Krassimir Ivandjiiski
Home Archive Search Sponsors About us Contact

Select Language

Krassimir Ivandjiiski

Operation “Barbarossa 2″

September  2016, Krassimir Ivandjiiski

 In the mid-twentieth century, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill said something clever, unlike his other statements while intoxicated. Churchill said: “Generals always prepare for the last war.”

The Russians added something even more clever: “War-cockery”

Both sentences can completely relate to the last summit of NATO in Warsaw, as well as their past joint maneuvers “Anaconda” and others.

As regards the meeting in Warsaw, it can be summarized as: the new cold war is no longer cold as NATO is on Russia’s borders, paving his way to “Operation Barbarossa 2″. As for the maneuvers “Anaconda”, they confirm that Europe has a tradition every 100 years where politicians and generals gather in the Reich and decide to enter the bear’s lair.

But lets go successively.

At Warsaw it was officially decided to deploy NATO forces on countries bordering with Russia starting 2017. Four battalions will be deployed on a permanent, but rotational basis. This was done in order to not undermine the foundations of Russia – NATO, according to which the alliance is not supposed to place “substantial forces on a permanent basis” in Eastern Europe

The United States, England, Germany and Canada agreed to send troops in four eastern countries of the pact. In simple terms NATO divided the Baltics and Poland into occupation zones. Canada received Latvia, Germany – Lithuania, England – Estonia, USA – Poland. At the same time NATO troops are not in the jurisdiction of the countries they occupy, thereby releasing them of any responsibility for complicity in war crimes.

The regime in Kiev with Poroshenko at the helm, could not deliver the occupation of the country for the Americans or the Europeans.

Canada, represented by its Prime Minister Trudeau, decided to show enthusiasm in the direction of the forces toward the central direction – Velikiye Luki and Rzhev, against “Russian aggression”.

England, with an Estonian baggage, will defend itself from the aggressive Russians in the direction St. Petersburg and Novgorod.

Germany will guard NATO in the direction Minsk – Smolensk – Vyazma, for the simple reason that they were already there at the time of Hitler and know everything from experience. The French can join them as they also have historical memory from the time of Napoleon.

The US will deploy in Poland and closer to the Black Sea. They will be there without sea and will be defending the Poles, Ukrainians, Turks, Bulgarians and whatever remains, from the Russians in the Crimea, Krasnodar, Voronezh, the Caucasus and further away in Ufa, Surgut, etc.

In a word – nothing new. NATO intends to defend itself in the same way that the Third Reich previously “defended” itself with the notorious “Operation Barbarossa”.

We recall that before World War II, Berlin explained the buildup of Western military forces at the Soviet borders, as a means of collective defense of Europe, although it was simply preparing for “Operation Barbarossa”. Today NATO is building its forces in the same places and in the exactly same way as Nazi Germany did in the 1930’s of the twentieth century.

“Barbarossa” began on June 22, 1941 with the invasion of the Reich in the western regions of the USSR, and ended on May 9, 1945 in Berlin.

May and June, before the meeting in Warsaw, there were NATO military maneuvers along Russia’s borders – “Anaconda 2016″, “Sabre hit 2016″, “Quick response”, “Sea Breeze” in the western, northwestern and southern direction with common purpose – creating on the eastern border a NATO group, able to resist the “Russian aggression”.

In fact, this series of maneuvers repeated the NATO concept of operations against the Soviet Union during the Cold War and up to the mid 70s.

Then, as now, Washington came to the conclusion that all European NATO armies together, would not be able to hold the tank attack of the USSR to the Atlantic. Because of this, the main military task of the Europeans was to last several weeks to a month, while to the theater of hostilities arrived the victorious American troops. That’s why the US and NATO had to provide naval and air traffic control over the North Atlantic, which had to move in convoys with hundreds of thousands of American soldiers and thousands of pieces of military equipment.

But because of the development of rocket weapons and the surge of Soviet capabilities, the plan quickly became obsolete, ie in the event of full-scale war, no Americans will manage to swim to Europe

Since that time, NATO firmly steped on the doctrine of nuclear deterrence of the USSR.

In 70 years, Russian options for blocking the transfer of US troops to Europe has only grown. The territories of Russia and the US are untouchable for the land armies of the opposing side, and a mutual nuclear deterrence is the only serious argument.

Because of this, the US developed its missile defense in Europe. In order to gain a strategic advantage by neutralizing the nuclear potential of Russia, they bet not on the unreal victory of NATO land forces, but on a disarming nuclear first strike and guaranteed protection from Russia’s retaliation. But this has also become obsolete since Russia introduced its hypersonic weapons, and turned the whole doctrine of a first strike in its favor.

Against this background, the NATO exercises, led by “Anaconda” are not only ridiculous but also pathetic. In similar drills, the Russian army transferred up to 100 000 soldiers and tens of thousands of military equipment, and in 7-10 days from the beginning of the alarm, they managed to reach the designated areas to deploy and create strike groups, fulfill the task and return to their permanent dislocation.

In turn NATO exercises were preparing in April. During this time the pact was able to bring in only 32,000 soldiers to the area of interest, a hundred aircraft, 12 ships and 3,000 military equipment. Of the troops, only 10,000 soldiers were transferred from the US.

Comparing the operational capabilities of the Russian army with NATO’s, we reach the conclusion that Russia’s strike formations will reach Paris, and turn back home before the US ones even start loading into the aircraft.

It is difficult to believe that the US does not know what they are doing. Just the opposite. They know and are making deliberate provocations on Russia’s borders, expecting an inadequate reaction from Moscow. By placing the Baltic and Black Sea regions in a possible pre-emptive strike zone, the USA is trying to involve Russia in conflict with NATO and the EU, and to traditionally remain outside the conflict.

At the same time the US was preparing a blow to Turkey, Armenia and Kazakhstan, while distracting Russia in a western direction to weaken them concerning the southern direction. In Europe was created a mutually blocking position. Violation of the delicate balance can lead to unpredictable consequences and trouble for both parties. At the same time Russia has its strategic projects in Asia. In the European direction it acts with restraint against the mired in a severe crisis continent.

Now comes a new vulnerability, the unstable post-Soviet Central Asia and Afghanistan. There is a Possibility for the destabilization of Kazakhstan or Uzbekistan, which will lead to a military political destabilization of the whole region with problems for Russia, China, Iran, Pakistan and the entire SCO

You have read 1 of your 15 free articles this month.
Subscribe to gain access to the Strogo Sekretno issues.

Subscribers please enter your username and password above.


"Строго секретно" излиза от 1991г. Вестникът е уникално издание за кулисите на висшата политика, геополитиката, шпионажа, финансовите престъпления, конспирацията, невероятното, трагичното и смешното.
Strogo Sekretno is the home for the highest politics, geopolitics, geo-economics, world crisis, weapons, intelligence, financial crimes...
(c) 1991-2024,, All Rights Reserved
Contents may not be reproduces in whole or in part without permission of publisher. Information presented in Strogo Sekretno may or may not represent the views of Strogo Sekretno, its staff, or its advertisers.
Strogo Sekretno assume no responsibility for the reliability of advertisements presented in the newspaper. Strogo Sekretno respects the privacy of our subscribers. Our subscriber mailing list is not available for sale or sharing.
Reprint permission: