While armada is a naval term, why should there not be armadas of privately owned airplanes that take off from Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania and the Black Sea, fly over the border into Ukraine, and air drop humanitarian supplies of food, etc., to Ukranians on the ground for picking up and getting to places in Ukraine where needed?
Where Putin is committing war crimes against Ukranian civilians to kill, injure and starve them and destroy their homes, can humanitarian supplies include weapons for the civilians to defend themselves against being killed, injured and starved and against their homes being destroyed?
If Russian forces attack the private airplanes owned and operated by NATO country citizens, is that an attack on NATO countries and their citizens, which legitimizes the NATO countries militarily attacking the Russian forces that are attacking the private airplanes?Do Russia's attacks on Ukraine civilians that Russia knows cause a refugee invasion of Poland and other countries constitute an attack by Russia on Poland and those other countries?
— Rob Shattuck (@RobShattuckAL06) March 4, 2022
#alpolitics https://t.co/c9ix4Hf5OZ
The NATO countries should consider whether Russia's attacks on Ukraine civilians that Russia knows cause a refugee invasion of Poland and other NATO countries constitute an attack by Russia against Poland and those other NATO countries
Article 5 of the NATO treaty refers to an "armed attack" against a NATO country.
Whether a cyberattack can be an Article 5 attack is subject of debate. Would a cyberattack on a NATO country trigger Article 5? | Cybersecurity Dive The foregoing article says, "For decades it seemed simpler, as an armed attack would be obvious and NATO nations would respond with tanks, artillery, and warplanes. Now, in our new world, nations can be undermined through information warfare and infrastructure crippled by cyberattacks, often difficult to trace."
In the case of Russia's attacks on Ukraine civilians, clearly those are armed attacks and the question becomes whether those armed attacks can be considered against Poland where there is a clear and direct cause of a refugee invasion of Poland and of of all the economic, societal and security harms and damages to Poland that result from the refugee invasion.
At a minimum, NATO can consider the matter and reach a collective decision about the same.
If NATO decides that there is an Article 5 armed attack against Poland, NATO can announce that to the world and to Russia and say to Russia that, if Russia does not cease its armed attacks on Ukranian civilians, NATO will take steps to defend Poland against the armed attacks by attacking the forces of Russia that are carrying out the armed attacks against Ukranian civilians that are causing a refugee invasion of Poland and all the economic, societal and security harms and damages to Poland that result from the refugee invasion.
3/6/22 - Other ideas and considerations.
Also, how is the Ukraine thinking of Mike Rogers, lead Republican of the House Armed Services Committee, affected by Putin considering economic sanctions to be akin to a declaration of war?#alpolitics https://t.co/Gvr7YPLemL
— Rob Shattuck (@RobShattuckAL06) March 6, 2022
Further, what does Mike Rogers, lead Republican of the House Armed Services Committee, think about Rep. Tom Malinowski's idea of a Berlin-like airlift to save Kyiv, and whether that would start World War III?#alpolitics https://t.co/zznUdKRM8K
— Rob Shattuck (@RobShattuckAL06) March 6, 2022
Email interchange with Mark Elovitz, Ph.D., J.D., Director Centre For Strategic Geopolitics Miramar Beach, Florida
To: Mark Elovitz
Sent: Sat, Mar 5, 2022 5:19 pm
Subject: Re: Unabashedly Addressing The Ukraine Crisis
Dear Mark,
Do you think Russia's attacks on Ukraine civilians that Russia knows cause a refugee invasion of Poland and other countries constitutes an attack by Russia on Poland and those other countries?
I think NATO should consider the question and make a collective decision.
If NATO decides that there is an Article 5 armed attack against Poland, NATO can announce that to the world and to Russia and say to Russia that, if Russia does not cease its armed attacks on Ukranian civilians, NATO will take steps to defend against the armed attacks by attacking the forces of Russia that are carrying out the armed attacks against Ukranian civilians that are having a clear cause and effect of a refugee invasion of Poland and of the economic, societal and security harms and damages to Poland that result from the refugee invasion.
I have written this up in more extended form at https://al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com/2022/03/a-reverse-airborne-dunkirk.html.
Thanks for your consideration of this idea, Mark.
Sincerely,
Rob
To: Rob Shattuck
Cc:
Sent: Sat, Mar 5, 2022 10:20 pm
Subject: What constitutes an Article Five attack on NATO?
Greetings Rob,
In response to your below-appended question:
Whether refugees from Ukraine into Poland (and elsewhere into NATO nations) would, could or does constitute an attack on NATO is an interesting issue about which NATO’s founding document and, more specifically Article Five thereof, is silent.
Indeed, how might, does or would a fleeing Ukraine refugee's abrupt appearance in a NATO nation constitute an attack by Russia even though proximately caused by Russia's wholly unprovoked invasion/attack upon Ukraine? Would the cost of caring for that refugee be deemed an attack?
Somewhat similarly, should refugees into NATO nations from Libya's chaos be deemed by NATO as an attack by Libya? Or is that a difference with a distinction? Is not Libya at war--- even though it is at war with itself? Should refugees into Europe from Syria's long-standing internal warfare be deemed an attack by Syria on NATO? Should Russia's significant involvement in the creation of some of those Syrian refugees be deemed a Russian attack on NATO? Should those millions of Syrian refugees still being housed in Turkey (a NATO nation) be deemed an attack on NATO by both Syria and Russia? Even more distant, exotic and perplexing scenarios present themselves to my mind. Indeed and ad absurdum, should Afghani refugees into NATO nations resulting from the USA's (and NATO's) botched war in Afghanistan be deemed an attack on NATO itself by fellow members? The issue becomes increasingly complex, convoluted and contradictory.
However, there is, for a truly concrete and immediate example, a more directly related question of whether the spill-over/bleed-over into a NATO nation from any Russian cyber-attack on Ukraine could/would "reasonably" constitute an attack on NATO.
I would tend to argue against that proposition with the weighty caveat that the answer might well depend on the nature/character/quality/extent of that cyber damage actually inflicted on a NATO nation.
So, if that cyber-attack on Ukraine resulted in loss of electricity/power to a hospital located in Poland and thereby proximately caused the deaths of "Polish patients" in that Polish hospital, that COULD (somewhat reasonably) be construed as an Article Five attack. IF NATO then predicated a responsive attack on Russia based upon those arguably related deaths, the potentiality for a further counter-responsive attack by Russia would quite foreseeably initiate WWIII.
That resulting horror and associated trauma would be exponentially enhanced by the likely use of nukes (as already not-so-indirectly indicated by Putin) thereby subjecting Western civilization to an all too conceivable conflagration between Russia and NATO (which expressly includes the USA & Canada) and resulting in massive, widespread destruction, innumerable deaths and the conceivable evisceration of much -if not all- of life as we know it.
As you may have noted: The next-preceding paragraph is an unduly lengthy sentence both in terms of verbiage and, most particularly, existential consequence!
I hope the foregoing is sufficiently responsive to your email.
Kindest regards,
Mark
To: Mark Elovitz
Cc:
Sent: Sun, Mar 6, 2022 4:20 am
Subject: Re: What constitutes an Article Five attack on NATO?
Thank you very much for your response, Mark
I agree that, in various situations in which Russia's actions are causing harmful and destructive effects on NATO countries, NATO needs to consider the nature and severity of those effects in deciding whether such Russian actions should be considered as an Article Five attack on NATO.
Also, consideration must be given to the precedential potential of such a decision, i.e., if the actions by Russia are considered an attack on the NATO countries, similar actions by the U.S. and NATO countries can be considered an attack on Russia (or on some other country).
I would like to post your email in my blog. Do you have a problem with that? I think on a previous occasion involving an email of yours you said you didn't have a problem with my posting the email in my blog.
Sincerely,
Rob
No comments:
Post a Comment