Russian expansionism may pose existential threat, says
Nato general
British general
Sir Adrian Bradshaw says Nato needs to develop fast-reacting conventional
forces and capacities to counter Russian propaganda
Peter Walker
@peterwalker99
Friday 20 February 2015 / http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/20/russia-existential-threat-british-nato-general
Russian expansionist ambitions could
quickly become “an obvious existential threat to our whole being”, the most
senior British military officer in Nato has said in a strongly worded speech.
General Sir Adrian Bradshaw, appointed last
year as Nato’s deputy commander of forces in Europe, said the alliance needed
to develop both fast-reacting conventional forces and capacities to counter
Russian efforts at coercion and propaganda, as seen in Ukraine .
Talking of “an era of constant competition
with Russia ”,
Bradshaw told an audience at the Royal United Services Institute that Nato had
to maintain a cohesive system of deterrence on its eastern borders, something
that would require help from the EU.
He said Nato was pushing ahead with plans
for a very high readiness joint taskforce, “in order to convince Russia ,
or any other state adversary, that any attack on one Nato member will
inevitably lead them into a conflict with the whole alliance”.
David Cameron has warned Vladimir Putin of
“more consequences” if a ceasefire in Ukraine does not hold. Speaking on
a visit to Govan shipyard in Glasgow on Friday,
the prime minister said the responsibility for what had happened in Ukraine “lies absolutely squarely with Vladimir
Putin and Russia ”,
and a strong response was needed.
Cameron said: “In terms of what Britain has done, we were the first country to
say that Russia should be
thrown out of the G8, and Russia
was thrown out of the G8. We have been the strongest adherent that we need
strong sanctions in Europe and we’ve pushed
for those, achieved those and held on to those at every single occasion.
“What we need to do now is to deliver the
strongest possible message to Putin and to Russia that what has happened is
unacceptable, that the ceasefires need to hold and if they don’t there will be
more consequences, more sanctions, more measures.”
In his speech, Bradshaw described Russia ’s
tactics as a “hybrid combination”, using fast-generated conventional military
forces as well as “subversion by a number of means, both military and
non-military”.
His strongest words came during a section
of the speech introducing other threats faced by Nato, including that from
Islamic State. He said: “While the threat from Russia, together with the risk
it brings of a miscalculation resulting in a slide into strategic conflict,
however unlikely we see that as being right now, represents an obvious
existential threat to our whole being, we of course face threats from Isis and
other instabilities to our way of life and the security of our loved ones.”
Bradshaw said the Nato summit in Wales in
September 2014 had been dominated by the urgent need for change due to Russian
behaviour. The “ambiguity” of Russian actions made a response all the more
difficult, he explained.
“These are, firstly, the difficulty of
identifying clearly the hand of a hostile state government in the subversive
destabilising effects they bring to bear in the early stages of such a
strategy,” he said. “Secondly, the danger that Russia might believe that the
large-scale conventional forces that she’s shown she can generate at very short
notice … could in future be used not just for intimidation and coercion, but
potentially to seize Nato territory, after which the threat of escalation might
be used to prevent re-establishment of territorial integrity.”
The best response was a new rapid reaction
force, he said, currently being drawn up by the UK ,
France , Spain , Italy
and Poland .
This would not contravene Nato treaties with Russia by positioning major forces
on its borders, Bradshaw said, but would “send a strong signal in the form of a
sustained, multinational Nato presence” in the eastern states.
Nato’s plans would need to include not just
conventional forces, he added, but countering “political agitation and
subversion, cyber-attack, hostile propaganda and other destabilising effects”.
This would need assistance from the EU, for example to produce Russian-language
TV coverage as as alternative to “the hostile and almost laughably inaccurate
propaganda beamed out every day to Russian domestic audiences”.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário