What's next?, next war Romanians could be part of

He wrote 3 "political-military thriller" books and based on that he has kind of a cult following. Apart from that his focus on Moldova and relations with Russia means his articles are re-posted on blogs with unionist/military themes. I can only speak for myself, so I'll say I don't see him as some kind of authority. I too, like you and I think also Radub, have found "holes"/shortcomings in his analyses.

This post has been edited by Imperialist on April 06, 2014 04:55 pm

thanks for the summary, Victor.

Sounds like there are some positives, especially the grunt and special forces factor.

Materiel can be ramped up quickly enough, dedicated and competent personell not so, I would think

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So does Romania have a cybercommand? I'm thinking that competency would be a huge asset in any otherwise asymmetric conflict.

I'm thinking Romania would excel in that field, given recent history.

He wrote 3 "political-military thriller" books and based on that he has kind of a cult following. Apart from that his focus on Moldova and relations with Russia means his articles are re-posted on blogs with unionist/military themes. I can only speak for myself, so I'll say I don't see him as some kind of authority. I too, like you and I think also Radub, have found "holes"/shortcomings in his analyses.

Thanks Imperialist.

He sounds like our Tom Clancy (The Hunt for Red October).

Interesting to see how their minds work.

cheers.

I read these exchanges regarding occupying the south of Bessarabia by force. Those who consider only the military balance of power and the military chances are missing the point.
As long as Ukraine will be labeled with the "Western friendly" stamp, any such move will be a magnet for the wrath of the West. As Russia, I would say: "Who cares?" As Romania, I would say: "Yes, I care!"
Another important thing: If Romania has the intention of changing the status-quo in the East, with what credibility can we defend our intention of keeping the status quo in the West ?
Maybe the only thing that would not generate international wrath would be the union between Romania and the Republic of Moldova, the latter with her present time borders.
I am not the kind of guy who jumps to agree with whatever the foreigners say and I am considering as obvious that Romania's interests should have priority against foreign interests, but in the same time we should not try to get more trouble than we can handle.

This post has been edited by Florin on April 08, 2014 02:05 am

From rt.com :

Wednesday, April 9
00:09 GMT:
Another American military ship will soon arrive for deployment at the Black Sea as the Ukrainian crisis continue, Derek Chollet, the US Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs told the House Armed Services Committee. Chollet also stated that USS Truxtun’s stay in the Black Sea will be extended, "to conduct exercises with Romanian and Bulgarian naval forces."
Headlines in Bulgaria circulate reports emerging from the Bulgarian Defense ministry, that a missile cruiser USS Donald Cook is soon to arrive to the Black Sea to join the war games.

Wow, what an opportunity for the Romanian nuclear aircraft carriers to wake up from boredom...

This post has been edited by Florin on April 09, 2014 04:33 am

I think I'm the only one who understood what CN want to say. He says if, in case Russia will occupy Odessa and the southern part of Ukraine, Romania must take a defensive movement, and occupy Bugeac, to make a defensive border on Dniestr line against Rusia. He pointed that movemement must be done with or without Ukraine's agreement, but is preferable with its agreement. And with NATO's approval. In this case, Romania must take a defenive position on Dniestr River, just look on the map!
In Bugeac, Dniestr River is the best defensive line you could obtain, because the river is so large here. You don't need some extra military assets, just hold the line, put your artillery in position and wait. With that movement, you put Russians in defensive posture, because they can't attack NATO troops without risking a war (WW3).

Actually Contras we can't take even this "defensive movement" with our actual capabilities if we don't want the russian troops the next day in Bucharest! Honestly if you (or anyone) listen to gen. Degeratu (State Advisor to the National Security Department of the Presidential Administration and former Chief of General Staff of the Romanian Army between 1997-2000) a week ago you understand in what poor condition is our army today! God sake we are in NATO otherwise...

This still makes no sense. No sense at all. This "strategy" depends entirely on Russia funnelling all their troops into one narrow corridor in Budjak. But what if Russia chose to go AROUND Budjak? Budjak is not that big. Another aspect of this strategy depends on "horizontal defence (build a fence and dig a trench to hold back the enemy) but in the days of missiles, planes and helicopters, Russia can "jump the fence". And one more thing: if Romania could see on a map that Budjak was such a "fantastic fortress", a mire and a stumbling block where Romania's small army could hold back the Russian military colossus, what makes CN think that Russia would not have access to precisely the same map, see that Budjak was a dangerous place and AVOID it? In other words, Russia can ALSO choose where to fight their battles. As a better strategist once said "no plan survives first contact with the enemy"

Forget NATO doing all the heavy work. NATO will never agree to any invasion/occupation movements by Romania, irrespective of the reasons. If anyone wanted to ask the question "is it OK to occupy a piece of my neighbour's land?", NATO's answer was already given when Russia took Crimea: NATO clearly said that such movements are not acceptable. So, if NATO says it is not OK, you might as well forget about Romania doing the same thing.

CN is, as usual, generously and carelessly casual with the lives of Romania's young men. In CN's mind Romania is a wealthy military giant ready/prepared to pick a fight with Russia for Moldova, but the truth is far from that. Wars are expensive and wasteful and Romania does not have the means for it. If Ukraine (with an army that is larger and more modern than Romania's) chose not to fight Russia, what chances would Romania have with its depleted resources? CN should concentrate less on "where should Romania fight Russia" and dedicate some time to "how can Romania fight Russia".

Radu





This post has been edited by Radub on April 12, 2014 08:22 am

NATO decisions are taken only by unanimity. So there will be no NATO approval of such a move. You simply can't get 28 states to accept the risk of a clash with Russia and to risk the integrity of the alliance for what.... Bugeac? Nobody cares about the Bugeac. You just saw Crimea taken and annexed and nobody cared so much as to actually do something militarily about it. Cristian Negrea is tripping.

I saw on YouTube this movie:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65sVXVRcLLI

It is not a documentary.
It is about the "5 days war" between Georgia and Russia.
I clicked "Like".

Only two corrections to Victor's good summary:
- Actually our air-to-air Mig 21 cannot engage targets BVR. The situation was discussed previously on this forum, and it is like that: the Israeli Elta radar has this capacity in theory, but the Romanians did not purchased any BVR missles until now and the pilots do not have any training in this regard. So no matter how good or well trained they are, they could be downed by the hostile planes before those reach their own range of engagement. Not to discuss about the air-to-ground Migs, which lack ANY type of radar... [Hm, where are the good old Migs 29 and 23? Oh wait, they are rusting in plain air, under the rain...]
- The modernized AFV (MLI 84 M Jder) are a few/several dozens in numbers - quite a few, when compared to the hundreds (thousands?) of similar Russian/Ucrainean IFV's.

And a bonus: even the good (and already old) PA mod. 1986 5,45 mm "standard" assault-weapon is reserved only to the "elite" forces (meaning those ready to be deployed in the T of O), and they lack any modern optics. The rest of the troops (except the special forces proper) have to do with the venerable 7,62 mm PM mod. 1963/65.
As for the two "modern" British frigates, their "weapons system" consists in... one 76 mm Otto Mellara qf gun each. It's something like buying a(n expensive) tank chasis and mounting a pistol or a hunting rifle on it

This post has been edited by Agarici on April 14, 2014 04:05 am

Only two corrections to Victor's good summary:
- Actually our air-to-air Mig 21 cannot engage targets BVR. The situation was discussed previously on this forum, and it is like that: the Israeli Elta radar has this capacity in theory, but the Romanians did not purchased any BVR missles until now and the pilots do not have any training in this regard. So no matter how good or well trained they are, they could be downed by the hostile planes before those reach their own range of engagement. Not to discuss about the air-to-ground Migs, which lack ANY type of radar... [Hm, where are the good old Migs 29 and 23? Oh wait, they are rusting in plain air, under the rain...]
- The modernized AFV (MLI 84 M Jder) are a few/several dozens in numbers - quite a few, when compared to the hundreds (thousands?) of similar Russian/Ucrainean IFV's.

And a bonus: even the good (and already old) PA mod. 1986 5,45 mm "standard" assault-weapon is reserved only to the "elite" forces (meaning those ready to be deployed in the T of O), and they lack any modern optics. The rest of the troops (except the special forces proper) have to do with the venerable 7,62 mm PM mod. 1963/65.
As for the two "modern" British frigates, their "weapons system" consists in... one 76 mm Otto Mellara qf gun each. It's something like buying a(n expensive) tank chasis and mounting a pistol or a hunting rifle on it

... And looking to TVR 1 News by using Internet, it seems that any other subject is more important than the readiness of the Romanian Army for any kind of conflict - as if what is happening in Ukraine would actually occur on some other far away continent.

I guess the present day Romanian government will buy for the Romanian Army a lot of white bed linen sets.
They can be easily turned into white flags and they are much cheaper.

This post has been edited by Florin on April 14, 2014 04:39 am

- BVR missles can be bought. I suppose Python 5 can be fired by the Lancer C, which already is able to fire (and already fired) the Python 3. From what I read the pilots have training in locking on target beyond visual range

- neither the MiG 23 or the MiG 29 could be fully serviced inside Romania from what I know. What's the use of upgrading an aircraft and then asking your potential enemies to overhaul it, especially when the MiG 29 is well known for the rapid depletion rate of its engines? The MiG-21 could be serviced in Romania and was available in numbers. I believe it was the best choice at that moment in time for our limited possibilities. What I find appalling is that in times of economic hardships Romania was able to identify enough funds to upgrade aircraft, helicopters, tanks, IFVs, missle launching systems and now, with a much improved economical situation, it barely has enough money to buy some APCs or do maintenance for this upgraded equipment.

- there are roughly 100 MLI 84M. It's not much, but then again it's not several. It's not like thousands of Ukrainian/Russian tanks and IFVs are going to appear from a wormhole in the middle of Romania. they still have to concentrate in some areas, cross over rivers, be supplied etc. A small number of Spike equipped IFVs, used with efficiency, could slow them down until the cavalry arrives.

- I never stated that the British frigates were modern, just that the Romanian Navy is better suited for hunting submarines, than for ship-to-ship battle or air-to-surface warfare.

The main issue now is that even as the international situation worsens each day, we continue continue to spend millions of Euros on flowers and street lamps, from where money comes back to the politicians who approve the funds, instead of supplementing the defense budget and patching things up a little. All the other countries in our position (Poland and Baltic states) are bolstering their forces, while for us it's business as usual.

In one word: Ponta.

This post has been edited by Florin on April 14, 2014 06:58 am

Actually, the "one word" is NATO. Romanians dream that NATO will fight all of Romania's battles. NATO makes Romanians very brave: read this thread and look at how many times contributors spoke about "Romania fighting Russia" and when asked "how can Romania fight Russia?" the answer was "NATO will defend Romania".
Maybe that is why Romania is not in a rush to improve its army.
Radu