Thursday, 27 October 2022 — The van says…
It may not (officially) be happening yet, but that’s not to say that it won’t in the future
From the outset, the current conflict being waged in the Ukraine has been NATO’s war against the East. Washington and its allies know as well as anyone that a resurgent Russia as well as a China that becomes more powerful by the day present a clear and present danger to a West that is sitting on a precipice of its own making. In this article, we will examine certain potential events from the author’s perspective between NATO and the East, these being a continuation of the commitments that have already been made by the Western establishment.
As covered in this older piece, the West has now spent more than a year shipping money, arms, ammunition and all kinds of other materiel to the Ukraine, nations apparently jostling to outdo each other in their race to stymie Moscow. Road, rail and air have been busy shipping the goods over the border, certain military bases in Poland turning into veritable logistical hubs to supply the Ukrainian effort. With the alleged magnanimity of governments has come a media frenzy, fools waving flags being the western heroes of the moment; the public have jumping on their government’s cause with just as much as enthusiasm as their leaders did with Uncle Sam’s bandwagon racing towards a war in Eastern Europe.
This carnival of kindness cannot continue however, and as the West continues to increase its support for Kiev’s decreasing situation, the US being involved means that something will inevitably happen to make a Cold War go hot.
Lighting the Fires of War
With so many flags being flown for Kiev, a false flag engineered by either Washington or London is virtually guaranteed. The talk of today is that of a dirty bomb being employed by Ukrainian forces in order to smear Russia, but there are any number of ways that western intelligence agencies can light up Eastern Europe should they wish to do so. How that will happen is yet to be seen, but once done, there is no doubt whatsoever that this will be capitalized upon by the West and used as a casus belli by NATO.
Fanning the Flames
NATO member states have already increased their presence in the member states which border the warzone, a blaze of headlines this week heralding the arrival of the US 101st Airborne Division which has been posted to Romania. Once matters do become critical however, the inevitable tsunami of men and machines will head eastwards, the western world heading off on the long-awaited Drang nach Osten that Washington so desires. So far, so good, yet if NATO et al cannot score the decisive victory they need in very short order, things could go very awry indeed.
To examine the fortunes of western military strategy in a possible future conflict however, we need to glance at the past and present before making suppositions.
Insolvent, Indifferent and Inapt
A lot of water has gone under the bridge since the last conflict when western nations faced peer opponents, the makeup of the military and the mentality of the public having changed immeasurably. Recent decades have seen the forever wars of Afghanistan and the Middle East, yet these have not in any way had any real effect on the western nations who involved themselves. Their public however has tired of the constant conflicts that have drained national budgets, they becoming ever more conscious of the logic behind these wars.
It might be photoshopped, but should many youngsters be forced into uniform, sights such as this may be commonplace
At the same time as they have woken to the stupidity behind the strife being wrought by their governments’ soldiers, they have themselves become cyberspace warriors, yet with no intention of ever leaving their cozy lives to fight for their online campaigns. Moreover, lifestyle changes over the last fifty years have ensured that obesity, diabetes and a whole plethora of other ailments afflict today’s young westerners as never before. More interested in fashion than actual fighting, the public of conscription age are completely disinterested and more importantly unfit to be involved in a big war should their governments urgently require recruits.
In spite of the numerous wars that have been waged over the last few decades, the industrial capacity to manufacture arms in the West is today pitifully low. Normal munitions are easy enough to produce, yet Western military doctrine places absolute reliance on technologically advanced weaponry which is both expensive and slow to produce. Stocks are inevitably held, yet as demonstrated by the British Army recently, once events start moving, the cupboard will empty fast, things from there going wrong even faster.
Western nations quite obviously operate on a daily basis with the best equipment they possess, yet it is only natural that older and less suitable assets are held in storage. Whilst the shadow of war has not hung over Western Europe since 1945, governments maintain stocks for use by second-line troops or to plug gaps in inventories should they appear in times of war. Or they did until they gave all this to Kiev over the last year or so. Whilst most of the gear being handed to the Ukrainians is obsolete, it does serve a purpose and should a NATO member state be in a tight spot, this could be a make-or-break weapon for those concerned.
This may seem a sideline, yet in spite of the Eastern sphere of the globe having embraced technology for all it is worth, westerners rely on it far more, and for a number of reasons. Not only are so many youngsters glued to devices, but the entire western war machine relies absolutely on having light-speed connectivity. A recent article mentioned the reliance that the Ukrainians place on the Starlink system, yet should Western armies attempt to conduct operations in the East, similar communications are necessary for a multitude of reasons. Should satellites be knocked out or fiber optic cables be compromised, everything from a general sending orders to a conscript using Instagram would face difficulties.
With all the hype regarding NATO and its alleged capabilities, it is easy to forget that in a war, the front can move in two directions. For all the bravado expressed by the media, very little thought seems to have been given to the idea of the Russians pushing west, NATO et al being in overdrive with no consideration of there even being a reverse gear should it be needed. We have already witnessed the backblast on European economies due to the sanctions they have placed against Russia, yet should the same happen on the battlefield, the western world may be in for a big shock if the media suddenly starts to tell the truth.
Although the Ukrainian government appears to be enlisting its entire into the military, we have seen reports over recent days of that same administration telling its people who are already abroad that they should not return this winter. This means that Ukrainian geriatrics are fighting against Operation Z, whilst the Ukrainian Generations Y and Z are not expected to do the same. With western nations now awash with refugees, the day may come when they are needed by their host nations to make an effort to support the situation which involves them all. Many of those who have fled abroad have an aversion for fighting the war, yet if it does go hot and western nations need to increase the numbers in the ranks, this could present a real quandary. Should the need for recruits suddenly become pressing or there be talk of conscription, it would be unthinkable that westerners go to war whilst the very Ukrainians they claim to fight for stay in the West and out of harm’s way.
Even before we examine the effects of a potential conflict involving Western European states, the consequences of sanctions, slowdown and stagnation are already causing untold damage to their industries and the economies that rely on the output and revenues they generate. Should NATO member states choose to rush headlong into a war, not only would the current industrial structure suffer immensely, but other than in the case of a very short engagement indeed, it would have to completely restructure in order that it survive. Many European nations have moved away from manufacturing in recent decades, and with that, many of the workers skilled in that sector have retired or now work elsewhere. This, compounded with a lack of the machinery needed to provide for a war economy, would mean government and industry alike would face near-insurmountable challenges should a European war take more than a week or so.
To date, there is no certainty regarding what the future holds for the current conflict or Europe as a whole. The points made in this article are suppositions based on logic, yet that same logic tells us that until shots are fired by NATO, war is still a supposition.
Philosophy aside, we do need to understand the facts in hand and with western hands being all over a situation that has resulted in the largest war that Europe has seen in nearly eighty years, conclusions must be reached.
The first blatant and uncomfortable truth is that other than NATO forces actually and overtly taking part in this conflict, the Atlantic Alliance has already gone all-in, yet its Eastern European ally has to date got nothing out. The US et al may have huge resources of their own which have not yet been employed, yet in terms of intelligence, planning, training, equipment and a myriad of other assets that have been rendered, NATO cannot do any more than it already has.
The second is the fact that despite the constant warmongering of the US and its hangers-on, the western establishment is a good deal better at starting conflicts than winning them on its own. The gradual decline of western fortunes is mirrored not only in its inability to fight the enemies of its own creation, but also in its people who are either unfit or unwilling to do their masters’ bidding in foreign lands; the average Joe of today has no intention whatsoever of being the GI Joe of the future. Moreover, with finances and industrial output already on a knife edge, unless any engagement was ‘shock and awe’, the shock of a western failure would ultimately yield awful results for the nations following Washington’s lead.
The third is the fact that with Moscow showing what it can do whilst attempting to do as little damage to the Ukraine with only limited Russian mobilization, what could it do if full resources were committed. And we have to question what role the millions of Ukrainian refugees would want to play in this scenario. If they didn’t want to fight for their own government, would they fight under another flag?
In conclusion, the western world may light the flames of global war, yet should it become itself involved, for so many reasons, the consequences would likely burn the western house down…
3 thoughts on “The War that NATO cannot Fight”
(a) Hiding behind technology does nothing for an army. Competency and ability is bigger.
(b) This could be my generation’s Operation Northwoods
(c) Proxy wars.
(d) I should quote Colonel Kurtz here.
NATO forces have demonstrated repeatedly that they cannot win wars. After the initial ‘shock and awe’ when they attack (invariably smaller weaker countries), their superficial strength dissipates. They have inadequate defence capability because they are not used to fighting enemies with equal or near equal capabilities let alone enemies such as Russia with superior capabilities. They have no recent experience since WWII fighting in cold wet climates, and their weaponry is far more suited to hot dry conditions.
The latest efforts in Ukraine have confirmed all of this. It also confirms their lack of understanding of different strategies and tactics.