Eagle Guardian: The War of 2010

[lordroel]

Looking good forcon and James G, keep them coming.

[James G]

Jan 24, 2019 4:12:27 GMT lordroel said:

Looking good forcon and James G , keep them coming.

More to come.
Elections and spies.

[James G]

Twenty–Two

The international situation with regards to previous events inside Russia and the current military stand-off with that nation’s armed forces didn’t have a significant impact upon the 2010 UK general election. There were some effects, but none which commentators, analysts and (often self-appointed) experts deemed to have played a role in the party campaigns nor the outcome of the nationwide vote. The election for a new Parliament and, as it turned out, a new government was decided on other factors. The economy post-crash was the deciding issue. There were other matters such as a stale government devoid of new ideas leading to a public desire for change, the previous year’s expenses scandal among MPs, an embarrassing campaign moment for the prime minister known as ‘Bigot-gate’, live televised debates between the party leaders and newspaper endorsements which had an impact. Yet it was the economy which set the tone of the election result and decided it. Overseas events such as Russia just couldn’t change how things were going to turn out.

The election on May 6th was ‘won’ by Cameron’s opposition Conservatives where the most seats were secured. However, no majority was gained with this victory making it only a partial win. Brown’s Labour came second in terms of seats with the Liberal Democrats under Clegg’s leadership taking third place. Parliamentary arithmetic kicked in when it came to who would lead the country afterwards with the Conservatives needing to work with the Lib-Dems if there was any way in which a government could be formed by them while Labour would need the Lib-Dems, plus a wide-ranging collection of smaller parties joining too, all for there to be any chance that they could stay in power. This was something anticipated pre-election in the media and within the civil service where the belief was that with the three parties doing how well they were in the opinion polls, there was a likelihood that they could have to work together to form a government. Preparations had been made and statements given too on what form that might take though first it was up to the voters. For almost six days, the country waited upon that formation of the new government. In the meantime, the old government stayed in-place. The Lib-Dems had talks with the Conservatives and Labour. However, it was more and more unlikely every day that the latter would pan out due to strong differences on a personal level between Brown and Clegg in addition to the issue of having to form a rainbow coalition of all of the smaller parties too should a Labour / Lib-Dem alliance be put into place to lead the nation. Cameron and Clegg had better relations than Brown and Clegg ever could. On May 11th, with the Conservatives and the Lib-Dems having their talks in the advanced stages whereas any deal between Labour and the Lib-Dems (and thus also the Scottish Nationalists with either the Plaid Cymru or the Social Democratic & Labour Party from Ulster too to make the maths work but giving a sure-to-be unstable government) dead in the water, Brown went to Buckingham Palace and resigned as prime minister. He advised his Queen to call upon Cameron to form the next government. There was no dead struck yet but Brown gave his parting shot regardless. This was the final impetus in forming a new government. It would be one where there was a coalition between the Conservatives and the Lib-Dems – not a confidence and supply deal – forming a stable government where there would be ministers from both parties in that government. Moreover, elements of each party’s manifesto would be followed. Clegg got to be deputy prime minister and this wasn’t a sinecure role either. As to Cameron, he got the keys to Downing Street.

In government, Cameron’s number one priority was the economy. Manifesto and campaign promises with regards to austerity would be followed. The deal with Clegg tied the Lib-Dems too this… which went against many of their manifesto and campaign promises. However, the coalition allowed for some tinkering in places and so too did outside events. One of those was the ring-fencing of certain parts of budgets for public departments within the overall national finances. The Conservatives stuck to their pre-election pledges on not cutting the money for health and international development but also included the defence budget in that, for the period of the next two years at least. Clegg signed off on this over the wishes of some in his party who considered this an unwise move. If there was money to spend, they had protested, it should have gone to education or pensioners, not to keep military spending what it was. Clegg won out there with his colleagues though. The protecting of the defence budget wasn’t something which Cameron had enacted as a personal wish but rather of his party. Both the new foreign and defence secretaries in the coalition government, Hague and Fox, wanted this in light of the tensions with Russia. Other ministers had been brought onside as well as key party figures. Osborne, Cameron’s chancellor, had been won over last after the prime minister got him to balance this out. Cameron made the announcement to the House of Commons once it was sworn in and seated: browbeaten into this, he took the lead rather than follow. This came on the back of his first week in the job where he had spent much time travelling through Europe and meeting with allies where they were made aware of Britain’s continued commitment to the NATO position regarding the defence of the Baltic States and Poland against Russian aggressive intent. Hague went off to Washington during that time with Fox doing the same as well before both of them also visited European capitals after Cameron had first done so. Fox also made photo-call appearances in all three Baltic States. Some newspaper columns back in London ran speculation on his ambitions for Cameron’s job with all of this though, while he was an ambitious man who had run for that role beforehand and naturally wanted the leadership in the future, the comments made back home in print didn’t have anything real to them. What his visits, plus those of Cameron and Hague, were about were matters of the NATO alliance.


It was post-election where Russia became a factor in British domestic politics instead of influencing that vote. The coalition government was only following the lead set by the preceding government yet there was much done in their own particular way now. Condemnation came from the Kremlin of this but more of an issue were domestic perceptions of the military stand-off. This became an issue in the early stages of the Labour leadership campaigns to replace Brown with a left-wing momentum to see a party leader elected later in the year to make it party policy to push for a lowering of tensions which were said to be on their way to bringing about war. There remained newspaper talk and off-the-record briefings by MPs about Fox’s attitude to confronting Russia where the defence secretary was called a warmonger. The pressure group known as the Stop The War Coalition – formed in Britain only days after 9/11 and which had opposed the Afghanistan War, the Iraq War and tensions with Iran in recent years where a war there had looked possible at one point – took up the mantle of opposing the military commitment to the Baltic States made by Britain plus also other activities of the RAN and the Royal Navy in light of international tensions. There were parliamentarians who spoke in support of the UK and NATO position on opposing the threat from Putin’s regime even more than was already being done with an even bigger military commitment made than currently was being. Increasingly, both in Parliament and in the media, the stand-off with Russia became more and more of an issue ahead of other political matters which should have had more prominence.

It grabbed headlines and led to political spats, outrageous speculation and sometimes fear-mongering. There were defence analysts who criticised the military position of the British Armed Forces in light of the threat posed to not just deployments aboard to defend allies but the country itself and their warnings would later turn out to be rather accurate in many respects. Cameron and Clegg both made public statements to the media and in the Commons stating that no one wanted war with Russia. It wasn’t desired in any way. Britain was defending its allies as per its NATO commitments and the armed forces were standing ready in the face of Russian aggressive action off Britain’s shores too. They informed the country that there was certainly no mood in the government for conflict!

[lordroel]

Jan 24, 2019 19:32:22 GMT James G said:

Twenty–Two

The international situation with regards to previous events inside Russia and the current military stand-off with that nation’s armed forces didn’t have a significant impact upon the 2010 UK general election. There were some effects, but none which commentators, analysts and (often self-appointed) experts deemed to have played a role in the party campaigns nor the outcome of the nationwide vote. The election for a new Parliament and, as it turned out, a new government was decided on other factors. The economy post-crash was the deciding issue. There were other matters such as a stale government devoid of new ideas leading to a public desire for change, the previous year’s expenses scandal among MPs, an embarrassing campaign moment for the prime minister known as ‘Bigot-gate’, live televised debates between the party leaders and newspaper endorsements which had an impact. Yet it was the economy which set the tone of the election result and decided it. Overseas events such as Russia just couldn’t change how things were going to turn out.

The election on May 6th was ‘won’ by Cameron’s opposition Conservatives where the most seats were secured. However, no majority was gained with this victory making it only a partial win. Brown’s Labour came second in terms of seats with the Liberal Democrats under Clegg’s leadership taking third place. Parliamentary arithmetic kicked in when it came to who would lead the country afterwards with the Conservatives needing to work with the Lib-Dems if there was any way in which a government could be formed by them while Labour would need the Lib-Dems, plus a wide-ranging collection of smaller parties joining too, all for there to be any chance that they could stay in power. This was something anticipated pre-election in the media and within the civil service where the belief was that with the three parties doing how well they were in the opinion polls, there was a likelihood that they could have to work together to form a government. Preparations had been made and statements given too on what form that might take though first it was up to the voters. For almost six days, the country waited upon that formation of the new government. In the meantime, the old government stayed in-place. The Lib-Dems had talks with the Conservatives and Labour. However, it was more and more unlikely every day that the latter would pan out due to strong differences on a personal level between Brown and Clegg in addition to the issue of having to form a rainbow coalition of all of the smaller parties too should a Labour / Lib-Dem alliance be put into place to lead the nation. Cameron and Clegg had better relations than Brown and Clegg ever could. On May 11th, with the Conservatives and the Lib-Dems having their talks in the advanced stages whereas any deal between Labour and the Lib-Dems (and thus also the Scottish Nationalists with either the Plaid Cymru or the Social Democratic & Labour Party from Ulster too to make the maths work but giving a sure-to-be unstable government) dead in the water, Brown went to Buckingham Palace and resigned as prime minister. He advised his Queen to call upon Cameron to form the next government. There was no dead struck yet but Brown gave his parting shot regardless. This was the final impetus in forming a new government. It would be one where there was a coalition between the Conservatives and the Lib-Dems – not a confidence and supply deal – forming a stable government where there would be ministers from both parties in that government. Moreover, elements of each party’s manifesto would be followed. Clegg got to be deputy prime minister and this wasn’t a sinecure role either. As to Cameron, he got the keys to Downing Street.

In government, Cameron’s number one priority was the economy. Manifesto and campaign promises with regards to austerity would be followed. The deal with Clegg tied the Lib-Dems too this… which went against many of their manifesto and campaign promises. However, the coalition allowed for some tinkering in places and so too did outside events. One of those was the ring-fencing of certain parts of budgets for public departments within the overall national finances. The Conservatives stuck to their pre-election pledges on not cutting the money for health and international development but also included the defence budget in that, for the period of the next two years at least. Clegg signed off on this over the wishes of some in his party who considered this an unwise move. If there was money to spend, they had protested, it should have gone to education or pensioners, not to keep military spending what it was. Clegg won out there with his colleagues though. The protecting of the defence budget wasn’t something which Cameron had enacted as a personal wish but rather of his party. Both the new foreign and defence secretaries in the coalition government, Hague and Fox, wanted this in light of the tensions with Russia. Other ministers had been brought onside as well as key party figures. Osborne, Cameron’s chancellor, had been won over last after the prime minister got him to balance this out. Cameron made the announcement to the House of Commons once it was sworn in and seated: browbeaten into this, he took the lead rather than follow. This came on the back of his first week in the job where he had spent much time travelling through Europe and meeting with allies where they were made aware of Britain’s continued commitment to the NATO position regarding the defence of the Baltic States and Poland against Russian aggressive intent. Hague went off to Washington during that time with Fox doing the same as well before both of them also visited European capitals after Cameron had first done so. Fox also made photo-call appearances in all three Baltic States. Some newspaper columns back in London ran speculation on his ambitions for Cameron’s job with all of this though, while he was an ambitious man who had run for that role beforehand and naturally wanted the leadership in the future, the comments made back home in print didn’t have anything real to them. What his visits, plus those of Cameron and Hague, were about were matters of the NATO alliance.


It was post-election where Russia became a factor in British domestic politics instead of influencing that vote. The coalition government was only following the lead set by the preceding government yet there was much done in their own particular way now. Condemnation came from the Kremlin of this but more of an issue were domestic perceptions of the military stand-off. This became an issue in the early stages of the Labour leadership campaigns to replace Brown with a left-wing momentum to see a party leader elected later in the year to make it party policy to push for a lowering of tensions which were said to be on their way to bringing about war. There remained newspaper talk and off-the-record briefings by MPs about Fox’s attitude to confronting Russia where the defence secretary was called a warmonger. The pressure group known as the Stop The War Coalition – formed in Britain only days after 9/11 and which had opposed the Afghanistan War, the Iraq War and tensions with Iran in recent years where a war there had looked possible at one point – took up the mantle of opposing the military commitment to the Baltic States made by Britain plus also other activities of the RAN and the Royal Navy in light of international tensions. There were parliamentarians who spoke in support of the UK and NATO position on opposing the threat from Putin’s regime even more than was already being done with an even bigger military commitment made than currently was being. Increasingly, both in Parliament and in the media, the stand-off with Russia became more and more of an issue ahead of other political matters which should have had more prominence.

It grabbed headlines and led to political spats, outrageous speculation and sometimes fear-mongering. There were defence analysts who criticised the military position of the British Armed Forces in light of the threat posed to not just deployments aboard to defend allies but the country itself and their warnings would later turn out to be rather accurate in many respects. Cameron and Clegg both made public statements to the media and in the Commons stating that no one wanted war with Russia. It wasn’t desired in any way. Britain was defending its allies as per its NATO commitments and the armed forces were standing ready in the face of Russian aggressive action off Britain’s shores too. They informed the country that there was certainly no mood in the government for conflict!

Good update James G

[forcon]

I'll post the next update witin an hour or two, plus the soundtrack.

[forcon]

Twenty-Three

Despite the fact that Turkey had been a member of NATO since the alliance had first formed, relations between Turkey and the United States were growing evermore strained throughout the early 21st Century. In 2003, Turkey had failed to allow U.S. forces to strike into northern Iraq from its territory, thus complicating the invasion and forcing several risky Special Forces operations to take place in place of a mechanised invasion. In part, the cooling of relations was due to Turkey’s continuously repressive policies towards the Kurdish populations in the south, and Turkey’s military intervention in northern Iraq in 2008. Though Turkey was, at least on paper, a democracy, it had a poor human rights record when compared with Western nations. President Obama had visited Turkey in the spring of 2009 in an effort to repair relations between the two countries. However, the newly-inaugurated President’s visit had achieved very little in the grand scheme of things, and Turkey continued to drift away from NATO despite its longstanding membership. The U.S. believed – not incorrectly – that Turkey was sliding further towards Islamism, with the nations’ foreign policy being systematically realigned on that basis. The U.S. was concerned by this slide in its traditionally secular ally. In Turkey, the Armed Forces served as not only the guardians of the nation but also of the traditional secular political order, which had led to several coups throughout the Cold War.

Organised by the Free Gaza Movement & the Turkish Foundation for Human Rights, Freedom & Humanitarian Relief (IHH), a large flotilla of transport ships left Turkey in May of 2010. The ships in the flotilla carried over ten thousand tonnes of humanitarian aid, including food, generators, wheelchairs and children’s toys, as well as construction materials. Before the 2008-09 Gaza War, five similar shipments had been allowed through the Israeli blockade imposed on Gaza, but following that conflagration, the Israeli’s had ceased to allow shipments of aid through their blockade. The route of the Gaza-bound flotilla took them south of Cyprus and towards the Israeli coast, where they were tracked and monitored by Israeli intelligence.

Israel offered for the six ships that formed the flotilla to dock at the Port of Ashdod so that the cargo could be inspected, but this offer was turned down by the Turkish crews manning the ships, for fear that they could be turned back their or that their cargo could be confiscated by those searching the ships. Israeli intelligence felt that letting the ships dock in Gaza was too much of a risk, due to their uncertainty over the contents of the cargo, and thus operation to forcibly board the vessels and search their contents was authorised.

This would turn out to be a major mistake on the part of the Israeli’s, drawing condemnation from around the world and further splitting the fragile alliance between the United States and Turkey.
Early in the morning on May 31st, Israeli commandos from Shayetet-13 took part in Operation SEA BREEZE. Israeli troops boarded all six of the cargo ships from a mixture of armed speedboats and naval helicopters, using the fast-roping technique to land on the ships from above. The boarding teams carried riot-guns with baton rounds to subdue unruly passengers, but they were also armed with concealed firearms. They reportedly faced resistance from about forty of the over five hundred people aboard the ships. Scuffles broke out between the Turkish passengers, including many charity workers, and the Israeli naval commandos. Passengers were alleged by the Israeli’s to have fought back with crowbars and knives. One Israeli team commander was thrown overboard, while another soldier was stabbed by a passenger. The commandos searched room-by-room, clearing out the ships with stun grenades and assault weapons.

According to the Israeli’s, their troops hadn’t opened fire until one activist had attempted to seize a rifle from a soldier, but there was little conclusive evidence as to what really happened offered by either side. In the initial melee of violence, the troops were ordered to use live ammunition to clear out the ships, and to crush an opposition violently and swiftly.
The ultimate result of this were the deaths of eight Turkish civilians and one Turkish-American.

They had died after being shot down with automatic weapons wielded by heavily-armed Shayetet-13 commandos. A further five hundred people were detained in Israel under military arrest after being subdued aboard the ships. The raid drew widespread condemnation from around the world, including a series of especially vitriolic – but private – outbursts. Turkish President Abdullah Gul would later take part in a press conference where he would tell the world that he considered this to be the first armed attack on Turkey since the First World War. Moscow opposed the Israeli actions as a method of drawing Turkey further away from its allies, knowing that the United States would be hesitant to openly support Turkey or condemn Israel. Within Turkey itself there was outrage even after those by the Israeli Military had been released from custody and sent home. The United States never publicly condoned the actions of the Israeli Military, but nor did it condemn them.

No U.S. President could publicly denounce Israel without facing major opposition in Congress and at the polls, and so the Obama Administration chose to respond with a wary silence.

The United States was struggling to maintain impartiality in the bitter split between two of its key allies. Due to the pro-Israel nature of the United States, however, the result of the disagreement was a decision that had already been made, and one in which President Obama had very little choice. The U.S. just couldn’t openly condemn Israel. Despite this, conversations between Obama Administration officials and their Israeli counterparts did inform the Israeli’s of the general displeasure of the U.S. with the course of action that Israel had chosen to undertake. None of this was public though; America was desperately trying to prevent Israel from carrying out any similar actions in the future while also attempting to maintain good relations with Turkey. Similar behind-the-scenes conversations took place between American and Turkish officials, with the goal being to persuade the Turks that they were an ally of value to the United States while similarly making the U.S. look pro-Israeli or at least impartial in the public eye.

Turkey, unfortunately, saw it all very differently. The Turkish government interpreted the lack of condemnation as a public endorsement of Israeli’s actions by the United States government, an act which only served to further infuriate them. Although the Americans tried to explain that this was not the case, and that America really did oppose what Israel had done, this answer was just unacceptable to grieving Turkish mothers and widows. Demonstrations took place outside NATO’s Incirlik Airbase, located in Turkey. It was a crucial facility both for the United States and for NATO as a whole, and although the Turkish government hadn’t even considered shutting the base down, it was a subject of contention across the country. Turkish civilians and officials alike were asking why they should allow the U.S. to operate military forces from their soil when Americans wouldn’t lift a finger to oppose Israel when that country chose to slaughter unarmed men and women aboard humanitarian ships. Moscow watched all this develop with a keen smile. The SVR was monitoring the situation from stations across Turkey, with this all headquartered at the Russian embassy in Ankara. Turkey had been one of the few NATO countries not to withdraw its ambassador from Moscow after Putin had violently seized power. Relations between the two countries were not exactly good, but they were being driven in a more positive direction by the ongoing dispute between Ankara and D.C.

Russia had a long history of attempting to destabilise relations between countries which opposed its own geopolitical goals, but this time there was no need for such active measures; the U.S. and Turkey were tearing themselves apart without the need for Russian intervention. Nevertheless, the SVR would continue to use its own methods to try to worsen the relationship between the two NATO countries. The abrupt circulation of false news about both Turkish and American activities against one another occurred, with articles of such a manner being published online and spread across social media sites such as Twitter; Russian contacts within Turkish protest organisations – ranging from Islamist to liberal to Kurdish – orchestrated demonstrations with some success, attempting to keep the crowds in place outside Incirlik Airbase. It was all fairly mundane really; there were no assassinations like the ones that had rocked the British capital, nor were there false flag terrorist attacks. What was being done was primarily taking place through social media and relatively benign protest movements.

And it was working.

[forcon]

Soundtrack is here. It's just a list of what I thought was lyrically or sentimentally appropriate. www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2v-FVSbUFjUplFOt7Kb_aF4spJZC_A00

Ask - The Smiths
Troubled Times - Green Day
21 Guns - Green Day
Here Comes the War - New Model Army
Panic - The Smiths
London Calling - The Clash
99 Red Balloons - Nena
Everybody Wants to Rule the World - Tears for Fears
Zombie - The Cranberries
Bleed American - Jimmy Eat World
The Headmaster Ritual - The Smiths
Seconds - U2
Everyday is Like Sunday - Morrissey

[lordroel]

Jan 25, 2019 18:15:11 GMT forcon said:

Soundtrack is here. It's just a list of what I thought was lyrically or sentimentally appropriate. www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2v-FVSbUFjUplFOt7Kb_aF4spJZC_A00

Ask - The Smiths
Troubled Times - Green Day
21 Guns - Green Day
Here Comes the War - New Model Army
Panic - The Smiths
London Calling - The Clash
99 Red Balloons - Nena
Everybody Wants to Rule the World - Tears for Fears
Zombie - The Cranberries
Bleed American - Jimmy Eat World
The Headmaster Ritual - The Smiths
Seconds - U2
Everyday is Like Sunday - Morrissey

The list looks nice.

[James G]

Twenty–Four

Across the whole of the Baltic region, there remained an extremely tense situation as June 2010 arrived. Since the New Year when NATO had begun its military deployment to protect the Baltic States and Poland, while facing down Russian aggression, countries on the shores of the waters of the Baltic prepared for war. There were domestic and foreign military forces in the region who operated on the ground, in the air and at sea. Some stayed fixed in-place; others took part in expansive exercises. Governments were working towards making sure that war didn’t break out here yet there were more and more people becoming convinced that soon it surely would.

Through the Baltic Sea itself, this important seaway for civilian ships was increasingly where military deployments were being made. There were warships, submarines and combat aircraft all involved. These had a detrimental affect upon commercial shipping as well as civilian aircraft too with those armed forces’ deployments facing mock attacks made against the participants and everyone not involved in the way of them. Russia’s Baltic Fleet was out with its vessels and aircraft and they had been joined by NATO forces in these crowded waters. Sweden felt compelled to act as well with its own deployment due to the threat of territorial infringement along the shoreline of mainland Sweden plus its island holdings within the Baltic. The Swedes were present when Russian and NATO forces conducted their war-games to intimidate the other. NATO wasn’t just a victim here but an active participant. What Russia did, it did back to Russia. Many near-misses with ships and aircraft coming close to collision occurred as well as close-calls when it came to one side almost opening fire upon the other but stopping at the very last moment when the other backed off from seemingly imminent attacks. There were Russian naval movements between the eastern end of the Gulf of Finland where St. Petersburg was and down to Kaliningrad during the war games. Few warships made that journey and instead it was chartered civilian shipping. NATO watched these movements and studied from afar what the contents were of the freight moved: it was all military equipment & stores. They themselves were active off the Polish coastline but also in the water offshore from Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. The coastlines of all four NATO members, especially those of Estonia and Latvia, were rather exposed and would certainly be vulnerable to Russian attack in wartime. NATO forces operated here now in peacetime as they practiced defending them should they be subject to an attack. These were overt preparations for war though, as was the official NATO position and that of its member states individually too, all of this was defensive in context. Russia took a different view on these military exercises and considered that the only reason while NATO would be doing what they were was because they were planning for war and knew that a Russian counterattack would be made into these areas.

In the skies, military activity took place above the countries stretching inland to the east and south of the Baltic. NATO had sent one of their AWACS squadron from its base in Germany to Poland. Six of the E-3 Sentry aerial surveillance aircraft were now flying from Powidz Air Base, a facility in west-central Poland. On most occasions, there was at least one of these aloft. This gave coverage near twenty-four hours a day. With its radar and onboard operators, an aloft AWACS controlled NATO air space for hundreds of miles in every direction. NATO air activity was monitored but so too was the flights of Russian and also Belorussian aircraft inside their own territories. There were many military aircraft in the skies. Denied overflight above the Baltic States, Russian transport jets heading for Kaliningrad like those ships went down over the Baltic. There were also combat aircraft in the skies over western Russia and above Belarus. Some of these would charge towards the edges of the NATO countries before turning away at the last moment. NATO fighters, including those French Mirage-2000s at Šiauliai in Lithuania, were busy on interception missions. The recent addition of Belorussian jets in the skies – Belarus bordered Poland as well at Latvia and Lithuania – made the NATO task more difficult first by their presence and then as Russian fighters flew with them above Belarus too. A lot more coverage was needed due to Lukashenko’s actions in tying his country’s armed forces to those of Putin’s.

NATO troops in Latvia with the British-led Baltic Brigade stayed far away from both the Russian and Belorussian frontiers. They were a light force, a tripwire in-place supposedly to deter Russian territorial aggression into the Baltic States. If a Russian invasion came, or, even worse, a joint Russian-Belorussian attack occurred, they were doomed. This was something understood. The three small countries here each had their own armies too yet none of them, even joined by these NATO troops, were going to be able to stop an invasion. That wasn’t their mission though. They were here to deter one by their presence. Many of the officers and men with the Baltic Brigade were starting to feel very exposed out here. Intelligence showed the strength of possible opponents and that was worrying when presented to them. Around them, the local armed forces were working with NATO special forces troops on border patrols. There was the Russia proper frontier that Estonia and Latvia had plus Lithuania had that border with Kaliningrad. The border with Belarus now needed patrolling too. Covert entry by Russian agents and special forces was something they were working to stop by their presence due to the belief that they would come in to cause trouble within the Baltic States as recently done. Down in Poland, NATO forces there consisted of the Polish Army and that Cav’ regiment of the US Army: no more NATO ground forces were in the country despite claims made from the Kremlin that the Americans, the British and the Germans were on Polish soil in number. Small scale exercises took place rather than anything big. Early summer weather helped with this. Troopers from the 2nd Cavalry Regiment moved right into the very north-eastern corner of Poland at the beginning of June. They conducted exercises with Polish tankers in an area deemed the ‘Suwalki Gap’. There were Lithuanian troops active over on the other side of the Polish-Lithuanian frontier here also exercising defending this area against an attack coming into the Suwalki Gap from either east or west… or both. That was because this stretch of Poland provided a territorial buffer right between Kaliningrad and Belarus. In wartime, during an attack it was anticipated that the Russians and Belarusians would try to seize it. By doing so they would physically cut off the Baltic States away to the north from the rest of Poland. It wasn’t perfect tank country and this wasn’t that similar to either the Fulda Gap or the North German Plain of the Soviet era though there were some comparisons there in how a very modern NATO would aim to defend this area. Across in Kaliningrad – which, if history had gone another way in the 1990s, might well have become a fourth member of the Baltic States – the Russian Armed Forces watched those NATO war games without conducting their own. They were busy reorganising their own defensive forces before they would later practice any warfare. Troops here from two previous brigades were merged into a lone division and supporting assets reconfigured. Mobile missile batteries were transferred to new hidden sites and airfields were given upgraded defences. Engineering troops were on the frontiers of Kaliningrad: they were digging defensive positions and also scouting sites for wartime demolitions. Russia’s generals were looking at how NATO would invade Kaliningrad and doing everything to see that the region, sovereign Russian soil, shouldn’t fall in an attack. These defensive measures came with aircraft flights from Kaliningrad’s many airbases though on clear mock offensive tasks and also the activities of the brigade of Naval Infantry – Russia’s marines – within the region as well. Those marines undertook amphibious and airmobile operations along the shoreline. In wartime they would be going elsewhere. NATO intelligence summaries said that the 336th Guards Naval Infantry Brigade had a wartime mission away from Kaliningrad (which was correct) either up in the Baltic States or possibly down on the shores of Poland in the Bay of Gdansk (which was incorrect).


The night of June 7th saw an incursion into Russian airspace. It was an accident though only sort of. With permission from the very top – Bob Gates gave the order: Bush’s defence secretary whom Obama had kept on despite the change in the White House –, US Air Force F-15E strike-fighters flew right on the very edge of the airspace off Kaliningrad’s coastline. These were jets based at RAF Lakenheath in the UK with the 48th Fighter Wing. Tanker support plus a divert field at Swidwin Air Base in Poland allowed them to be flying this far forward from East Anglia. Russian air activity with their bombers right off the coast of the mainland United States last month had seen Gates authorise flights of these tactical aircraft closer than before to Kaliningrad. There was a flight of four of them which overflew the Bay of Gdansk and then headed north along the edge of Kaliningrad. Moving at high speed in the darkness, they should have still not crossed the invisible line in the sky marking Russian airspace because they had their own state-of-the-art navigation gear and one of those AWACS aircraft was controlling their flight.

Well… they strayed into Russian airspace, even skimming above the edges of the Sambian Peninsula – the headland which pushed out into the Baltic – rather than just being above the water which legally belonged to Russia. Sukhoi-27 Flankers raced towards them. These were Russian Naval Aviation jets who had recently been busy buzzing NATO warships at low-level through the Baltic but a pair of them were on hot-alert at Chkalovsk Air Base tasked for air interception and given the go order once those four F-15s were above the Bay of Gdansk. They were thus on an intercept course before the airspace violation occurred. Each side had their advantages in this potential fight. The Americans had better aircraft & systems as well as greater training. The Russians were on home ground though (they had no worry over a fuel issue) and had a lot of recent experience. Numbers were a factor though – four against two – and there was too the fact that AWACS support alerted the Americans to the arrival of the Su-27s.

As quick as they were in, the Americans were out of Russian airspace and back out over the sea. They were looping back around when the fighters coming out of Kaliningrad approached. The F-15s broke into two pairs and swept back around coming towards the inbound Russians. Trigger fingers on both sides were at the ready. All that was waited for was for opposing rules of engagement to come into play. The US Air Force could only open fire if fired upon first. Russian Naval Aviation fighters had the same orders. These standing orders for the aircrews could be changed at any moment from on-high but none came. No shots were exchanged. The F-15s flew away first and racing towards a tanker out over the Baltic. Only then did the Su-27s head back overland to establish a patrol in case more American aircraft showed up to overfly Russian territory with arrogant perceived immunity from retaliation. The stand-off in the skies, with each set of aircraft conducting aggressive manoeuvres while flying at high speed armed with deadly weapons, was over in minutes.

In the days and weeks afterwards, there would be implications from this. American navigation procedures on the edge of Russian airspace were reviewed though they would continue to fly missions off Kaliningrad. Gates would push for Obama and Clinton to get the NATO Council (the Poles themselves would have no objection) to agree to station some of the 48th Wing in Poland afterwards. Russian military authorities in Kaliningrad would receive new orders when it came to airspace incursions. This had been the latest one of several with others made by larger reconnaissance aircraft though those had occurred just offshore and never before over land like this surely deliberate attempt had been. Aircraft would be shot down next time. A verbal warning would be given but unless that was obeyed at once with no hostile intent shown, air intruders would be downed whomever they were. Russia couldn’t have its sovereign airspace violated so nakedly at a time when the West was seeking weakness ready to invade.

[forcon]

Good update!

[lordroel]

Jan 26, 2019 20:58:20 GMT forcon said:

Good update!

You take the words right out of my mouth, second that.

[lueck]

james and forcon why do I think that the Russian intel guys get enough info from the downed polish plane to put together in their mind that eagle guardian is a deployment order for mustering a full scale force for going in to put down pro putin military assets after the west causes the Russian government to fall. Also I am assuming that human assets in Poland that are reporting no western buildup are having their reports tossed to so the leadership only has their view of what going in Poland.

[James G]

Jan 27, 2019 0:40:29 GMT lueck said:

james and forcon why do I think that the Russian intel guys get enough info from the downed polish plane to put together in their mind that eagle guardian is a deployment order for mustering a full scale force for going in to put down pro putin military assets after the west causes the Russian government to fall. Also I am assuming that human assets in Poland that are reporting no western buildup are having their reports tossed to so the leadership only has their view of what going in Poland.

They got intel and their agents are busy elsewhere looking for more.
Well... there are intel reports being discarded with regards to NATO (some countries, not all) not wanting war but this is 2010 not 1983 so the paranoia hasn't moved to that stage yet. Russian propaganda is declaring Poland is full of NATO troops - Germans especially - for their own people but also the usual suspects in the West. As things get far worse, then reports such as those might be tossed but we are not at that stage yet.

[forcon]

Twenty-Five

As the United States’ largest and most capable investigative organisation, the tracking and capture of foreign intelligence operatives fell into the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Following the wave of post-Cold War defections in the ‘90s, the FBI’s attention had turned to terrorism. In the post-September 11th world, that was the area in which all U.S. law enforcement agencies were most focused. Even the Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms Administration (ATF) and the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) were focused on terrorism-related occurrences within their own fields of expertise. Though the FBI was out of practice in its old job of spy-catching after years of counter-terrorism work and operations countering organised crime, the agency still retained a sizeable section dedicated solely dedicated to the art of counter-intelligence. These kind of operations had seen a steady fall in their budget until the crisis with Russia erupted and espionage was again a major threat to the national security of the United States. The budgetary priorities of the FBI were again dedicated to spy-catching after the events that had taken place in London at the hands of the SVR, and then again in the Baltic States and Ukraine, this time perpetrated by the Russian Armed Forces and their GRU operatives. Potential Russian espionage operations were repeatedly investigated by the FBI and at the beginning of summer of 2010 the Bureau finally found something concrete.

The ‘illegals network’ was the name hastily assigned to a group of Russian sleeper agents in the employ of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service. The eleven spies had lived under painstakingly-crafted false identities, known as legends within the intelligence community. Their cover stories were meant to run so deep that they could stand up to any scrutiny, and against a lesser agency than the FBI, they would probably have done so. Posing as ordinary American civilians, the members of the illegals network made contacts first in academia and with industrialists, then with political policymakers on both sides of the isle, and finally, as tensions between Russia & the U.S. rose, with Pentagon officials. One such official, a civilian staffer working for the DOD’s logistical department, would find himself blackmailed into handing classified documents regarding the transportation of American troops over to the Russians. The individual in question was a married man in his thirties, and had already been identified as a philanderer and a casual cocaine user in his spare time. Russian operatives working under the illegals operation approached the civil servant, showing him a video of him in bed with a trio of young women, one of whom was aged only fifteen, taken through the window of a motel outside Washington D.C. He was persuaded to ‘flip’ by his Russian handlers, and provided them with information he could uncover from his work. There were others in lower places who were approached casually and sounded out. Those who would break were flipped, and those who would rather face the consequences of their own activities than become traitors were left alone. The Russians communicated with their handlers using laptops smuggled in from Russia, equipped with private wireless internet connections that were thought to be almost impervious to electronic surveillance. These operations had served to provide the SVR with a great deal of information regarding U.S. military operations around the world.

What the Russian operatives were not aware of was Operation GHOST STORIES, the FBI mission to stop them in their tracks.

On June 27th, 2010, the activities of the Russian spooks were brought to an abrupt end by the conclusion of Operation GHOST STORIES. FBI Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) teams, acting in coordination with state and local law enforcement, mounted a series of raids from coast-to-coast, where they successfully arrested ten of the eleven known Russian intelligence operatives. These raids took place in New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts & Washington State. Though the spies were not thought to be armed – this wasn’t a James Bond film after all – the FBI was taking no chances, and so the green-clad SWAT team members were sent in to kick down doors and drag the enemy agents out in handcuffs. The operation was a complete success, with almost all of the targets rapidly arrested by SWAT teams before they could offer any kind of resistance. Some of the detainees had acted rather unprofessionally while carrying out their duties, having written down passwords and encryption keys to their communications devices and computers. This gave the FBI & NSA a true goldmine of information to begin sorting through, and would disrupt Russian intelligence operations within the United States for years to come as methods of communication were uncovered.

Initially, the detained Russian agents were held at local jails for a brief period before being moved into maximum security federal penitentiaries on the East Coast. The Russians were treated fairly, and there was no torture or anything of that sort, though they certainly did not receive any privileges. As those detained would discover, the U.S. prison system was not a pleasant place to be. There were rigorous interrogations by agents of the FBI, as well as people from the CIA & DIA. Due to the fact that they had coerced the aforementioned Pentagon official into giving up military information, the ten Russian sleepers were charged under the controversial Espionage Act of 1917, for the crime of “conveying information with the intent to interfere with the success or operation of the Armed Forces of the United States.” For the Russians, this was bad news indeed. Prosecutors in Washington D.C. did not seek the death penalty, although it would have been a legally viable option. However, the threat of a death sentence was used by intelligence personnel as a means of getting information out of their captives. Instead, the FBI sought lengthy twenty-year prison terms for all ten detainees, causing fury and outrage in Moscow.

Only one individual had escaped arrest in the United States, and his freedom would not last long.

*

Pavel Kapustin, a.k.a Christopher Metsos, was the money-man of the illegals operation. Upon the arrest of the other SVR agents, Kapustin had fled. The Russian agent had taken the identity of a deceased child as his alias and had used a false passport provided by a contact at the Russian embassy in Washington D.C. to board a flight to Cyprus. He would then board a plane to Budapest, and fly from there directly back to Mother Russia. Working with Interpol, the FBI & CIA along with the Military’s Joint Special Operations Command began working on a plan to prevent Kapustin’s escape. Nobody was going to create a diplomatic incident by forcing the airliner to land before it reached Cyprus, but other plans were being put into place instead. Two dozen members of the U.S. Naval Special Warfare Development Group (DEVGRU), better known to the public as SEAL Team Six, were, at the time of the arrests in the United States, conducting training exercises with the Sixth Fleet and its assigned 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit. Having previously operated in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Horn of Africa, these individuals were all highly-trained and veteran operators. In an operation that was signed off on personally by President Obama, the SEALs were helicoptered to the Royal Air Force base at Akrotiri on the island of Cyprus hours before Kapustin’s commercial flight landed. Behind the scenes, CIA personnel stationed at the U.S. embassy in Cyprus began to communicate with officials within the Cypriot authorities, alerting their contacts that an operation to detain Kapustin was to take place imminently. With an Interpol warrant issued for his arrest, the local police could have detained him at the airport. However, the FBI worried that he might be granted bail and use this an opportunity to escape under another false identity, or at least make his way to a Russian consulate.

The DEVGRU men moved into position outside Larnaca International Airport, using a white transit van and a pickup truck acquired locally. As well as being veteran soldiers, members of SEAL Team Six were trained to operate covertly in urban environments, having been taught a variety of tradecraft skills by the CIA. Agency personnel were also present, carrying sidearms and fully capable of defending themselves although their training could not compare to that of the SEALs. The SEALs carried H&K MP-7 compact submachine guns as well as pistols and stun grenades. Though Kapustin was not expected to be armed, there were fears that SVR personnel from the Russian embassy would be there to greet and extract him, and no chances were being taken by the Americans. The CIA had been careful to ensure that only localised police forces were informed of the operation, to avoid a blue-on-blue incident; the Cypriot government had no idea of what was about to take place. After exiting the airport, Kapustin found himself suddenly surrounded by armed Americans in plain clothes. Two SEALs had emerged from the pickup truck behind the Russian agent, and shouted at him to freeze and raise his hands. Four more SEALs leapt from the back of the van, two of them aiming their weapons while two more tackled Kapustin to the ground, snapping cable-ties around his wrists and hooding him.

It was all over in a matter of seconds. Kapustin was bundled into the back of the vehicle before he had time to react. Even for a trained spy, the abduction was too shocking and well-executed to be resisted. From there, he was transported in the back of the van to RAF Akrotiri. During the planning of Kapustin’s ‘extraordinary rendition’, MI6 had been informed and the Ministry of Defence had authorised the use of RAF Akrotiri by U.S. forces in carrying out the operation. Kapustin was to be held there for as little time as possible, however, and would certainly not be interrogated while on the British airbase for fear of international condemnation should the United States resort to previously outlawed methods used under the Bush Administration. That wasn’t going to happen though. Three hours after his abduction, a U.S. Marine Corps helicopter arrived at RAF Akrotiri. Kapustin was taken aboard the aircraft by Marine Corps military policemen, handcuffed and hooded, and flown to the USS Bataan. Waiting aboard the amphibious assault ship were a team of federal agents working for the FBI, along with interrogators from the CIA & DIA.

The FBI agents – the only ones who held the legal right to actually arrest people - formally placed him under arrest.

[James G]

Very good work there. The spies using perversions against subjects and the FBI raids with SWAT teams.
As to that subject captured on Cyprus, I can imagine a lawyer working pro bono decrying the injustice of armed men seizing him and frightening him when he was only taking a vacation! Poor man must have been terrified etc etc.

One of these spies, as readers may recall, was an attractive young lady who also held British residency.