Afgan police. I doubt that Afgan police can handle with this. So we have a great problem.
If I'm wrong then I'd be happy.

Drug production and export level during five years of talaban government was neglible but after US& NATO attack its cultivation is at maximum level because it is main source of income for insurgents and war lords.US&NATO has adopted wrong strategy from start and after seven years now they realise that talaban involvement is must to achieve the objective of control of terrorism,norcotics etc.

I think this stratgey could work effectively.

 

[Todjaeger]

Afghanistan does not fit in fail state formula because they dont have direct link with international bank system.They have their own barter trade system based on islamic finance.
I dont think EU have any direct security treath from Afghanistan.We dont have any example that Talaban did some terrist activities in EU or other part of world before US lead afghan war.
Yes Al Qaida has targeted many time different europian countries

A failed state is not, IMV, defined by having or the lack thereof, a link to the international bank system.

A failed state is typically defined as one that has some of all of the following characteristics

1. Loss of physical control of its territory or a monopoly on the legitimate use of force.
2. Erosion of legitimate authority to make collective decisions.
3. An inability to provide reasonable public services.
4. The inability to interact with other states as a full member of the international community.

A failed state poses a danger to its neighbours and the world at large as the population of the failed state takes actions to survive in their environment. An obvious example of this would be in Africa, specifically Somalia. The incidents of piracy around the Horn of Africa, in the Gulf of Aden or in the Indian Ocean are clear examples of how a failed state can impact the rest of the world. An example of a failing state and the impact it can have would be Sudan. Given the situation in Darfur, it has caused refugees to flee into neighbouring Chad, in turn straining Chad's resources.

There is also the danger of a group or groups gaining power and influence within a failed state, and then being able to use that power base to support attacks carried out elsewhere. Afghanistan and the relationship Al Qaeda had with it and the Taliban in 2001 is a good example of why there is a concern.

-Cheers