via Nina Ash
Measures that would have seemed unthinkable just a few years ago are now becoming part of Europe’s planning.
FINLAND
• Raised the military-reserve age to 65
• Expanding its reserve toward one million personnel
• Removed legal restrictions that could have prevented allied nuclear weapons from entering Finnish territory
• Withdrew from the treaty banning antipersonnel mines
ESTONIA
• Has discussed the possibility of hosting NATO nuclear weapons if necessary
• Building bunkers, trenches and anti-tank defenses along its Russian border
• Participating in the Baltic Defense Line
LATVIA
• Building border fortifications and military positions
• Withdrew from the antipersonnel-mine treaty
• Expanding civil-defense and national-resilience measures
LITHUANIA
• Building defensive positions near Russia and Belarus
• Stockpiling anti-tank barriers and expanding mine capabilities
• Withdrew from the antipersonnel-mine treaty
POLAND
• Has discussed hosting NATO nuclear weapons
• Expanding its armed forces and reserve system
• Planning large-scale reservist training
• Building the “Eastern Shield” with fortifications, surveillance and drone defenses
• Withdrew from the antipersonnel-mine treaty
GERMANY
• Assessing subway stations, tunnels, garages and basements for potential shelter use
• Seeking to expand civilian shelter capacity
• Preparing military infrastructure for the movement of large numbers of NATO troops and vehicles toward the east
SWEDEN
• Distributed its “In Case of Crisis or War” guidance
• Advises households on blackouts, air attacks, communications failures and other wartime emergencies
DENMARK
• Expanded military conscription to women
• Increased the length of military service
FRANCE
• Issued public emergency-preparedness guidance covering supplies, communications and radiation precautions
• Encouraging participation in military reserves and civil-defense organizations
BRITAIN
• Reviving government “War Books” for emergency planning
• Integrating military, civilian, industrial and infrastructure planning
• Preparing for large-scale national defense exercises
• Strengthening protection of energy, water, communications and undersea infrastructure
• Planning for cyberattacks, fuel shortages and supply-chain disruption
• Expanding weapons, drone and ammunition production
EUROPEAN UNION
• Advising citizens to maintain at least 72 hours of essential supplies [in itself this is actually a good idea —Eds]
• Developing strategic reserves for major chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear emergencies
IMPORTANT: There is no confirmed deployment of nuclear weapons in Finland, Estonia or Poland. Discussions about potential nuclear arrangements should not be confused with actual deployment.
European governments describe these measures as deterrence, resilience and preparedness in response to a deteriorating security environment.
But the scale of these preparations raises a serious question:
Are European governments simply preparing for the possibility of a major conflict—or are they planning to start one?
But they simply don’t have the means to wage their war and won’t be superior to what the BRICS bloc can muster if needed.
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte (an idiot) now admits that 5,000 aircraft took off from bases in Europe to support the U.S. war of aggression against Iran earlier this year.
Laith Marouf, a Beirut-based journalist and executive director of Free Palestine TV, noted that while Rutte’s admission doesn’t come as a surprise, it is humiliating for the entire NATO alliance, as even with the wider range of support, they STILL lost to Iran.