Romanian Special Forces

It is difficult to miss the significant differences between the 10 new NATO members. One thing which has been repeated time and again in international media was that no country can join without offering something in return. In other words, if a new member wishes to profit on the security offered by the alliance, it must offer in return its own (considerable) military capabilities for the respective alliance.

It comes then at a great surprize that most of the 10 countries were invited at all. Furthermore, some of those countries did not even have armed forces ! From the three Baltic states that were invited, only Lithuania could claim an air force, which is composed of a couple of PZL-104 Wilga and An-2. Those aircraft are used to tow gliders at various airfields in Europe, and are on the verge of being replaced even for that type of usage. What could they possibly do in combat, and, even more, how could they possibly enhance the air power of NATO entirely, is a total mystery to me.

Described as a "political-military aliance", with an emphasis on the military side, NATO seems to have become a geo-political organization, where membership is granted more on geographical terms rather than real life military capabilities.

A study done by RAND Corporation for the Pentagon, right after the collapse of the communist regimes in Central Europe, noted that only two countries in the region are worth considering for NATO membership. The two countries were Romania and Poland, and Romania had a military doctrine and order of battle much closer to the one of NATO countries, due mainly to its repeated refusal to fully adopt the Soviet model. Two decades later, the situation remains the same - Poland and Romania being the only two countries in Central Europe to have a large, sustainable military, which is also well trained and equipped.

Poland and Romania are the only countries among the 10 new NATO members which are capable of deploying brigade-size units anywhere in the world, Romania doing so by its own means (C-130's). Poland and Romania were also sending high quality special forces to perform operations abroad under NATO, UN or US guidance since the 1990s - GROM, DIR and SIE's Delta detachment's operations being well known by the US Department of State.

Articles in the German press, praising Slovenia and the Baltic states for their "remarcable" contributions to world security come then as more evidence, if there was a need for that, as to how far from reality the mass-media can get. Most of the time that is due to certain interest groups which simply suggest articles should be written for a specific purpose, and later reward the respective newspaper or TV network with a substantial ammount of cash.

Readers should always be circumspect while reading newspaper articles or watching TV news; as it was proved so many times in the past, most of the time they represent a mere smokescreen for what is really going on in the background.

Back to Menu

NATO - between politics and military	[...]	[...]
It is difficult to miss the significant differences between the 10 new NATO members. One thing which has been repeated time and again in international media was that no country can join without offering something in return. In other words, if a new member wishes to profit on the security offered by the alliance, it must offer in return its own (considerable) military capabilities for the respective alliance. It comes then at a great surprize that most of the 10 countries were invited at all. Furthermore, some of those countries did not even have armed forces ! From the three Baltic states that were invited, only Lithuania could claim an air force, which is composed of a couple of PZL-104 Wilga and An-2. Those aircraft are used to tow gliders at various airfields in Europe, and are on the verge of being replaced even for that type of usage. What could they possibly do in combat, and, even more, how could they possibly enhance the air power of NATO entirely, is a total mystery to me. Described as a "political-military aliance", with an emphasis on the military side, NATO seems to have become a geo-political organization, where membership is granted more on geographical terms rather than real life military capabilities. A study done by RAND Corporation for the Pentagon, right after the collapse of the communist regimes in Central Europe, noted that only two countries in the region are worth considering for NATO membership. The two countries were Romania and Poland, and Romania had a military doctrine and order of battle much closer to the one of NATO countries, due mainly to its repeated refusal to fully adopt the Soviet model. Two decades later, the situation remains the same - Poland and Romania being the only two countries in Central Europe to have a large, sustainable military, which is also well trained and equipped. Poland and Romania are the only countries among the 10 new NATO members which are capable of deploying brigade-size units anywhere in the world, Romania doing so by its own means (C-130's). Poland and Romania were also sending high quality special forces to perform operations abroad under NATO, UN or US guidance since the 1990s - GROM, DIR and SIE's Delta detachment's operations being well known by the US Department of State. Articles in the German press, praising Slovenia and the Baltic states for their "remarcable" contributions to world security come then as more evidence, if there was a need for that, as to how far from reality the mass-media can get. Most of the time that is due to certain interest groups which simply suggest articles should be written for a specific purpose, and later reward the respective newspaper or TV network with a substantial ammount of cash. Readers should always be circumspect while reading newspaper articles or watching TV news; as it was proved so many times in the past, most of the time they represent a mere smokescreen for what is really going on in the background. Back to Menu	-- Back to Menu	-- Back to Menu