Could a tiny Estonian town mean the end of NATO?

I came across this interesting article from 2008, concercing a hypothetical situation how Russia would invade part of Estonia, the small part having Russian majority.

Estonia is a member of NATO, and Article 5 of the NATO Charter requires of its members that "an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently … that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them … will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area."

The language of Article 5 would seem to suggest Europe would have to rush to Estonia's defense in case of a Russian attack. Of course, diplomatic language can be variously interpreted and whether or not Europe would actually respond in this manner would depend on a number of factors.

First, Russia would deny that it has instigated an "armed attack" and insist that it is on a humanitarian mission to restore the human and civil rights so brutally denied its Russian brethren by Estonia's supposedly chauvinist regime.

Second, Russia would tell the world that it is merely responding to calls for help from local Russians—perhaps organized in a Russian Popular Front—who feel neglected by the European Union and NATO.

Third, Russia would rely on the authority of Europe's own institutions, which have criticized Tallinn's policies toward its Russian minority, in making its claims.

Fourth, Russia would argue that Narva—like Estonia—is too small to risk a complete breakdown in relations or war.

Fifth, Russia would suggest that it's acting no differently than Europeans who intervene in conflict zones in Africa in order to protect their citizens.

Finally, Russia would remind Europe that even humanitarian missions in Estonia could have the unfortunate consequence of disrupting flows of oil and gas.

www.atlanticcouncil.org...

Does the scenario make you feel a bit dejavu? The situation happening in Crimea is not that different, technically.


But Narva. After finding this particular article, I started researching a bit on internet, trying to find other articles concercing somewhat similar hypothetical situation. In recent days, there have been several articles concerning such situation, all pretty much copy of this one:

The Tiny Estonian Town That Could Spell the End of NATO

There are a few mistakes made in the article though. Narva does not have 40% unemployment rate, but 5% currently. The HIV is high, but not that high as it is made to believe.

In theory Narva is not only part of the EU, but within the territory covered by NATO. Yet despite all the solemn commitments no doubt now being repeated by U.S. Vice President Joe Biden during his visit to Warsaw, how might the U.S. and its Western allies really respond? Would they send troops to push the Russians back? In Estonia? How would they get there? And what then? Is the U.S. army prepared to then head north and reenact the siege of Leningrad (with German troops no less, in tow)? Would it threaten nuclear war? Over Narva?

About the city
Narva is a small town in Estonia on the Estonian-Russian. It has around 65k people living in it and is situated in the Ida-Virumaa (150k population, area under 1300 square miles) shire, which is the only Russian-majority area in the country having around 80% of russian-speaking out of whom 46% are Estonian citizen, 36% Russian citizens and 17% without any citizenship (all rounded). Many people there are not born in this area though, during the Soviet era, as part of the russianisation process, Russia was shipping its citizens to the occupied countries, where were not that many russians. Although, considering the current amount of Russian-speaking people, this seems like a perfect target,when considering Crimean situation.

Strategically, there are a few other key points concerning that area 1) 90% of electrictity in Estonia is produced in that particular area. 2) It has large reserves of oil shale, as well as psophorite rock.

Considering all these factors, Ida-Virumaa with Narva is an important area for Estonia, as well as having lots of russian-speaking people living, which makes a scenario similar to Crimea a possibility for Russia, although just a possibility. I can honestly assure, without rigging and extreme propaganda something like that is impossible. Even the Russians (majority, besides true Russian nationalists ) in Estonia are not that brainwashed to believe that going under Russian rule would make anything better, Soviet times were painful enough.

Last week Russia showed concern towards discrimination happening against Russian nationnels in Estonia. In low-level it might, although in reality there is no real discrimination. I would not say having the national language of Estonian and all the paperwork in that language is discrimination. After all US also does not require everything done (government level, as well as bureocracy) in Spanish to not "discriminate" the minorities. As wel as, majority of the Russian youth themselves want to learn Estonian. After all, this country is not Russia, but Estonia and estonian national language is estonian

Although, there are a few big BUTs with the whole situation:

1) Estonia is a member of EU as well as NATO
2) There is no border control between Ukraine and Russia. Russians can just go inside. To come to Estonia, you need official visas. Taking the army in there is not possible.

As a resident of Estonia, of course the current situation makes me a bit worried. I really hope Putin is not mad enough to do anything here, especially due to NATO. Although the guy has taken several very large bets and gotten away with everything so far.

What if he made similar bet again, although a risky one this time, with a NATO member. Considering the size of that small part of Estonia (under 1300 square miles with under 150k population), even if the contracts said one thing, would US risk a war with Russia, who is also a nuclear country? Is a matter of principle and pride enough of a reason to start defending an area as small and "meaningless" in the world perspective. In such a hypothetical situation, will NATO serve its purpose or could it become the end of NATO?

I personally believe NATO would stand, what do you believe? What would you, as American, want US to do?

reply to post by Cabin


Yes, indeed it is an identical argument. The same one that prompted even Hillary to recognize the similarities with a certain fuhrer we all know and hate. Let's hope that the west grows some and steps up to honor its treaties and alliances.

/sarcasm
So... I have idle hands. Lets see if we can drag the US into more wars because I have nothing better to do. Oh and I love chaos. I love to see people suffer and babies fried. Cant forget gruesome death and poverty, lets create more because you know, thats always a good thing.
/sarcasm off

I'm gonna troll every effing warmongering crybaby p.o.s on the planet until you people gather their nutjob asses up and ship them off to megiddo.

The US will go to war with anyone it seems so that one is probably a yes - if they felt it could help to gain friends, get a foothold, and we could be justify saving the day from Russia's attempted take over. Every bit of territory someone gains is that much more power their Country has so it's pretty messed up when it comes to motives. It would be nice if it was all about morals but it isn't. There is always something more than what meets the eye going on. Russia is certainly not happy right now so let us hope nothing of this sort unfolds now.

We wouldn't at first. We would be drawn in by RNK post fact as WWII history would repeat itself with new characters. At least that is how they would make it look.

Nephalim
/sarcasm
So... I have idle hands. Lets see if we can drag the US into more wars because I have nothing better to do. Oh and I love chaos. I love to see people suffer and babies fried. Cant forget gruesome death and poverty, lets create more because you know, thats always a good thing.
/sarcasm off

I'm gonna troll every effing warmongering crybaby p.o.s on the planet until you people gather their nutjob asses up and ship them off to megiddo.

Unlike Ukraine estonia is NATO, the US has to like or not, so does Britain and France .

Treaty is a treaty like or not. The argument should be if the USA withdraws from NATO not if it goes into to help estonia.

reply to post by Nephalim


reply to post by Dianec


Please read the articles I provided in the OP... The current situation is about a hypothetical (but possible, especially currently) situation, where NATO member nation territory is invaded/occupied. This is not war-mongering. This is a situation, where NATO is supposed to do something to stop it, even if it means war.

As a resident in the particular nation, of course I am concerned about similar situation. I was just interested in how do people from other nations see such situation. Even if the territory was a small territory of a small for-most-people-unknown nation, do you believe US would do what the chapter 5 in NATO states, especially considering the situation might be made to seem similar to "liberating"/occupying Crimea.

crazyewok

Nephalim
/sarcasm
So... I have idle hands. Lets see if we can drag the US into more wars because I have nothing better to do. Oh and I love chaos. I love to see people suffer and babies fried. Cant forget gruesome death and poverty, lets create more because you know, thats always a good thing.
/sarcasm off

I'm gonna troll every effing warmongering crybaby p.o.s on the planet until you people gather their nutjob asses up and ship them off to megiddo.

Unlike Ukraine estonia is NATO, the US has to like or not, so does Britain and France .

Treaty is a treaty like or not. The argument should be if the USA withdraws from NATO not if it goes into to help estonia.

Wheres my fart link.
Then why write a thread about it? So someone can sit here and bark "law" at people?
Suit up and get after it. Megiddo awaits. Take all these racists, law zealots and religious extremists with you.
Wont bother me or any other sane people in the world one bit.

reply to post by Cabin


Cabin are you worried?

Cabin:

...hypothetical situation how Russia would invade part of Estonia, the small part having Russian majority.

You make an interesting point of concern. Some recent reports have suggested Russia is eyeing Estonia, but they may well be hyperinflated distractions to give 'cause celebre' to the Crimean crisis and Western sanctions?

It's an hard one to call, because Putin has clearly demonstrated his willingness to bring aid through the Russian military to Russians in other surrounding countries. Crimea had extenuating circumstances, such as Russian military assests that needed protecting as well as Russian peoples suffering Ukrainian violence.

Personally, I would not support any further Russian encroachment anywhere, Putin needs to settle back, and perhaps provide a timetable on troop number reductions from Crimea and along the Ukraine border. If he is not careful, he could find Western influence outmaneuvering him and forcing his hand into a situation he won't be able to control, and thus set him down a path of aggressive reactive actions.

The situation with Russia is convoluted and very tense...which is obviously not good.

reply to post by Nephalim


Shouldn´t I be? Russia is doing pretty much whatever they want in Crimea and besides the economic sanctions nothing has been done yet.

This here is a NATO country and the even if something happened here, the most likely scenario would be the one I described above. What I am interested in is other people´s beliefs about such situation... Considering how minor area that is and the current financial situation of most economies, of course certain questions might be raised, especially if Russia manages to do a coup like they did in Crimea, even though here it would illegitimate 100%.

For me, that would mean war in my home country, as well the obligation of defending the country

reply to post by Cabin


No I wouldn't be worried. Theres a big area in the middle of effing nowhere. A big field. If all these wackjobs wanna go bat# crazy, they can all pile the # up and go there, have at it and leave everyone else alone. Its either that or they all abide by the "law."

Nephalim

crazyewok

Nephalim
/sarcasm
So... I have idle hands. Lets see if we can drag the US into more wars because I have nothing better to do. Oh and I love chaos. I love to see people suffer and babies fried. Cant forget gruesome death and poverty, lets create more because you know, thats always a good thing.
/sarcasm off

I'm gonna troll every effing warmongering crybaby p.o.s on the planet until you people gather their nutjob asses up and ship them off to megiddo.

Unlike Ukraine estonia is NATO, the US has to like or not, so does Britain and France .

Treaty is a treaty like or not. The argument should be if the USA withdraws from NATO not if it goes into to help estonia.

Wheres my fart link.
Then why write a thread about it? So someone can sit here and bark "law" at people?
Suit up and get after it. Megiddo awaits. Take all these racists, law zealots and religious extremists with you.
Wont bother me or any other sane people in the world one bit.

edit on 27-3-2014 by Nephalim because: (no reason given)

Excuse me but you will find me the last one on here calling for war.

But a treaty is a treaty,

Dont like it? Get the USA to withdraw from it next election!

reply to post by Nephalim


heh, people like you think you're innocent and blameless, judging others while hiding behind your false shield of righteousness, that attitude of yours causes as much anger and conflict as a slap in the face would.

i think you need to relax and discuss properly or stop posting in the thread, you're being quite rude to someone with a genuine concern, who is closer to the danger than you are.
don't let fear blind you to reality, the people you wish to see gone won't go away so easily, life isn't so grand as that.

as for the poster cabin, well, who knows? our country the US has never really stepped in for another nation unless we gain from it or if that nation is weak, so i'd say don't count on our country at least, though europe on the other hand might act even if we don't, they understand what a real invader looks like and won't accept such actions as we might, we are ignorant in such things even if we talk big about war.

It would be an honor to fight in Europe.

Russia has no business in Estonia. Crimea was a tricky situation, and the Russian argument had value. But Russia can't just go busting into other countries that have Russian citizens or ethnic Russians in them just because they aren't being treated well. Estonia is not Crimea. It is a defined country with a distinct ethnic and national Identity that is not Russian. If Russians don't like the way they are being treated in Estonia, then they should either address it through Estonian institutions, not cry to Russia to come send troops to protect them. Or simply go back to Russia.

It would be like Mexico threatening to send military into the U.S. because Mexican nationals here are complaining about the way they are treated.

This is NATO territory, and if NATO means anything, this should be the line in the sand.

The US at least will always the honor the NATO treaty. Failure to do so would destroy the credibility of all US treaties world wide. And if the US is rolling everybody else will follow. If nothing else Russia actions in Crimea has unified the alliance more so than ever. Finland and Sweden though? They might have some worries.

You must be kidding. About an invasion: can you tell me where in the history there was an invasion where people met soldiers as heroes, where army in that regions parties with 'attackers' and organizes a football tournament and where 97% of the voters choose to leave country?

Claims about discrimination are much different from claims of genocide threats against population. And those claims are not new. Same people that made the coup against democratic officials were making those threats for the last 15+ years. You heard leaked phone call from Tymoshenko? Few years ago she already said that if it was her decision that she would put a barbwire around Russian speaking regions. Wests favorite Tyagnibok was ousted from Svoboda because of anti-semitism in 2004. He was calling population of South Eastern Ukraine dogs and slaves for the last 15 years. Now he's back and he leads first Nazi party that has seats in the highest government position since WWII. Even Israel (few years ago) warned EU that they have to do something about him and Svoboda. Right sector made claims that they will kill Moscali as they call Russian speaking Ukrainians in the Southeastern part of Ukraine. Those slogans were among the loudest on the Maidan. And the language law was important catalyst ... You simply can not forbid people to use language that they speak from their birth and learn Ukrainian in the school as second language (this is the case in the Ukraine).

So, when people ASK for protection and get it, it's not an invasion. And btw: Yanukovich is still a president and he can legally call Russia to help him. When parliament voted him out, 'only' 72% of the parliament voted to do so when Ukrainian constitution clearly says that 75% is minimum. Someone should tell Obama and Merkel which number is to be considered in this case. So, he has the right to ask Russia for help and they have to respond because of the agreements they have.

And newest news: people of other regions are protesting and asking for Yanukovich to come back and ask Putin for help. This 'campaign' already has few tens of thousands of followers and is gaining popularity among the population of those regions. Situation in Ukraine is far from over.

But my main point was: Estonia cannot compare to Ukraine in this situation.

Treaties mean nothing if there's no profit to be made from it.

Shale oilfields eh?

Maybe they just need an excuse to make working those fields profitable?

War could do that.

namehere
reply to post by Nephalim

 

heh, people like you think you're innocent and blameless, judging others while hiding behind your false shield of righteousness, that attitude of yours causes as much anger and conflict as a slap in the face would.

i think you need to relax and discuss properly or stop posting in the thread, you're being quite rude to someone with a genuine concern, who is closer to the danger than you are.
don't let fear blind you to reality, the people you wish to see gone won't go away so easily, life isn't so grand as that.

as for the poster cabin, well, who knows? our country the US has never really stepped in for another nation unless we gain from it or if that nation is weak, so i'd say don't count on our country at least, though europe on the other hand might act even if we don't, they understand what a real invader looks like and won't accept such actions as we might, we are ignorant in such things even if we talk big about war.

"Heh" Yea your right. Its all my fault. whatevers clever. Always my fault, cabins fault, never the people actually doing the crap.
I'll drink to that.