We would like to explain a few things in light of the recent threats that Russia has made against Finland and the Scandinavian nations in general.
In addition, we would like to put an end to the exaggerated claims that have been made by the Russian side this time since it appears that a new cold war is on the verge of beginning.
Finland is not Ukraine, nor is it located culturally between the West and the East.
On the other hand, as a result of the conflict in Ukraine, Russia runs the risk of the collapse of the security of Moscow and St. Petersburg in general in the event that Finland joins NATO.
There is no one else to blame for this other than the party that, rather than seeking to achieve a quick strategic victory and going to negotiations, altered the status quo on the European Continent and attempted, but failed so far, to occupy the entirety of Ukraine.
How powerful is NATO against Russia and CSTO?
The Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) is an intergovernmental military alliance signed on May 15, 1992. In 1992, six post-Soviet states belonging to the Commonwealth of Independent States – Russia, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan – signed the Collective Security Treaty, three other post-Soviet states Azerbaijan, Belarus and Georgia – signed the following year and the treaty entered into force in 1994. Five years later, six of the nine states, in addition to Azerbaijan, Georgia and Uzbekistan, agreed to renew the treaty for a further five years, and in 2002 the six states agreed to create the Collective Security Treaty Organization as a military alliance.
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is a Western military defense alliance aiming at strengthening collaboration between member countries in numerous domains, promoting geopolitical interests, and preventing military attacks by non-members. This alliance was formed in April 1949 in Washington. Many European countries joined the alliance in the 1980s and mainly after 1999. The North Atlantic Alliance (NATO) now has 30 members.
It seems that a lot of people have underestimated the power of NATO and European countries in general, which is something that no serious analyst in either the East or the West would agree with.
Any devaluing of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) forces, particularly those of the United States, It takes place in the context of psychological operations carried out also by the West on behalf of the Russian and Chinese forces, respectively.
In certain cases, the purpose of some military analysts is to create the impression and delusion that they are a “revolutionary” in order to draw more persons who are enraged by their rival countries, downgrading either NATO or CSTO based on their birthplace or ideological opinions.
It is obvious that the underestimating of Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) forces based on the war in Ukraine is also partly inaccurate, since there are many different components between a battle against NATO and something that is close to a “civil war.”
On the other hand, this conflict showed aspects that even Russian analysts on Russian television admitted, the fact that the Russian military does not have much access to new weapons and instead relies primarily on Soviet equipment that is not up to date.
Additionally, the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) is comprised of Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, and Tajikistan however, these countries do not pose a significant military threat excepting Russia.
The fact that NATO can fight a Russian invasion conventionally on its members territory or on Finnish soil if nuclear bombs are not used is the reality that many people may be trying to hide behind Nuclear Forces and other pointless conclusions that will simply lead to the destruction of the planet without a winner.
If nuclear bombs are not used, NATO can fight a Russian invasion and with a strong likelihood of victory in the area.
How is this documented?
It is based on the fact that the defense budgets of NATO members are several times more than the defense budget of Russia according to official data.
The justification of many people who argue the opposite is that Russia has the ability to devalue the ruble multiple times, and by doing so while also taking advantage of lower costs when we discuss domestic armaments production, they are able to achieve better cost-effectiveness than NATO countries, which is not the case.
However, this only applies to a very limited level because several NATO nations possess the same capabilities.
The United States, which has the greatest military in NATO in terms of numbers and technological capabilities, has an anticipated budget of 763 billion dollars for its defense for the year 2022, while Russia has an estimated budget of 52 billion dollars for its defense for the same year.
It is not necessary to compare the total defense budgets of each nation in NATO in order to come to a conclusion regarding which military organization is better equipped for combat.
What about nuclear weapons and the new cold war?
It is not a fabrication that Russia possesses a vast nuclear missile arsenal and improved capabilities in space, even so, we must finally come to the realization that a confrontation between nuclear powers is meaningless when evaluating conventional warfare.
This is owing to the fact that, quite simply, if nuclear missiles begin striking both sides, the least thing we will care about is who will emerge victorious. If nuclear exchanges begin on both sides, this will be the case.
The only domain in which Russia and the CSTO appear to be dominant at the present time is that of supersonic missiles; however, there is not yet a sufficiently substantial arsenal to even begin discussing a shift in the current military balance.
After all, does NATO have a conventional military superiority over Russia?
In terms of technological capabilities and in many circumstances and numbers, yes, NATO has a superior military power to win against any enemy on the planet. This statement, despite how one-sided it may sound to some, is based on data that is accessible to the general public.
Nevertheless, NATO is not a country but rather a military organization, and it assumes that its member countries will work together for a common goal, which is uncertain in our time.
As a result, the comparison that should be properly defined will be primarily between the United States and either Russia or China, both of which still so far apply on what we said above.
Copy-pasting the article text to other websites/social media is prohibited. You can copy paste parts of the content (max. 60 words) for editorial or informational purposes only with an active backlink to the post (with follow attribute)