227
Putin tells Poland any aggression against Belarus is attack on Russia
(www.reuters.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2023
227 points (100.0% liked)
World News
34357 readers
923 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I'm not up to snuff on NATO regulations. As I understand it, if a NATO nation gets attacked, the rest of them are obliged to defend, correct? What happens if that nation is "the aggressor". Like in this situation if Poland were to do a first strike against Belarus or Russia and they respond attacking Poland, is the rest of NATO obliged to help defend Poland?
No, NATO doesn't interfere if a member starts a war. It's a defensive treaty. That said, Poland alone wouldn't be able to do much, and democracies rarely openly declare war.
I had a deployment with Polish soldiers. They are a modern and extremely capable defensive force. It would likely turn into the same thing we're seeing in Ukraine (smaller force that is well trained and better supplied vs sending a lot of bodies and old tech). I don't think we'll ever see a Polish led force invading Belarus or Russia without a massive NATO backing and a lot of foreign units already on the way to support them. Defensively, they will fuck you up. Offensively, they don't have the man power to go deep into enemy territory.
The Polish have historical grudges with Russia and are chomping at the bit to hurt some Russians. It is probably NATO that is holding them back from sending units to Ukraine
However what if a NATO country starts a war with Belarus, and then Russia attacks the NATO country?
The NATO country would never have initiated a war with Russia, they would have initiated it with Belarus.
Does a NATO country automatically become vulnerable if they have any wars currently ongoing? Because that would mean Russia could have attacked America during the war in Afghanistan and NATO would not have been able to get involved.
It's probably a case where Russia could attack Poland's forces in Belarus but attacking Polish soil would involve article 5.
The way it works is that the attacked country invokes article 5. If the country does it then other members are obligated to help. If they don't, they are undermining NATO.
Having said that, NATO doesn't specify how countries supposed to respond. It could be something to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoney_War
I think putin sending Wagner to Belarus is indeed thinking to force Belarus to attack Poland or a Baltic states and see what happens. Of course that would be simple, it would be Belarus vs NATO, and would end up quickly.
So he is tipping the scale and saying that attacking Belarus will be also attacking Russia, hoping that it will be ignored like two Russian missiles hitting Poland. If it won't be ignored, then he is just sacrificing Belarus.
As long as an attack happens on NATO territory, it's considered an act of war. Even if the NATO country is the aggressor. Ideally the aggressing country would be suspended before they could invoke article 5.
Your comment belies your ignorance of how NATO works.
Enlighten me.
PP in all examples intermixes NATO with US military.
In its history NATO article 5 was invoked only once.
That doesn't dispute my comment though? If Poland were to attack Belarus and Belarus retaliated with an attack on Polish soil, they could absolutely invoke article 5.
Unless there is a cover up like happened with those Russian missiles that hit Poland.