• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Romeo Squared

Defense with a Baltic edge

  • Air Force
  • Army
  • Navy
  • Russia
  • Military strategy
  • About
    • Privacy Policy

Let’s not question the future of Königsberg

2018-03-31 By Anders Puck Nielsen Leave a Comment

Next time you think the Russians are paranoid for believing that NATO might attack them, keep this in mind:

Jüri Saar has an article titled “The Future of Königsberg” in Diplomaatia, which is an Estonian think tank publication. In this he argues that the 1975 Helsinki Accords are no longer valid, and that Kaliningrad is essentially an illegally occupied territory which the West should demand to get back.

“The issue of the territorial ownership of the Kaliningrad Oblast after the Russians leave is considered a problem. The area could become a new bone of contention between Germany, Poland and Lithuania. For this reason, it must not be merged with the territory of any existing country. The solution, however, is also as plain as day. Königsberg must become the first region solely under the jurisdiction of the European Union, similar to the capital of the US, which forms a separate administrative unit, the District of Columbia.”

This is probably the worst idea I’ve seen all month. In fact it’s so bad I had to read the article twice to look for signs that it is meant as a joke.

Saar more or less proposes that the West should seek regime change in Kaliningrad through a series of hybrid warfare operations. This is exactly what the Russians believe to be the Western doctrine, and what chief the the general staff Valery Gerasimov has pointed out that Russia needs to prepare for. If I were a Russian military strategist, I’d be pretty happy about those Iskander missiles in Kaliningrad now.

What we need is to create certainty about the existing borders. Both sides must believe that the opponent accepts the borders as they are. It may require some fortification before we get to that point, but it also requires cogency.

Silly suggestions like this one which question the border drawing in the Baltic region are flat out dangerous.

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Reddit

Related

Filed Under: Military strategy and politics Tagged With: NATO, Russia

Anders Puck Nielsen is the writer of the Romeo Squared blog. He is a military analyst at the Center for Maritime Operations at the Royal Danish Defense College.

Reader Interactions

< Previous
Next >

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Primary Sidebar

Top Posts

  • Helicopter scandals for everyone, Black Hawk to the rescue
  • Turkey is losing Leopard 2 tanks in Syria at an alarming pace
  • Why Small Navies Prefer Warfighting over Counter-Piracy
  • Russia has found money to repair the flagship of the Baltic Fleet
  • A look at the Baltic Fleet and the defense of Kaliningrad

Follow blog via e-mail

Featured

Militarization in the Baltic and the Arctic compared: The Arctic is the dangerous place

The Arctic will not be a peaceful exception in a militarized world. In this post I compare the security situation in the Baltic and the Arctic. Both regions are militarized these days, but in very different ways. The most dangerous dynamics are in the Arctic, and it will get worse in the coming years.

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2021 · Romeo Squared

  • Air Force
  • Army
  • Navy
  • Russia
  • Military strategy
  • About
    ▲
    • Privacy Policy