KipPotapych

Well-Known Member
I mentioned in the RU-UA war thread a while back that the costs of replacing the donated equipment and supplies is going to be astronomical. Here is the first comments on the subject that I have seen from NATO officials.


Basic idea:

"Prices for equipment and ammunition are shooting up. Right now, we are paying more and more for exactly the same," Dutch Admiral Rob Bauer, the chair of NATO's military committee, said on Saturday after a meeting of the alliance's chiefs of defence in Oslo.

"That means that we cannot make sure that the increased defence spending actually leads to more security."


In my opinion, this is somewhat an optimistic disclosure. This I thought was also interesting:

Bauer pushed for more private investment in the defence sector to ramp up production capacity, urging pension funds and banks to stop labelling defence investments as unethical.

This is likely targeted at the general public because… Well, sound like targeted at dummies and not the actual “private sector”:

"Long term stability needs to prevail over short term profits. As we have seen in Ukraine, war is a whole of society event," he said, adding such investment was in the private sector's strategic interest as well.

"Forty percent of the (Ukrainian) economy evaporated in the first days of the war, that was private money to a large extent, that money is gone," he noted.
 

koxinga

Well-Known Member
Things seem to be heating up between Serbia and Kosovo, with reports of Serbian formations and artillery divisions massing on the border with Kosovo.


This comes on the back of a violent attack on 24 Sep, in North Kosovo, municipal area of Zvečan around the village and associated Serb Orthodox monastery of Banjska. The amount of equipment, ammunition found include:

Zastava M84 machine guns, M72 LMG, M80 'Zolja' anti-tank weapons, Zastava M76 DMR, Zastava M93 automatic grenade launcher with Serbian NSBG-1 aiming device, 30mm M93P1 grenades, Zastava M70B1 / M70AB2 assault rifles Zastava M70, MP5K & MP5SD3 SMGs, AR-15 rifles, Zastava M92 carbine and suppressed Beretta 92FS pistols, MRUD landmines, 82-BM-36 pattern mortar with M74 mortar bombs, M60P1 AP rifle grenades and M75 & M52P3 hand grenades, .50 BMG (12.7x99mm) M2 heavy machine, M80 'Zolja' anti-tank weapons

at the scene would suggest a state sponsored actor rather than criminal organisation. Feels like an attempted direct action in anticipation of some broader situation.

 

Big_Zucchini

Well-Known Member
I mentioned in the RU-UA war thread a while back that the costs of replacing the donated equipment and supplies is going to be astronomical. Here is the first comments on the subject that I have seen from NATO officials.
If it ain't the basic principle of supply and demand coming to bite European butts because they all decided to buy masses of equipment at exactly the same time.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Placing this here because the drone threat is applicable to all members not just the US army. The Ukraine war is an awake showcasing the vulnerability of ground forces to this threat. You can bet the PLA is pressing for massive drone counter measures and will likely surpass any Western production, at least for several years.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
If it ain't the basic principle of supply and demand coming to bite European butts because they all decided to buy masses of equipment at exactly the same time.
And they're having to pay to increase production capacity: hardware, & recruitment & training of new workers. IIRC the UK has exactly two factories making artillery ammunition: one making shells, the other one filling them. Both can get more out of their hardware, but for that they need more workers, to work more shifts. Last I heard, they'd already increased production as much as they could by getting the workers they already had to work overtime, & were busy recruiting.
 

Vivendi

Well-Known Member
On October 8 the gas pipeline Baltic Connector between NATO countries Finland and Estonia suffered an unusual drop in pressure. Initial investigations concluded that this was caused "on purpose by an external actor". In addition, a telecommunications cable between the two countries was also damaged. It is not known if there is a link between these two incidents. It is also not yet known who damaged the pipeline and the cable. Interestingly, the Russian Project 865-class hydrographic survey vessel Sibiryakov apparently has been mapping the pipeline on a number of occasion during this year, the last of which was a month ago. The vessel is also known to have operated in the area of the Nord Stream sabotages.

Seabed Warfare: Another Sabotage in the Baltic? - Naval News

Initial reports from Finland indicated that they did not believe an explosion caused the damage. However, Norwegian NORSAR detected a probable explosion in the region at the time of the breach. Seismic signal detected in vicinity of gas pipelines in the Eastern Baltic Sea - jordskjelv.no
 

Vivendi

Well-Known Member
A fibre optic cable between Sweden and Estonia was damaged, at roughly the same time as the sabotage on the gas pipeline between Finland and Estonia. The cause of the damage is unknown.

Finnish authorities have identified two ships, one from Russia and another from China, that were observed in the area of the gas pipeline sabotage, on the day the sabotage happened. Sweden investigating damage to Baltic undersea cable - BBC News

One may wonder if it's a coincidence that these events took place hours after Hamas launched their massive attack on Israel. See also this post by @ngatimozart: Hamas-Israeli War 2023 | Page 6 | Defence Forum & Military Photos - DefenceTalk
 

Vivendi

Well-Known Member
On Thursday, a spokesperson for the Estonian Prosecutor General said the Baltic country's probe would be expanded to include both telecoms cable incidents, in a move showing a potential link between the two was being considered.

"The circumstances of damage to the communications cables between Estonia-Finland and Estonia-Sweden are similar," the spokesperson told Reuters.

Estonia has already concluded that the cable between Estonia and Sweden was damaged by "outside physical impact". Sweden has sent submarine rescue ship Belos to the area to assist in the investigations. Estonia to probe Sweden cable damage as part of Baltic Sea incident investigation | Reuters

NATO is stepping up patrols in the region. NATO boosts Baltic patrols after undersea infrastructure damage | Reuters. I assume Russia is doing the same? If not, it would look very suspicious -- if Russia is truly disturbed about these mysterious incidents then it would be logical to step up patrols... Damage To Baltic Pipeline Is Disturbing Russia - BW Businessworld - test
 

Vivendi

Well-Known Member
The Swedish government has updated it's communication on the damaged cable today:

Updated version 23/10 16:30: It has been confirmed that the cable has been damaged through external force or tampering. The damage did not effect the function of the cable. The damage occurred within the Estonian economic zone.

– We are cooperating closely with our Estonian and Finnish partners. Estonia has reported that traces of physical impacts have been found. They have also assessed that the damage to the gas pipeline and communications cable between Finland and Estonia is related to the damage to the communications cable between Sweden and Estonia, says Minister for Civil Defence Carl-Oskar Bohlin.

The Swedish Police Authority, the Swedish Security Service, the Swedish Armed Forces and the Swedish Coast Guard were already in contact with their Finnish and Estonian counterparts to offer Swedish support and assistance in relation to the investigation and the damaged Finnish-Estonian cables. Contact between the government agencies in the respective countries is now being strengthened given that similar developments have impacted Swedish interests.

– The relevant Swedish authorities are investigating the situation in close collaboration with their Estonian counterparts. The Swedish Armed Forces vessel HMS Belos has been deployed to the location to investigate. NATO is also sending an important signal with its increased presence in the Baltic Sea following these events, says Minister for Defence Pål Jonson.

Update: NATO has increased their presence in the Baltic Sea by deploying a minesweeping vessel and through increased air surveillance.


Damaged telecommunications cable between Sweden and Estonia - Government.se

Edit: Finland is focusing it's investigations on Chinese ship NewNew Polar Bear that was in the region when the pipeline (and cables) were damaged. The investigation is now focused on the role of the vessel Newnew Polar Bear - Police (poliisi.fi)

China cautions Finland and Estonia over the investigation. China cautions Finland and Estonia over pipeline 'sabotage' investigation | Euronews
 
Last edited:

Vivendi

Well-Known Member
Norwegian National Security Authority (NSM) has recently reported a massive "day zero" cyber attack launched on Norway. On a scale from 1 to 10, this was a "category 10" attack. It is not known who was behind the this sophisticated attack. Important Norwegian subcontractors, and regions with key defense installations seems to have been targeted in particular. They have noticed an increase in sophisticated cyber attacks recently. NSM-sjefen bekrefter: Håndterer nytt avansert cyberangrep mot Norge | DN
 

Vivendi

Well-Known Member
If Trump becomes president, he will most likely not be able to make the US formally leave NATO however he may be able to strongly weaken the interpretation of article 5, and for sure generate a lot of uncertainties. Trump Plots to Leave NATO, Given the Chance, If Demands Aren't Met (rollingstone.com)

European NATO countries + Canada should really step up and meet (preferably exceed) the minimum NATO 2% requirement ASAP. I am not sure why so many politicians (including Norwegian ones) still don't understand how dangerous and unstable the world is becoming. It's extremely frustrating.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
If Trump becomes president, he will most likely not be able to make the US formally leave NATO however he may be able to strongly weaken the interpretation of article 5, and for sure generate a lot of uncertainties. Trump Plots to Leave NATO, Given the Chance, If Demands Aren't Met (rollingstone.com)

European NATO countries + Canada should really step up and meet (preferably exceed) the minimum NATO 2% requirement ASAP. I am not sure why so many politicians (including Norwegian ones) still don't understand how dangerous and unstable the world is becoming. It's extremely frustrating.
They are pollies, looking after themselves electorally is the priority and country comes second. In Canada’s case, second is being optimistic. I am beginning to wonder if 2% is sufficient given the increasingly deteriorating geopolitical situation.
 

Vivendi

Well-Known Member
They are pollies, looking after themselves electorally is the priority and country comes second. In Canada’s case, second is being optimistic. I am beginning to wonder if 2% is sufficient given the increasingly deteriorating geopolitical situation.
I agree -- however if all European NATO countries + Canada reach the 2% goal, and if (this is also dreaming of course) they could become much more efficient and less political in how they spend the money, I think NATO would become decently strong also at 2%. NATO's European countries accumulated GDP (adjusted for PPP) is just slightly below the US', and even at 2% it means quite a lot of money. However given the massive waste and inefficiencies they should probably aim for 3% to compensate.
 

SolarisKenzo

Well-Known Member
European countries could spend 4% and still count zero in world geopolitics.
Division, fragmentation, duplication...
They would still be something very close to puppet states of the US.

No, Europe doesnt need to spend more.
Europe needs to spend better, together, as equal partners of the US. Not as a dog.
 

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
If Trump becomes president, he will most likely not be able to make the US formally leave NATO however he may be able to strongly weaken the interpretation of article 5, and for sure generate a lot of uncertainties. Trump Plots to Leave NATO, Given the Chance, If Demands Aren't Met (rollingstone.com)
The US doesn't have to leave NATO entirely. The US and the president can absolutely reduce their European posture and support. They can still meet any NATO obligation even if a state is attacked and the US pledges just some airstrikes in support. It doesn't need to have tens of thousands of troops and equipment based in Europe. A really, the US has been decreasing its European footprint, for decades. Europe isn't the burnout ghetto it was in 1946. The US could absolutely ditch basing ships in Europe and troops and equipment in Europe. Ships and planes can come back pretty quickly, within a term of a president. More likely they will be repositioned into Asia where the US is facing a possible existential and direct threat to its territory and interests. Does the US need to base 5 destroyers in Spain? In Italy? F-35's in the UK or Germany?

There really is a feeling in the US that America is too concerned about issues very far away from it, and its interests. Ukraine now feels like an endless war, and one that Europe should really be doing all the heavy lifting on. The middle east, well its a mess too, we are seeing a polarisation in the Muslim world and things are, complicated, even amongst US allies. At some point it might find itself in a situation too complicated for its liking. The US can't defeat Hamas for the Israelis. I'm not sure attacking Iran solves anyone's problems either.

Attempting to do any of those things is likely to leave the door ajar on China doing what ever it wants unopposed. Which is a far, far, far, far bigger headache for the US than anything in Europe or the middle east.

Europe needs to spend better, together, as equal partners of the US. Not as a dog.
Lets not use derogatory language. Plus dogs are loyal, brave, capable animals. Im not sure Trump sees Europe in the same light.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
The USA has a huge investment in facilities in Europe. They enable much of what the US armed forces do in other parts of the world. There are massive logistical hubs, hospitals, etc. Europe's safe: it has excellent infrastructure. It's politically stable. Where's the USA going to find equally good places for bases, & how much would it cost to build them?

Ukraine now feels like an endless war, and one that Europe should really be doing all the heavy lifting on.
BTW, so far European countries have given more aid to Ukraine than the USA has. Less military, but more economic. Europe's kept Ukraine functioning behind the front lines. And it's also taken & supported Ukrainian refugees. How many million has the USA accepted?
 

SolarisKenzo

Well-Known Member
If you don’t want to change, Moderators can always issue warning points or bans
Lets not use derogatory language. Plus dogs are loyal, brave, capable animals. Im not sure Trump sees Europe in the same light.
A dog is a dog.
And Europe must stop to be a dog.
 

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
NATO selects Boeing E-7A Wedgetail for I-AFSC - Australian Defence Magazine
NATO is the latest to select the E-7A Wedgetail, for its I-AFSC capability to replace the E-3, initial order is for 6 aircraft. NATO joins the RAAF, Turkey, ROK, RAF and USAF as operators of the type. There are still 3 operators of the E-3 Sentry AWACS system in France, Saudi Arabia and Japan (E-767) who could possibly select this system at some time.
Also, the RAAF currently have a E-7 deployed to Germany in support of Ukraine, so plenty of opportunities for NATO crews to get some familiarisation.
 
Last edited:
Top