Russian
Paratroopers Could Totally Mess Up the Baltic States
Airborne
soldiers bring the element of the surprise
by KAROL ULC
In February
2016, the influential RAND Corporation — a think tank closely aligned with the
U.S. Air Force — published a paper in which it warned that a Russian invasion
of the Baltic States could reach the capitals of Latvia and Estonia in less
than three days even with a week of warning.
But that
might underestimate how quickly Russia could overrun the region, were the
Kremlin to send the bulk of its airborne forces and seize the element of
surprise. It’s possible a Russian victory could come within hours, not days.
How would
such an invasion unfold? A missile barrage and air strikes at dawn, crippling
the Baltic States’ defenses, would precede a large-scale airborne operation
supported by a small-scale land intrusion into Lithuania from Russia’s enclave
in Kaliningrad.
Before the
alliance could understand — let alone react to — what was happening, it’d be
over.
Impossible?
Let’s have a look at the figures.
Estonia has
5,300 active duty land troops as of 2016, according to the International
Institute for Strategic Studies. Latvia has 4,450 active ground troops and
Lithuania has 6,000, which gives the Baltic States a combined 15,750 soldiers.
To be sure,
these numbers don’t include naval and air force personnel, which are relatively
small in size. It also doesn’t count reservists, paramilitary forces and allied
NATO troops who regularly rotate through the region. Estonia can call on 12,000
paramilitary members of the Estonian Defense League, and Lithuania has 11,300
militia fighters, according to the IISS.
However, it’s
unlikely all of these troops will be available at once, and the same goes for
reservists. We also can’t assume the Baltic States’ entire active land forces
will be available during a surprise attack — given likely disruption to the
Baltic governments’ ability to communicate during a conflict’s opening hours.
The Russian
Airborne Troops alone consist of four divisions and six brigades/regiments,
totaling more than 45,000 men. These soldiers are better equipped and trained
than their potential opponents and will be able to count on overwhelming
Russian air superiority for at least several days.
However,
Russia is not able to deploy that entire force at once, even if it wanted to.
The bottleneck is transport aviation. A study by the author of Russia’s active
transport aircraft, their transport capacities and availability rates reveals
that, in theory, the Russian military — when working at maximum
capacity — could move half of its paratroopers … at best.
Russia
typically relies on four-engine Ilyushin Il-76 transport planes for dropping
its blue-beret paratroopers during training exercises. However, we cannot
exclude the possibility of Russian airborne troops flying into battle aboard
other types of aircraft — at least toward captured airfields.
Which doesn’t
mean Russia will conduct an airborne operation in this manner were it to go to
war. But it’s within the realm of possibility that Russia could, at the least,
strike with an airborne force of around 10,000 men were it to deploy almost its
entire fleet of 91 Il-76s.
Would the
Russian Army be operationally capable of conducting such a large airborne
operation? Well, its airborne forces certainly train to do exactly that.
In one
October 2015 exercise, Russia brought 10,000 paratroopers in the Central
Military District to a state of combat readiness within 24 hours before moving
them by air. In 2016, Russia carried out no fewer than 18 large exercises which
either included or were solely conducted by the airborne forces.
The largest
2016 airborne exercise involved more than 30,000 soldiers from Russia’s Western
Military District between March 22-24. The exercise included 3,800 military
vehicles and more than 100 attack helicopters and warplanes. However, not all
of the soldiers in this exercise were air-dropped.
Additionally,
the Kaliningrad enclave holds a formidable military presence consisting of two
motorized rifle brigades and a single marine infantry brigade — a total of
around 14,000 soldiers supported by an artillery brigade. Were the Kremlin to
further bolster its forces, it could call on at least 14 more battalions from
the Russian Western Military District — including four tank battalions.
Even if we
don’t include casualties caused by the preliminary strikes, the Russian Army
would begin the conflict with an enormous numerical advantage in terms of
soldiers and the quality of equipment, while at the same time operating with
air superiority.
Russian air
superiority is crucial to a successful surprise attack — but the Kremlin’s
advantage here is practically guaranteed in the short term. Were Sweden and
Finland to stay neutral, and neither are members of NATO, the Western
alliance’s access to the air space over the Baltics would be severely limited
within the first few hours, if not days, after the start of an invasion.
Regardless,
the decisive factor would be surprise and the effectiveness of the preliminary
strikes, which if successful could throw the Baltic States’ regular forces into
disarray.
To give one
example, the garrison of the Estonian Kuperjanov Infantry Battalion located in
Võru is just 50 miles away from the Russian base in Pskov. The range of 9M528
rockets fired from the BM-30 Smerch is 55 miles.
RAND’s study
also assumed Sweden would allow NATO to use its territory as a base for the
alliance’s combat aircraft. Such a move would instantly place Sweden under the
threat of retaliation, including the nuclear option. The alliance should not
take Swedish cooperation as a given.
Russia
seizing the element of surprise would also be critical to prevent the Baltic
States from mobilizing their paramilitaries and reserves. And with defenses
shattered, communication lanes and key infrastructure either knocked out or
under Russian control, the region’s governments would be under tremendous
pressure to surrender — potentially within mere hours of the first missiles and
paratroopers landing on Baltic soil.
And what
about Poland? If during the early hours of an operation, Russia were not to
attack Polish territory, should Warsaw fulfill its responsibilities under the
NATO charter? Should it launch a counterattack on its own?
Should Poland
attack Kaliningrad and face the possibility of a Russian stand-off attack on
its infrastructure? Or maybe even a nuclear strike? Such moves would also lead
to a halt of Russian oil and gas, of which Poland is very dependent.
A day, or
three, of hesitation would be all that Russia needs to bring its regular army
units into the Baltic capitals and solidify its presence.
Could NATO
avoid such a disaster? Yes — through deterrence. The alliance’s ability to
retaliate, and having the political will to do so, is key to forcing Russia to
weigh any aggressive action very carefully.
Is the
presented scenario a purely fictional one? Hopefully.
It’s unlikely
Russia will undertake direct, aggressive military action against a NATO member
state. However, as events of the recent years prove, even the most unlikely
scenarios can come true.
Original
post: warisboring.com
Related post:
BMD-4M airborne
assault vehicles: Details
BTR-MDM Rakushka: Details
BMD-2 with Berezhok weapon system: Details
BMD3 with Berezhok weapon system: Details
2s25 SPRUT 18 ton Tank Killer: Details
New upgraded
T-72B3M MBT also called T-72B4: Details
No comments:
Post a Comment