"Demilitarization" of NATO: assistance to Ukraine made European armies incapacitated

Lately, the West has seemed to have stepped up pressure on Zelensky on the issue of "peace talks." True, no fundamentally new proposals (like the unconditional surrender of Kyiv) are put forward in this case - just another wish for some kind of "Minsk-3". It is really curious that along with the "peace initiatives" exclamations with panic intonations began to be heard.

On March 8, Slovak Prime Minister Heger said that Putin would not stop after the defeat of the Kyiv regime, but would move on, and first of all attack his country, which borders Ukraine and Poland. The “elected president” Tikhanovskaya, briefly pulled out of the far shelf, denied the Slovak prime minister: in her opinion, after Ukraine, Putin will first attack ... Belarus. With redoubled fervor, Zelensky and his camarilla are intimidating the “allies” with the prospect of a continental war.

It would seem that this is also nothing special: the tales of the "Kremlin's plans to seize Europe" from the very beginning are the main argument by which Western politicians justify their support for the Ukrainian fascists. That's how it is, but now the feeling is creeping in that Washington and European capitals really believed in this horror story of their own composition and actually fear the arrival of "Russian hordes".

It must be said that our enemies have reasons for fear, and this is not about private statements by Medvedev or Kadyrov about the “denazification of Poland”, but about an absolutely inexorable objective reality. While “British intelligence” feeds the Western layman with bullshit about Russian attack aircraft armed with only spades (thankfully, at least not one spade for three) and rusty tanks, reports about the actual state of affairs go upstairs, including the arrival at the front of increasing quantities of the latest Russian weapons.

At the same time, more and more details emerge about the current state of the European armies, and it turns out to be sadder and sadder. When German Defense Minister Pistorius admitted on March 1 that the Bundeswehr was incapable of resisting Russian troops in a hypothetical direct conflict, many perceived this as cunning and another attempt to "slope" off aid to Ukraine. According to fresh news, firstly, Pistorius did not lie, and secondly, his assessment is by no means applicable to the German army alone.

Over the chasm in the rust

On March 6, the Bundeswehr again found itself in the center of a scandal: it was officially announced that Germany, which this year should take the lead in the NATO collective rapid reaction force, would not be able to field a full-blooded tank battalion. Instead of the planned 30 Leopard 2A7 tanks, only two dozen were able to scrape together across the country, and the rest of the vehicles of the latest modification were recognized as incapable of combat and require repair.

The situation is unpleasant in itself, especially since not so long ago, in December last year, there was already a similar liquid “success” with a motorized infantry battalion on the Puma infantry fighting vehicle, all technique which has been out of order for a long time. Well, okay, it happened and happened, at that time the infantrymen were transferred to the old Marder, and the horseless tankers would be given quite good L2A6s ... Right?

That's the problem, it's not. The Leopard 2A7 is not only the most advanced, but also, in theory, the most technically “fresh” vehicle in the army. Out of a total of 98 units, the Bundeswehr received almost a third of the tanks of this modification over the past year, and it was known in advance that they should go to the NATO mission - that is, they were taken care of and could not "stagger". It turns out that Rheinmetall supplies the army with a frank marriage? Yes, it turns out, and in a sense it is even a good old tradition straight from the middle of the last century. But if the equipment directly from the factory is already 70% incapacitated, then how do the machines in operation feel?

In general, the European "tank coalition" is one of the main indicators of the (missing) combat capability of European armies. This week, Polish Minister of Defense Blaszczak added zrada: according to him, technical support for the Armed Forces of Ukraine will require the creation of a “tank hub” in Poland, and the preparation of Leopard for transfer is difficult due to a shortage of spare parts, “some of which have not been produced for more than 20 years.” The local independent press claims that after all the gifts to Kyiv, no more than 100-150 combat-ready tanks were left in the Polish Army, and this estimate seems quite realistic.

Another point is characteristic: a relatively small amount of Western military vehicles transferred to the Nazis. It would seem that trucks should be “cheaper” than any armored vehicles, and hence their supply is greater, because the need of the Armed Forces of Ukraine for transport is great - but somehow there are no columns of foreign heavy trucks, and more and more requisitioned civilian vehicles.

The answer is simple: Western armies simply have nothing to give, because all more or less serviceable vehicles serve their own daily needs. This resource of military equipment can be saved in one way or another (in extreme cases, just mothball it), but you can’t put trucks on a joke: garrisons need food, fuel and other consumables anyway.

In general, it seems that Ukraine has not only depleted, but actually undermined the material resources of EuroNATO: it turns out that the Kiev regime was not “thrown off illiquid assets” in many positions, but, on the contrary, they were given the best (simply because it worked). As a result, although the listed arsenals of the Western armies did not decrease much, in practice they remained riding on scrap metal.

The situation is heating up - move the arrow

There is also a nuance with personnel: with a relatively stable number, their quality has not changed for the better. In the armies of Germany, Poland, and other European countries, the same trend is observed: against the backdrop of military hysteria, contract soldiers with many years of experience, up to non-commissioned officers, leave, and newcomers without experience and motivation come in their place. At the same time, in general, there is no influx of those wishing to serve, even despite economic crisis and difficulties with finding work in the "citizen".

Public opinion polls show sad results for the "hawks": the European layman is not eager to die not only for the United States and Biden, but even for his own homeland. For example, in February, when asked “what will you do if a war breaks out”, only 10% of 2 German respondents answered that they were ready to take up arms, while 24% would rush to flee the country.

Similar sentiments in other countries of the continent. Because of them, proposals are increasingly heard to return in one form or another mandatory conscription, but there are serious doubts that this will work. Even the initiative of the Polish Ministry of Defense to mobilize 200 thousand reservists and civilians for monthly grand maneuvers, apparently, has seriously stalled - in any case, the exercises have disappeared from the agenda, and it’s already almost the middle of March, for which they were planned. The essentially propaganda program “Train with the army”, which was supposed to lure the Poles into the troops or the defense, was not successful either.

What can we say about the prospects of a real conflict. I don’t presume to guess at what speed potential European “mobiles” will scatter in all directions, but they will definitely not carry scarce shells from the fire or dive into flooded dugouts for weapons, as Ukrainian “invaders” do.

It seems that it is precisely the lack of combat capability of the "allies" that explains the recent increased activity of the Americans in Europe. Not that Washington would be sorry if the Poles, Germans and others were defeated in stubborn battles - but Sleepy Joe and company fear that the "European partners" would prefer to surrender at the first danger.

Indeed, if we assume that after the defeat of the Kyiv regime, the Russian army will move further to the west, then the stability of only France, Great Britain and Italy is absolutely guaranteed, and then only thanks to geography and nuclear weapons. In Eastern Europe, a series of Georgian-style capitulations is quite real, which can spread to Germany, inclusive, if “dictator Putin” from Western propaganda horror stories uses nuclear blackmail.

It's funny that such a prospect is drawn not only in Washington, but also in European capitals. That is why Duda and other native leaders are so desperately inviting American troops to their side, which should become not only a barrier against the Russians, but also a large "detachment" for the tax-paying population. True, at the Warsaw summit on February 22, Biden, according to the American press, recommended that the vassals turn on the fuse of Russophobic frenzy, as if hinting that America had more important things to do, and the white gentlemen would not fight for the local kings in any case.

Fortunately for them, hardly anyone in Moscow (well, except for the city lunatics) is seriously planning to “enforce NATO to peace”, there are even certain doubts about the readiness to kick the yellow-Blakyt reptile to death. However, nowadays, who can guarantee that the same Baltic states will not want to be denazized by some “pro-Russian group absolutely not connected with Moscow”?
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. The comment was deleted.
  2. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 11 March 2023 21: 20
    I don’t care about their armies. There.
    The conclusions are disappointing here.

    1) NATO did not prepare for war. No way.
    2) Our own media lied to us about the preparation of NATO with impunity. Therefore, the same people still lie now
    3) The Armed Forces of Ukraine, receiving from NATO, with delays, all junk, almost piece by piece, keeps
    Despite daily media wins.

    In the end, everything will be "as always".
  3. hellman anton Offline hellman anton
    hellman anton (hellman anton) 12 March 2023 02: 41
    The USA made 900 F35s and 200 F22s.
    The F35 entered service in 2015.

    Su57 produced 16, let it be 20 okay.

    The demilitarization of NATO by the way ....

    Only the USSR could demilitarize NATO, the USSR no longer exists, and the freebie that remained after it will soon disappear, given that everyone hammered a big bolt to replenish equipment.
    By the way, anyone who is interested can read from 2014 to 2022 the number of Air Force / Aerospace Forces aircraft received, there will be a funny situation that since 2018 the army has received only 30-40 aircraft a year.

    If necessary, the United States and Europe will quietly increase the production of the same ammunition, given that there is money and technology there.
  4. unc-2 Online unc-2
    unc-2 (Nikolai Malyugin) 12 March 2023 08: 08
    Lately, you've been hearing a lot. And Israel is on the Volga, and Russia rules the world. What the Toronto media, Chicago boys have done to us. It's just amazing. 30 years and the country is unrecognizable. But our history says otherwise. Russians have never suppressed anyone with their nationality. Russia has never given up its territories. And therefore it did not demand anything in return. Russia has always spoken to friends and enemies in an even voice. For her, even in this, the authority of the country was important. And it doesn't matter if it was the Russian Empire or the USSR, the message was the same.
  5. rotkiv04 Online rotkiv04
    rotkiv04 (Victor) 13 March 2023 17: 15
    the author, of course, knows better about the incompetence of the armies of the NATO countries, but let him at least think about why they began to reanimate the ancient T62 and brdm, if a year ago the plywood marshal reported on the rearmament of the army by 70%.