25 February 2013 saw a series of announcements which appear to underscore the inherent character of Arctic. Firstly, Norwegian Minister of Defence, Anne-Grete Strøm Erichsen, stated that Norway would welcome larger NATO exercises in the Arctic. This is in spite of the already substantial increases seen in recent years in the annual COLD RESPONSE exercises. The announcement seems to constitute a dog-whistle message with the United Kingdom as the primary intended recipient. At the time of the statement, UK Defence Secretary Philip Hammond was visiting Royal Marines engaged in military exercises in Northern Norway. Unlike many other NATO allies, the UK has a particular interest in Norway's security. The purpose of Hammond's trip to the Arctic was, according to media, 'to survey the Armed Forces’ role in protecting key energy supply routes across the Arctic' in a post-Afghanistan 'era of contingency'. The following week, a contingent of US special forces personnel conducted war games in the Finnish Arctic, in spite of the Nordic county's neutrality.
In an apparently unrelated move the same day, Russian President Vladimir Putin, pointed to several alarming developments for the region, including possible NATO expansion as well as plans for the European missile defence system. With this in mind, he stated that 'a danger of militarising the Arctic exists'. Although it does not break with Russia's assertive Arctic policy, pursued since 2007, this certainly marks a departure from the 'zone of peace' language that Putin has used in past years in which pessimistic forecasts from the region were categorically discounted. It serves to underline the meme of this blog that the High North is indeed an area of high tension.
Showing posts with label militarization. Show all posts
Showing posts with label militarization. Show all posts
Thursday, 21 March 2013
25 February: An emblematic day for the High North
Labels:
Afghanistan,
Arctic,
Defence,
energy,
High North,
militarization,
military,
NATO,
Norway,
oil,
Philip Hammond,
Strøm-Erichsen,
United Kingdom
Friday, 15 February 2013
Sweden looks to counter-balance Russian rearmament
Recent revelations by the Swedish Armed Forces Chief, General Sverker Göranson, that his country could only effectively resist an attack by the Russian Federation for a few days have caused considerable consternation. According to assessments, in such a scenario, Sweden would rapidly require the military assistance of the US and NATO. His comments came as a protest against recent cuts to the Swedish military which have been enacted in spite of Russia’s marked increase in arms spending. Echoing the sentiments expressed by General Göranson, Deputy Prime Minister Jan Björklund stated that Sweden ought to consider, among other purchases, the procurement of Patriot missile batteries. Demonstrating that it was not only current and former military officers like Björklund who were of such an option, Foreign Minister Carl Bildt also chimed in with similar comments. He made it clear that Russian rearmament was 'worrying' and, although the likelihood of aggression was low, 'in an up-heated mode, Sweden, and Swedish territory could be affected'. The Russian Federation is indeed rearming. Defence spending in 2013 alone is set to increase by more than 25%. Sweden's defence spending per capita is only half of the Norwegian level and is clearly inadequate to deal with the potential threat posed by the Russian Federation.
These statements came only shortly after provocative comments made by Russian Defence Minister, Sergei Shoigu. In a speech to the Russian Academy for Military Sciences, Shoigu was blunt in describing the military threats facing Russia. He stated that its armed forces needed to be ready for 'large-scale conflict'. Particularly striking were his comments that 'the use of power continues to play an important role in the resolution of economic and political contradictions between countries'. Shoigu was perhaps referring to the use of force by his own country. Göranson used the example of the Georgian War to demonstrate that the use of armed violence can still result in territorial changes in Europe. The South Ossetian Conflict convinced the Nordic states that Russia's threshold for violence was lower than previously thought. The link between the Nordic States and the Five Day War in the Caucasus has not only been made by Scandinavian leaders, but is also one put forward by the Russians themselves. In June 2012, Russian General Chief of Staff Nikolai Makarov effectively threatened Finland. He noted its increasing cooperation with NATO and stated that, in light of the military manoeuvres in Eastern Finland at the time, the situation was comparable that which existed before the outbreak of hostilities in Georgia in 2008. There is now a strong and growing desire among many in the political and military establishment in Sweden to join NATO. Russian leaders often balk at the prospect of NATO expansion, but by wielding threats of armed force, they seem to do everything in their power to bring it about.
These statements came only shortly after provocative comments made by Russian Defence Minister, Sergei Shoigu. In a speech to the Russian Academy for Military Sciences, Shoigu was blunt in describing the military threats facing Russia. He stated that its armed forces needed to be ready for 'large-scale conflict'. Particularly striking were his comments that 'the use of power continues to play an important role in the resolution of economic and political contradictions between countries'. Shoigu was perhaps referring to the use of force by his own country. Göranson used the example of the Georgian War to demonstrate that the use of armed violence can still result in territorial changes in Europe. The South Ossetian Conflict convinced the Nordic states that Russia's threshold for violence was lower than previously thought. The link between the Nordic States and the Five Day War in the Caucasus has not only been made by Scandinavian leaders, but is also one put forward by the Russians themselves. In June 2012, Russian General Chief of Staff Nikolai Makarov effectively threatened Finland. He noted its increasing cooperation with NATO and stated that, in light of the military manoeuvres in Eastern Finland at the time, the situation was comparable that which existed before the outbreak of hostilities in Georgia in 2008. There is now a strong and growing desire among many in the political and military establishment in Sweden to join NATO. Russian leaders often balk at the prospect of NATO expansion, but by wielding threats of armed force, they seem to do everything in their power to bring it about.
Labels:
Arctic,
attack,
Björklund,
Carl Bilt,
conflict,
deterrence,
Georgia,
Göranson,
Makarov,
militarization,
military,
NATO,
neo-liberalism,
Realism,
rearmament,
Russia,
Scandinavia,
Shoigu,
Sweden,
threat
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)