EU vs Russia who would win in this scenario.?

[Ananda]

What high-end technology does Russia produce and export other than weapons? How many flat screen TV's, hybrid cars, industrial robots, precision machine tools, lap-top computers et al are built and exported from Russia? Once their arms industry withers and dies due to lack of investment and exports, what are they going to turn to? Have you ever seen a Russian 'high-tech' commercial product for sale in a competitive free-market environment, if so tell me, because I haven't.

High end products will not comming all from civilan commercial market. The military products of Russia still getting healthy export orders. In fact the questions can also be asked on future of EU military industry, since more and more export market went to US (i,e the US Military Industries slowly but sure continue pressing EU military Industry).
Will EU Military industries die out..?? I Say no, but definetely can not be saying that EU Military Industry will push out Russian ones, considering they have hard time surviving the US competition.

Again back to original scenario of this thread, the scenarios say that Russia will dominate Oil & Gas market which means that they will still have enoughmoney to Invest on the military Industry.
Even Russian know they do not have healthy commercial industries, but they do have and still have helthy Military Industry.
This debate has moved to area where many Westerners scoorn the ability of Russia to continue improvement base on present situations.
The situations which I must say still far from the hight of USSR, but still show improvement even much slower than like of China.

Having healthy Military Industries means there still employment for their R&D sectors to continue producing. They might be lacked on UAV which can match Predators, but their UAV design was not really far behind.
They still produced world class radars, sensors and missiles, which means those are High End products eventhough not for coomercial civilian market.

Why don't we just wait the outcome of PAK-FA, and then still can decided if the military Industry and R&D of Russia still able to produce High Tech products.

Oh my god, do you have any idea what kind of products the EU produces and what China produces? Do you know what it means to have an "extended workbench"? Are you familiar with the concepts of industrial sourcing? I guess not.

And still, please provide a perspective on why the economical dominance over Russia would possibly change within 14 years.

Do you have a clue on what the Chinese products were 14 years ago ??
Off couse I know the concepts on Industrial Sourcing, Off couse I know the arguments that eventhough Chinese products flooding the market, but basically its western products build in China.
However those arguments also ommited the fact that while they producing under western contracts from western Multinationals, but the Chinese original manufactures also producing products that continues clossing gap with the well known commercial brand from Europe, Japan, Korean, or US.

Perhaps not all of those products entered the European market yet, perhaps if they do, the will not sell wel yet in the industrialized countries. However they begin to make significant chunk of Japan and Korean brand in Asian Market. While in the same time majority EU products lossing out in Asia, in which many agree the fastest growing market in the world. Face it the only existing EU products that still have strong name in Asia are the kind like Mercedes Benz, BMW, and Nokia. The rest slowly lossing out.
It's open to arguments if any global producers that lossing out in Asia will continue be a strong global brand in the future.

They're building the bases, and again like I said 14 years from know, they do have potential to replaced existing brand name. Will the existing brand manage to survive ?? perhaps..but also there's possibility on lossing out.

I'm putting China as example only to show, rapid improvements from a country that demeed as backward, can with the right condition and investment turn their industrial ability and R&D from laughable to something to be considered in short time.

Russian average citizens wellfare are much bellow EU ??? Well depends on which EU....However so Does average Chinse, but this does not stop them to continue Improved.

Your comment on Russia is on lower end..the higher end will be by people that support BRIC view. I'm on the other hand in the middle.
I'm not saying that Russia will dominate Europe (like BRIC supporters do), but I'm also not saying EU will dominate Russia either.

And back to scenarios'...That's why I'm saying EU can not take on Russia militarily alone without US of A.

 

[riksavage]

High end products will not comming all from civilan commercial market. The military products of Russia still getting healthy export orders. In fact the questions can also be asked on future of EU military industry, since more and more export market went to US (i,e the US Military Industries slowly but sure continue pressing EU military Industry).
Will EU Military industries die out..?? I Say no, but definetely can not be saying that EU Military Industry will push out Russian ones, considering they have hard time surviving the US competition.

Again back to original scenario of this thread, the scenarios say that Russia will dominate Oil & Gas market which means that they will still have enoughmoney to Invest on the military Industry.
Even Russian know they do not have healthy commercial industries, but they do have and still have helthy Military Industry.
This debate has moved to area where many Westerners scoorn the ability of Russia to continue improvement base on present situations.
The situations which I must say still far from the hight of USSR, but still show improvement even much slower than like of China.

Having healthy Military Industries means there still employment for their R&D sectors to continue producing. They might be lacked on UAV which can match Predators, but their UAV design was not really far behind.
They still produced world class radars, sensors and missiles, which means those are High End products eventhough not for coomercial civilian market.

Why don't we just wait the outcome of PAK-FA, and then still can decided if the military Industry and R&D of Russia still able to produce High Tech products.



Do you have a clue on what the Chinese products were 14 years ago ??
Off couse I know the concepts on Industrial Sourcing, Off couse I know the arguments that eventhough Chinese products flooding the market, but basically its western products build in China.
However those arguments also ommited the fact that while they producing under western contracts from western Multinationals, but the Chinese original manufactures also producing products that continues clossing gap with the well known commercial brand from Europe, Japan, Korean, or US.

Perhaps not all of those products entered the European market yet, perhaps if they do, the will not sell wel yet in the industrialized countries. However they begin to make significant chunk of Japan and Korean brand in Asian Market. While in the same time majority EU products lossing out in Asia, in which many agree the fastest growing market in the world. Face it the only existing EU products that still have strong name in Asia are the kind like Mercedes Benz, BMW, and Nokia. The rest slowly lossing out.
It's open to arguments if any global producers that lossing out in Asia will continue be a strong global brand in the future.

They're building the bases, and again like I said 14 years from know, they do have potential to replaced existing brand name. Will the existing brand manage to survive ?? perhaps..but also there's possibility on lossing out.

I'm putting China as example only to show, rapid improvements from a country that demeed as backward, can with the right condition and investment turn their industrial ability and R&D from laughable to something to be considered in short time.

Russian average citizens wellfare are much bellow EU ??? Well depends on which EU....However so Does average Chinse, but this does not stop them to continue Improved.

Your comment on Russia is on lower end..the higher end will be by people that support BRIC view. I'm on the other hand in the middle.
I'm not saying that Russia will dominate Europe (like BRIC supporters do), but I'm also not saying EU will dominate Russia either.

And back to scenarios'...That's why I'm saying EU can not take on Russia militarily alone without US of A.

I totally agree that not all high-tech systems come from the private sector, however they undoubtedly contribute and help dilute the burden of total cost. If you can incorporate an off the shelf system developed by a civilian orientated company into a ruggedised military platform then great - win, win situation all round for both entities.

Russia is not China, having worked in both countries, the latter has managed to encourage JV's and tech transfers, which remain impossible under Putin. Other than Oil & Gas related investments none of the Fortune 500 companies are transfering proprietary technology to Russia or opening advanced plants like they are doing in China.

Russia's defence industry is dying, selling AK's, heavy tanks and artillery is one thing, moving to net-centric warfare platforms suitable for the 21st Century is another. Russia's R&D base has suffered horrendously because of a lack of cash coupled with an increasing brain drain as key engineers and scientists leave for more lucrative offers outside the country in the private sector. The once famous universities that produced high-grade scientists are also starved of cash and many of Russians best and brightest are more interested in making money than serving the state.

The Russian's openly admit their Naval ship building bases will close unless they partner with an outside entity, preferably a European one. The military no longer receives the lions share of the funds it once enjoyed. The cost of restructuring the military alone will cost billions, never mind diverting funds to develop 5th & 6th generation products. Boeing for example has just released designs for its next generation F/A-XX replacement for F/A-18E/F, they have money to burn when compared to the their Russian counterparts, same goes for the European consortiums. Time is against Russia simply because the old Eastern block is now looking west, China will develop its own well funded defence industry, and even India is now looking for alternative suppliers. They can still make cheap reliable low tech weapons, but this will not help them catch-up and compete with the likes of Europe, Israel and the US.

Take nuclear weapons away from Russia and she's a paper tiger. As the memories of WWII die and countries such as Germany grow in military confidence and the old East becomes more integrated in Europe the tide militarily will swing even further away from the old bear.

 

[swerve]

...Again back to original scenario of this thread, the scenarios say that Russia will dominate Oil & Gas market ....

Yes, & the scenario falls flat on its face at that point.

Russias oil & gas industry is doing well only by comparison to the rest of the Russian economy. Domestic industry is not providing improved equipment or techniques. Like the rest of Russias civilian manufacturing, it's in poor shape, & increasingly dependent on foreign technology. But foreign technology is becoming harder to obtain, as foreign firms have seen their contracts torn up, their investments seized, & their intellectual property stolen. In the Far East, the biggest potential markets are also the biggest potential suppliers of investment, & in some cases technology - but they're either frozen out or reluctant to invest because of the lack of a solid legal framework.

Without the rule of law (& Russia does not have the rule of law, & it is getting even worse), foreign investors will be limited, & foreign technology expensive & in limited supply. Domestic sources of both are inadequate. This leads to high-cost, low-productivity production, with low extraction rates. Then factor in that there are countries (e.g. Saudi Arabia or Iraq) with reserves which dwarf those of Russia, that many individually smaller, but large in aggregate, producers daren't behave like Russia, & that some current importers (e.g. Brazil) are moving to exploit new reserves which may turn them into exporters, & the whole idea that Russia will dominate the world oil & gas markets becomes laughable.

 

[swerve]

... Russia's R&D base has suffered horrendously because of a lack of cash coupled with an increasing brain drain as key engineers and scientists leave for more lucrative offers outside the country in the private sector. The once famous universities that produced high-grade scientists are also starved of cash and many of Russians best and brightest are more interested in making money than serving the state. ....

My former employer employed quite a few Russians (& Russian Kazakhstanis, etc), both directly & via an Israeli supplier which seemed very skilled at locating them & getting them visas to work either in Israel, or in its overseas development centres. Lots of clever people, turning their brains from many other disciplines (maths, engineering, etc.) to writing commercial software for western firms. Few seemed interested in going back.

 

[Tavarisch]

Essentially, an engagement between both parties in the near immediate future is not at all a feasible scenario. Russia relies on the EU as much as the EU relies on Russia. For an engagement of such a scale to happen would only equate to a total conventional nightmare both in terms of warfare and politics. America will not stand by idly while this happens, that is an assurance. (Unless the politics of the war are otherwise)

However, politics aside, the war will fast become a stalemate. Russia can commit far greater reserves if necessary and has the industrial capability to produce more tanks, guns and APCs than the entire EU put together. The T-90 which is in low level production has been produced more than any other nation per annum, and the running production of the T-90 last year was 160+ and that statistic outranked all the other nations in the world with tank fabricating abilities. Financially, it will be a nightmare for the Russian government as in last year alone, the 5 day war with Georgia cost them more than 500 million USD. But that did not stop Stalin from making all the T-34s to defeat the Nazis in the Great Patriotic War which spanned for 6 years. The EU will mostly have to rely on their air-dominance, since almost a good portion of the Russian Air force is rusted and is basically a pile of poop. ( MiG-29s in Russian service are poorly maintained and they comprise a good bulk of their inventory, next to their MiG-31s. Their pilots get only a fraction of what NATO countries do in terms of training. The Ruskies rely too much on SAMs)

EU may have 27 countries, but how many of them are like Germany, France and the UK? Essentially, none of them can even hope to match these said armies individually. Even collectively, I believe that the EU will have a nightmare. However, their chances of victory are perhaps on equal terms with the Russians. Assuming that the Russians do make their reforms and finish them by their planned year, the Russians will still have a tough time pushing EU back.

 

[Falstaff]

However, politics aside, the war will fast become a stalemate. Russia can commit far greater reserves if necessary and has the industrial capability to produce more tanks, guns and APCs than the entire EU put together. The T-90 which is in low level production has been produced more than any other nation per annum, and the running production of the T-90 last year was 160+ and that statistic outranked all the other nations in the world with tank fabricating abilities.

I appreciate you trying to make a objective statement, however this is simply not true. I don't know where you get the idea that Russia has greater industrial capabilities. The EU has many times greater industrial resources and capabilities than Russia.
Consider that in terms of automotive imdustry, electronics, metal processing, shipbuilding, aviation industry and so on and so on the EU has ressources and capabilities that Russia can't even dream of. This applies to the appropriate workforce as well as machinery and equipment. All this is state of the art and if you check your numbers then you'll find the industrial base of Germany alone is several times bigger than Russia's, at least today that's the case. Count in the rest of the EU, and there you are.
Plus there's the Know-How to ramp up production real fast and to apply all the latest production systems like TQM, SCM, PLM. Name it, the EU has considerable experience and experts to mass-produce complex goods.
If the EU, which is the biggest economic entity in the world and the biggest goods producer in the world would switch to war-time, ressource based production mode... oh boy, there you go.
I don't want to be disrespectful to you, you're really making a contribution here, but this time you really are mistaken.

 

[Tavarisch]

I appreciate you trying to make a objective statement, however this is simply not true. I don't know where you get the idea that Russia has greater industrial capabilities. The EU has many times greater industrial resources and capabilities than Russia.
Consider that in terms of automotive imdustry, electronics, metal processing, shipbuilding, aviation industry and so on and so on the EU has ressources and capabilities that Russia can't even dream of. This applies to the appropriate workforce as well as machinery and equipment. All this is state of the art and if you check your numbers then you'll find the industrial base of Germany alone is several times bigger than Russia's, at least today that's the case. Count in the rest of the EU, and there you are.
Plus there's the Know-How to ramp up production real fast and to apply all the latest production systems like TQM, SCM, PLM. Name it, the EU has considerable experience and experts to mass-produce complex goods.
If the EU, which is the biggest economic entity in the world and the biggest goods producer in the world would switch to war-time, ressource based production mode... oh boy, there you go.
I don't want to be disrespectful to you, you're really making a contribution here, but this time you really are mistaken.

Yeah, I will have to agree that basing my opinions on a narrow perspective of tank production numbers and stats is a bit silly. nfloorl:

But let's remember, Russia still has the most minerals amongst Europe. Allow me to remind you that the EU relies on Russia for natural gas... or was that deal cut off ? lol. Russia can still commit their reserves and remember the Soviet Union adapted very effectively to a war-time industrial base during the Great Patriotic War, I'm sure the Russians can do the same again. Seeming most of the Soviet-era factories still remain in their domain, with the possible exception of the Kharkiv T-80 factory in Ukraine. Russia's equipment is designed to be cost-effective and easy to manufacture, at least as far as the tanks go.

Suffice to say, my knowledge of Russian avionics and naval issues are a bit shallow. Yes, you may laugh. And no worries, I do not feel insulted at all. It is good that one points out the flaws of others in manners that are acceptable. Some people would jump the gun completely and come up with stupid sarcastic retorts.

Speaking of ships, I do believe that Russia seriously needs to update their navy. They've got only one Air-craft carrier, and even then that old Kuznetsovz of theirs carries much less of a compliment that what EU and NATO can offer potentially and even currently.

 

[swerve]

..
But let's remember, Russia still has the most minerals amongst Europe. Allow me to remind you that the EU relies on Russia for natural gas... or was that deal cut off ? lol. Russia can still commit their reserves and remember the Soviet Union adapted very effectively to a war-time industrial base during the Great Patriotic War, I'm sure the Russians can do the same again. Seeming most of the Soviet-era factories still remain in their domain, with the possible exception of the Kharkiv T-80 factory in Ukraine. Russia's equipment is designed to be cost-effective and easy to manufacture, at least as far as the tanks go. ...

1. So what? Unless you can point to specific minerals which EU countries need for military production, & which they can't get except from Russia, that's irrelevant.
2. IIRC the EU imports about one third of its natural gas (not its fuel - just the gas) from Russia. Painful to lose, but it wouldn't shut down the economy.
3. Russian reserves. Hmm. Remind me of how recently the average reservist did any training. Remind me of how much equipment there is fit for use, for these reservists to use.
4. If Soviet WW2 experience is relevant, let us consider British & German WW2 experience. Go and look at aircraft production figures.
5. So.... how quickly can a factory which has been idle for 10 or 15 years resume production (if, that is, it still has the machinery, if it hasn't been sold for scrap)? What can it produce? And what is this obsession with tanks? More WW2 thinking? Think about aviation & electronics. I think most Western armed forces nowadays would think of large numbers of poorly-equipped (as in short of sensors, protection systems, etc) tanks trundling west as a target-rich environment, not a serious threat.

 

[Sampanviking]

I would remind posters that Russia has Regional Security arrangements to help it preserve its territorial integrity. The most significant of its security partners being the PRC. If anybody seriously believes that the PRC would see the fall of Russia as anything other than a serious threat to its own security, then I am afraid that they are living in la la land!

Why else do you think China has just granted a $1.5Billion loan and unlimited guarantees to Moldova? China clearly sees the stability of the post Soviet space as critical to its own and Russia seems happy to allow China to establish its own interests within it. Indeed these seem to be happening at an Increasingly Strategic level on the basis of agreement between the two giants.

 

[Falstaff]

I would remind posters that Russia has Regional Security arrangements to help it preserve its territorial integrity. The most significant of its security partners being the PRC. If anybody seriously believes that the PRC would see the fall of Russia as anything other than a serious threat to its own security, then I am afraid that they are living in la la land!

Why else do you think China has just granted a $1.5Billion loan and unlimited guarantees to Moldova? China clearly sees the stability of the post Soviet space as critical to its own and Russia seems happy to allow China to establish its own interests within it. Indeed these seem to be happening at an Increasingly Strategic level on the basis of agreement between the two giants.

Sadly this is out of the focus of the scenario for this thread, which on the other hand leaves out involvement of the USA too.

 

[Vivendi]

EU may have 27 countries, but how many of them are like Germany, France and the UK? Essentially, none of them can even hope to match these said armies individually. Even collectively, I believe that the EU will have a nightmare. However, their chances of victory are perhaps on equal terms with the Russians. Assuming that the Russians do make their reforms and finish them by their planned year, the Russians will still have a tough time pushing EU back.

EU fighter force, 2023:

Finland: 60 F-18
Sweden: 100 Gripen
Denmark: 48 F-35
Holland: 85 F-35
Germany: 180 Typhoon, 85 Tornados
Poland: 98 F-16
Czech republic: 14 Gripen
Hungarian air force: 14 gripen
Romanian air force: 24 fighters (F16 or Gripen?)
Bulgarian air force: 24 fighters (F16 or Gripen?)
Austrian air force: 15 Typhoons
Belgium: 24 F-35 (?)
French air force: 290 Rafale, 60 Mirage
Portugese air force: 24 F-35 (?)
Spanish air force: 130 Typhoon, 85 F18, 24 F-35 (??)
Italian air force: 120 Typhoon, 130 F-35
Hellenic air force: 290 a/c, most likely mix of F16, F-35 and Rafale or Typhoon.

A total of approx. 1900 fighter aircraft, most of them sophisticated 4. and 5. gen. Many of my estimates are probably wrong but hopefully the should be about right. I did some googling, and used either current figures, or what's on order for each country with some guessing.

IF as the scenario depicts, Russia would dramatically increase her military forces, then my estimates may be conservative...

EU will obtain air dominance rather quickly. Russian army should not be underestimated, but it will need equipment. Unlike previous wars, air dominance should mean good capability to destroy factories producing military equipment.

Russia will simply not stand a chance -- even going nuclear may not give a Russian victory. By 2023 the missile defence shield should be up and running. Some missiles will go through and cause huge astrocities but Europe is a big place and will still have remaining capacity, this will guarantee in EU hitting back with nukes. And unlike the Russian nukes than for for the most part will never reach their intended targets, the few nukes France got will reach their targets.

And realistically if Russia attacks with nukes then the UK and probably also US will get involved. Game over for Russia.

Of course I agree with those that say this scenario is extremely unrealistic for various reasons already given. So I consider it purely a Gedankenexperiment

vivendi

 

[Grim901]

Essentially, an engagement between both parties in the near immediate future is not at all a feasible scenario. Russia relies on the EU as much as the EU relies on Russia. For an engagement of such a scale to happen would only equate to a total conventional nightmare both in terms of warfare and politics. America will not stand by idly while this happens, that is an assurance. (Unless the politics of the war are otherwise)

However, politics aside, the war will fast become a stalemate. Russia can commit far greater reserves if necessary and has the industrial capability to produce more tanks, guns and APCs than the entire EU put together. The T-90 which is in low level production has been produced more than any other nation per annum, and the running production of the T-90 last year was 160+ and that statistic outranked all the other nations in the world with tank fabricating abilities. Financially, it will be a nightmare for the Russian government as in last year alone, the 5 day war with Georgia cost them more than 500 million USD. But that did not stop Stalin from making all the T-34s to defeat the Nazis in the Great Patriotic War which spanned for 6 years. The EU will mostly have to rely on their air-dominance, since almost a good portion of the Russian Air force is rusted and is basically a pile of poop. ( MiG-29s in Russian service are poorly maintained and they comprise a good bulk of their inventory, next to their MiG-31s. Their pilots get only a fraction of what NATO countries do in terms of training. The Ruskies rely too much on SAMs)

EU may have 27 countries, but how many of them are like Germany, France and the UK? Essentially, none of them can even hope to match these said armies individually. Even collectively, I believe that the EU will have a nightmare. However, their chances of victory are perhaps on equal terms with the Russians. Assuming that the Russians do make their reforms and finish them by their planned year, the Russians will still have a tough time pushing EU back.

Most of the issues i was going to address have been answered already. Your claim that last year Russia produced more tanks than anyone else is largely irrelevant since (to my knowledge) not one of the western nations with the capability (US, UK, France, Germany) were producing tanks. Indeed most of those nations shouldn't need to again for some time.

 

[riksavage]

Essentially, an engagement between both parties in the near immediate future is not at all a feasible scenario. Russia relies on the EU as much as the EU relies on Russia. For an engagement of such a scale to happen would only equate to a total conventional nightmare both in terms of warfare and politics. America will not stand by idly while this happens, that is an assurance. (Unless the politics of the war are otherwise)

However, politics aside, the war will fast become a stalemate. Russia can commit far greater reserves if necessary and has the industrial capability to produce more tanks, guns and APCs than the entire EU put together. The T-90 which is in low level production has been produced more than any other nation per annum, and the running production of the T-90 last year was 160+ and that statistic outranked all the other nations in the world with tank fabricating abilities. Financially, it will be a nightmare for the Russian government as in last year alone, the 5 day war with Georgia cost them more than 500 million USD. But that did not stop Stalin from making all the T-34s to defeat the Nazis in the Great Patriotic War which spanned for 6 years. The EU will mostly have to rely on their air-dominance, since almost a good portion of the Russian Air force is rusted and is basically a pile of poop. ( MiG-29s in Russian service are poorly maintained and they comprise a good bulk of their inventory, next to their MiG-31s. Their pilots get only a fraction of what NATO countries do in terms of training. The Ruskies rely too much on SAMs)

EU may have 27 countries, but how many of them are like Germany, France and the UK? Essentially, none of them can even hope to match these said armies individually. Even collectively, I believe that the EU will have a nightmare. However, their chances of victory are perhaps on equal terms with the Russians. Assuming that the Russians do make their reforms and finish them by their planned year, the Russians will still have a tough time pushing EU back.

Unfortunately Russia appears tied to producing unintelligent mass-produced weapons for export to developing countries to generate revenue. Tanks are a prime example, relative to western UCAV developments, they fall into the unintelligent / low tech category. Russia needs to invest money at the same rate as Europe, USA & Israel into R&D efforts to develop high-tech unmanned platforms, which will ultimately dominate the future battlefield. Russia has nothing in its armoury to match Hermes, never mind Reaper, Predator or Global Hawk. I don’t think a single Russian unit currently has access to UAV’s linked in real-time to troops on the ground via RVT’s, which is common practice in A-Stan for not just tier one assets, but most TAC’s supporting infantry formations (US, UK & Canada)

The US is already looking at deploying swarms of relatively cheap UCAV systems, which will decimate tank formations, with very little risk to human life. These systems will no doubt be sold to western countries. Extended loiter delivery platforms capable of remaining aloft for weeks not days will provide target surveillance, acquisition and attack capabilities, which will render many manned platforms too dangerous to operate in a conventional war scenario, thus removing the old Soviet argument quantity over quality. The importance of ISTAR linked to net-worked intelligent weapons will keep growing; A-STAN is already proving this with Reaper strikes flown by crews sitting in Creech Air Force Base in Nevada.

Russia can continue to develop armour, move on to fit 140mm main armaments, but unless they are impervious to the next generation of precision attack weapons carried by unmanned systems they will simply be cannon fodder particularly when deployed across the open plains of Europe.

 

[Sampanviking]

Sadly this is out of the focus of the scenario for this thread, which on the other hand leaves out involvement of the USA too.

All of which simply reinforces in my mind just what a daft scenario this is! Well never mind.

Something that all posters on this thread may wish to add to their contemplations however is this.

You have all assumed that the march of the EU eastward is a given. I would call that assumption to account. Enlargement of the EU all took place against a backdrop of a prolonged boom in Europe at a time of near/actual collapse of the former Soviet States. As we move forward over the next 14 years towards the scenario date, we can assume a very different economic backdrop, in which many of the EU economies fluctuate from periods of Recession to Economic Stagnation as the full costs incurred in fighting the credit crunch come home to roost. In the former Soviet Space however we are now seeing the beginnings of an Asian Single Economic Zone develop, principally in Central Asia and (more importantly for this scenario) The Russian Far East (RFE). This has two major impacts on the scenario.

1) A total reinvigoration of the Russian Economy caused by massive investment and probably massive immigration into the RFE.

2) The EU; which remains principally a rich man's club, losing its appeal to many of the accession nations which finds instead the neighbouring Asian Single Economic Zone better suited to the needs and immediate aspirations of moderately rich but still very much developing nations.

Not so simple in reality is it!

 

[Grand Danois]

Why else do you think China has just granted a $1.5Billion loan and unlimited guarantees to Moldova? China clearly sees the stability of the post Soviet space as critical to its own and Russia seems happy to allow China to establish its own interests within it. Indeed these seem to be happening at an Increasingly Strategic level on the basis of agreement between the two giants.

But wherever the people actually has a say in things...

Parliamentary seats after Moldova's elections

By The Associated Press (AP) – Jul 30, 2009

The breakdown of seats in Moldova's 101-member parliament, based on more than 98 percent of votes counted. Pro-Europe parties won a combined 53 seats, defeating the ruling Communists with 48:

___

COMMUNIST PARTY: 48 seats. Party came to power in 2001; leader Vladimir Voronin will step down after serving two four-year terms as president.

___

LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY: 17 seats. Pro-European, pro-NATO; considered a party of technocrats.

___

LIBERAL PARTY: 15 seats. Pro-European, pro-NATO; wants closer relationship with Romania. Deputy chairman Dorin Chirtoaca is mayor of Chisinau, the capital.

___

DEMOCRATIC PARTY: 13 seats. Supports Moldova's eventual membership in the European Union — a long-term goal. Party now led by Marian Lupu, who quit senior position in Communist Party in June.

OUR MOLDOVA ALLIANCE: 8 seats. Pro-European, pro-NATO; favors closer ties with Romania.

The Associated Press: Parliamentary seats after Moldova's elections

 

[Masky]

I’m sorry to say this, but the details provided for this imagination exercise are pretty vague. I mean UK is in EU, Middle East is a wasteland? and the war starts because Ukraine is attacked by Russia concerning a civil war with Crimea peninsula. So Ukraine is in EU but is not in Nato?

Cool, now you set the war in 2023, now this is wrong, because we need to extrapolate the military effectiveness, organization, technology etc … not to mention that different individuals will have different opinions.

Because of this I would try to locate this conflict in present times, assuming Russia starts an dissimulated army build-up for one year, so the war will be a little surprise for EU.

As I see it , EU :
27 countries, decentralized army, units in western countries have high end technology gear

Russia:
Centralized army, access to high end technology weapons but implemented in only a fraction of his units, the majority of the army uses basic equipment.


Again, because of the lack of wars between developed countries in the recent years, we base most of our assumptions on the WW2, in which Germany was fighting a 3 fronts war and when the tank was the star with his thirsty engine, their resources low and their factories bombed to hell and back.

In my opinion this is wrong.

In present times, the majority of the EU countries, didn’t have a real war in over 60 years, I think it’s safe to say that the stockpiles of fuel and additional military equipment are full.
So the gas and oil won’t have really an impact on their effectiveness, not at least in the first 2 years of the war.(during war time, I think we all agree the majority of civilian resources will be directed to the war effort)

Second we need to remember that NATO is a military treaty and EU doesn’t have a centralized army, all it has is communication links between the different countries.


So to keep it short, the wars starts, in a few month Russia will occupy Ukraine,Poland,Romania and Finland( if it learn anything from previous wars) by brute force.
Right about this time it will stall, as their supply lines will be stretched and considering that this is not a “liberation” war, we can assume that the native population won’t receive them with open arms, several prolonged urban fights will take place with many sabotages behind the front line.

EU uses this time, to create an centralized army with a distinct chain of command and begin to use its implemented high technology.

After a few weeks, EU should be able to gain air supremacy, using mobile SAMS,fighters and the new generation of sensors networks and communications centers.

After the unification of the army is complete and the air supremacy is achieved, Russia won’t have any chance, in my opinion.

This is a very simplistic analyze, which in most parts ignores naval battles, the possibility of prolonged war and secret weapons.

Note: Please consider the current state of the Russian army right now, the corruption is rampant, the supplies are minimal and adequate training is missing for not specialized units.

 

[Sampanviking]

But wherever the people actually has a say in things...

Parliamentary seats after Moldova's elections

By The Associated Press (AP) – Jul 30, 2009

The breakdown of seats in Moldova's 101-member parliament, based on more than 98 percent of votes counted. Pro-Europe parties won a combined 53 seats, defeating the ruling Communists with 48:

___

COMMUNIST PARTY: 48 seats. Party came to power in 2001; leader Vladimir Voronin will step down after serving two four-year terms as president.

___

LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY: 17 seats. Pro-European, pro-NATO; considered a party of technocrats.

___

LIBERAL PARTY: 15 seats. Pro-European, pro-NATO; wants closer relationship with Romania. Deputy chairman Dorin Chirtoaca is mayor of Chisinau, the capital.

___

DEMOCRATIC PARTY: 13 seats. Supports Moldova's eventual membership in the European Union — a long-term goal. Party now led by Marian Lupu, who quit senior position in Communist Party in June.

OUR MOLDOVA ALLIANCE: 8 seats. Pro-European, pro-NATO; favors closer ties with Romania.

The Associated Press: Parliamentary seats after Moldova's elections

The communists are still the largest single party and need only one coalition partner to retake power, while the pro EU section need to all come together, which is pretty awkward when their top three is spread so evenly as to make the identity of a natural coalition leader almost impossible. Add to that the dependence on Russian energy and the promise of Chinese money, I doubt if you will see any major changes anytime soon. I also note that there has been no new news of Government formation for nearly a fortnight, which rather reinforces my view.

 

[SkolZkiy]

Sorry guys but you are wrong. EU without US cannot withstand Russia
and if US would stay away from this EU would be destroyed.
If US enters war - then Mass Nuclear Usage and then ... nobody really knows =)
By the way - all this NAVSTAR guided missiles, UCAV - will they work in real, not with something like Iraq or Afghanistan.
You believe that these operations showed everybody that victory of West is inevitable and you believe in that yourself, but is it true? and what if you are wrong??

Thinking the way that EU or US can defeat Russia easily could bring to WW3. You of course have forgotten from what WW1 and WW2 started.

 

[Grand Danois]

Macro economic/demographic data points. ("EU" includes Norway and UK)

GDP, Nominal 2008
EU - 19,000 billion USD (31% of world economy)
Russia - 1,700 billion USD (2.8% of world economy)

PPP GDP yields similar numbers.

Secondary sector output (industrial output), EU is 2,000 billion USD, i.e larger than the entire Russian economy.

Population, 2008
EU - 500 million
Russia - 142 million

Full time military personnel
EU - 1.9 million ('active personnel" numbers are much larger)
Russia - 1.0 million "active personnel"

Defence budgets
EU - 389 billion USD (2.0% of GDP)
Russia - 49.1 billion USD (2.9% of GDP)

 

[Grand Danois]

The communists are still the largest single party and need only one coalition partner to retake power, while the pro EU section need to all come together, which is pretty awkward when their top three is spread so evenly as to make the identity of a natural coalition leader almost impossible. Add to that the dependence on Russian energy and the promise of Chinese money, I doubt if you will see any major changes anytime soon. I also note that there has been no new news of Government formation for nearly a fortnight, which rather reinforces my view.

I'm not alledging they'll make a shining beacon of a functioning democracy or governance..

A 1.5 billion loan may make the Communist Party happy ("bribe"), but the population wants to go with Europe. They want to be rich themselves - not just watch syndicalists graft the Chinese loan money, leaving them with the liablities.

Gas is not the factor it is made out to be.