The arrival of 3.000 United States soldiers together with their equipment in the Baltic States is sending strong signals not only to Russia but to the EU as well. These troops, of the US 3rdinfantry division will conduct training exercises with the three Baltic States of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. Supporting these troops are 750 military tanks, helicopters and other military vehicles. The most notable deployment is that of 120 M1A2 Abrams tanks in the port of Riga.
The deployment of these US forces is one of the biggest in recent years and comes to reassure the Baltic States that their independence is guaranteed by NATO and that US Forces are willing to defend these nations. It is also a clear message towards Russia saying that meddling with these three nations will cause a strong reaction by NATO and possibly even leaded by the United States.
The EUBG consists of 1.500 troops reinforced with combat support elements. Two of these are ready for deployment on all times and are under direct control of the Council of Europe. EU member states contribute the troops on a rotation basis. The EUBG is designed to be deployed within five to ten days but they lack one significant weakness. First they can sustain themselves for only 30 days but their mission can be extended to 120 days when resupplied. As such the EUBG acts only as a rapid response force to operate only in a time of crisis and to hold the line until other units arrive and take over the position.
Sweden is a weak military partner and is in need of large investments and a firm national security policy. The military cooperation’s of Sweden with Finland and Denmark only serve to strengthen the Swedish position in the Baltic Region but is defensive in nature.
Both France and the United Kingdom have other security goals centred on Africa and the Middle-East. The UK has troubles with Russian airplanes and warships engaged in provocative actions but these are more treated as a nuisance. This is largely due to the fact that the UK Army is in decline and lacks the means to project power into the Baltic States on a firm basis. The position of France is even more negatively as the country is only focused on its ongoing missions in Africa. The Mistral deal between France and Russia is also a cause of concern as France still plans to sell these vessels in order to avoid compensating Russia for the loss of these two ships. As such it is in the French interests to avoid any large tensions with Russia if it still wants to sell these ships.
The Netherlands make for a strange commitment to the Baltic States. Even though the Netherlands have a small army they are very active inside the Baltic Region. This is because the Netherlands have a strong anti-Russia stance, aided by the shooting down of the MH-17 flight above the Ukraine. Dutch warships are regularly active in the Baltic States and the recent sell of CV-90 armoured fighting vehicles to Estonia and a winter exercise in Estonia shows that the Netherlands are willing to stand-by Estonia against Russia.
Conclusion
The commitment of the US to protect the Baltic States has been shown again in one of the biggest military deployments of recent times. Aside from a 3.000 men strong fighting force the US is also deploying over 100 tanks to exercise in the Baltic States, sending a strong signal to Russia.
Of all the EU member states only a few can project sufficient deterrence power to the Baltic States at the same level the US is doing. Both Poland and Germany are reorganizing their armed forces, a process that takes priority over large scale deployments. Sweden is too weak to be the strong EU member that can guarantee the independence and security of the Baltic States. France and the UK, like most western EU members have other military interests that are less tied to the security of the Baltic States. Strangely a small country like the Netherlands has a strong commitment to the Baltic Region and teams up with Estonia to deter an aggressive Russia.
The US is at the moment the only real player to guaranty the safety of the Baltic States as long as the EU member states themselves or the EU as a whole create the means and forces to provide an active deterrence. At the level of the EU there is a suitable force structure, called the EU Battle Groups. Changing the role of these EUBGs into a reaction force send to strengthen the weak spots at the borders of the EU will provide another deterrence as well lessening the burden on the US to constantly have to safeguard the borders of the EU.
 |
| The arrival of US tanks in Riga |
Over the past months the US Army has been conducting several military training exercises with the Baltic States but these were mostly centred on the role of infantry manoeuvres, survival techniques in winter conditions as well as understanding how to cooperate with these three nations. The deployment of heavy vehicles like tanks marks a significant shift in the pattern.
All three Baltic States have terrain that allows for large mechanized manoeuvres. A Russian invasion of these countries can be done very fast if Russia decided to use its mechanized forces in order to seek a fast victory before any other NATO country can react fast enough to stop it.
By sending over large amounts of mechanized forces the US Army will now start to learn how well its own forces can operate inside the Baltic States and how these forces can cooperate with the armies of the three Baltic States. Learning how fast these troops can manoeuvre in certain areas will allow US planners a better understanding of what kind of options its mechanized forces can have inside the Baltic States. At the same time the US now has a better understanding on how fast it can build up mechanized forces in Latvia as it now experiences how fast it can unload its military equipment in the port of Riga.
The US, as said earlier, sending a strong message to Russia that it has the resolve to stand by the Baltic States in their times of need and it thus hopes to deter any kind of plans Russia has to interfere in this region. But the US deployment also sends a strong signal towards the EU, namely that it is still the US that is the only strong power inside NATO to deploy enough combat power in the Baltic States to deter Russia.
Indeed, the EU as a whole and its member states lack the means to project the amount of power into the Baltic States to make a firm commitment. At the level of the EU there is a lack of the right institutions that can combine the military power of its member states into one single organisation to make a permanent commitment to the Baltic States. This is not so much the lack of a single EU army but also the way its military projects are designed, most notably the EU Battle Groups (EUBG).
The EUBG consists of 1.500 troops reinforced with combat support elements. Two of these are ready for deployment on all times and are under direct control of the Council of Europe. EU member states contribute the troops on a rotation basis. The EUBG is designed to be deployed within five to ten days but they lack one significant weakness. First they can sustain themselves for only 30 days but their mission can be extended to 120 days when resupplied. As such the EUBG acts only as a rapid response force to operate only in a time of crisis and to hold the line until other units arrive and take over the position.
Never intended to be a permanent standing force the EUBG is therefore not suitable as a permanent EU force to help defend the Baltic States. Even so, the EUBG can act as a deterrent against Russia and operate in the same way as US Forces are currently doing. In times of a heightened tension between the Baltic States and Russia the EUBG could be deployed to the Baltic States for exercises and show that the EU does take the defence of its Baltic flank serious.
These training missions will not only show Russia that the EU still has military power and the will to use it if it feels threatened but it will also give the EU valuable experience on how to organise its forces and how to operate with the armies of the Baltic States. As the troops of the EUBG are delivered on a rotatory basis by the EU members it means that these experiences of operating in the Baltic States and its security problems become more common in Western Europe. It is no secret that the EU members in Western Europe are less concerned about Russia’s aggressive politics then their eastern EU members.
 |
| EU Battle Groups are still a long way off from being a more permanent standing military force |
Looking at the level of the individual EU member states the situation tells a somewhat different story. Only a few EU member states have the armies that can deploy the same combat power as the US does in the Baltic States. However few of them have the capabilities or the commitment at this time. Poland is in the middle of a reorganisation that includes transferring the bulk of its forces and bases from the German border to the border with Belarus in order to be in a better position to defend the Polish nation.
Germany is currently rebuilding its army as a response to Russia’s foreign policy at the borders of the EU. A new tank brigade is about to be activated and new material and investments are being done to modernize and expand the German Armed Forces. Germany does have however a strong commitment for peace inside the EU and is willing to cooperate with its Baltic Nations.
Sweden is a weak military partner and is in need of large investments and a firm national security policy. The military cooperation’s of Sweden with Finland and Denmark only serve to strengthen the Swedish position in the Baltic Region but is defensive in nature.
Both France and the United Kingdom have other security goals centred on Africa and the Middle-East. The UK has troubles with Russian airplanes and warships engaged in provocative actions but these are more treated as a nuisance. This is largely due to the fact that the UK Army is in decline and lacks the means to project power into the Baltic States on a firm basis. The position of France is even more negatively as the country is only focused on its ongoing missions in Africa. The Mistral deal between France and Russia is also a cause of concern as France still plans to sell these vessels in order to avoid compensating Russia for the loss of these two ships. As such it is in the French interests to avoid any large tensions with Russia if it still wants to sell these ships.
The Netherlands make for a strange commitment to the Baltic States. Even though the Netherlands have a small army they are very active inside the Baltic Region. This is because the Netherlands have a strong anti-Russia stance, aided by the shooting down of the MH-17 flight above the Ukraine. Dutch warships are regularly active in the Baltic States and the recent sell of CV-90 armoured fighting vehicles to Estonia and a winter exercise in Estonia shows that the Netherlands are willing to stand-by Estonia against Russia.
 |
| Image of the latest winter exercise of Dutch troops in Estonia |
Conclusion
The commitment of the US to protect the Baltic States has been shown again in one of the biggest military deployments of recent times. Aside from a 3.000 men strong fighting force the US is also deploying over 100 tanks to exercise in the Baltic States, sending a strong signal to Russia.
At the same time the US sends a negative signal to the EU because the EU lacks the capabilities to reassure the Baltic States themselves. This is in part because the EUBG are not created to operate as a deterrent force and the EU lacks the power to decide to use the EUBG as such a force, which is to deploy it where the military position of the EU needs to be strengthened.
Of all the EU member states only a few can project sufficient deterrence power to the Baltic States at the same level the US is doing. Both Poland and Germany are reorganizing their armed forces, a process that takes priority over large scale deployments. Sweden is too weak to be the strong EU member that can guarantee the independence and security of the Baltic States. France and the UK, like most western EU members have other military interests that are less tied to the security of the Baltic States. Strangely a small country like the Netherlands has a strong commitment to the Baltic Region and teams up with Estonia to deter an aggressive Russia.
The US is at the moment the only real player to guaranty the safety of the Baltic States as long as the EU member states themselves or the EU as a whole create the means and forces to provide an active deterrence. At the level of the EU there is a suitable force structure, called the EU Battle Groups. Changing the role of these EUBGs into a reaction force send to strengthen the weak spots at the borders of the EU will provide another deterrence as well lessening the burden on the US to constantly have to safeguard the borders of the EU.
