《泰晤士報》
週五深夜，幾架俄羅斯快速噴射機在關閉應答器的情況下轉向進入北約前線國家之一的領空。
這次，它們並沒有像往常一樣沿著邊境平行飛行然後溜走，而是突然轉向內陸，似乎朝著一個軍事設施飛去。
北約國家武裝部隊總司令只有短短一分鐘的時間來做出他一生中最重要的決定：是像往常一樣用攔截機將他們帶走，還是下令將他們擊落。
米格-31戰鬥機進入瓦因德盧島附近的愛沙尼亞領空
蓋蒂圖片社
在俄羅斯對北約領土進行一系列極具挑釁性的空中行動（包括約 20 架無人機入侵波蘭和三架米格 31 戰鬥機入侵愛沙尼亞領空）之後，這已成為北約內部的核心爭論點。
川普總統的言論加劇了這場辯論。週二，有人問他是否認為北約應該使用武力回應。他回答道：“是的，我認為應該。”
這種困境並非新近出現。在過去十年的大部分時間裡，俄羅斯戰機每隔幾天就會在北約東翼「嗡嗡」盤旋，但最終都會被快速反應空中警戒飛機驅離。
然而，在過去兩周里，這些特技的規模、性質和強度都發生了變化，尤其是如果導致哥本哈根和奧斯陸空中交通癱瘓的無人機被明確歸咎於克里姆林宮的話。
哥本哈根機場在領空發現兩三架大型不明無人機後，數十架航班被迫改道或取消。
史蒂文·納普/路透社
根據所謂的戰略模糊原則，北約在這個議題上的官方立場故意含糊其辭。
關於何時、何地以及如何應對俄羅斯戰機或無人機的入侵，包括哪些條件可以將其擊落，都有具體的指導方針，但這些指導方針嚴格保密。這種模糊性很大程度上是為了防止普丁政權利用交戰規則。
馬克·呂特
DURSUN AYDEMIR/蓋蒂圖片社
北約秘書長馬克·呂特表示，每項決定都將基於現有情報中的一系列細節，例如「意圖、武器裝備以及對盟軍、平民或基礎設施的潛在風險」。
許多軍事領導人認為，北約應該保持冷靜，不要魯莽地在「升級階梯」上追趕俄羅斯。
德國國防部長鮑里斯·皮斯托利斯表示，他認為沒有必要對普丁總統的挑釁“全盤接受”，並敦促北約“冷靜、審慎、不危言聳聽，但要果斷”地採取行動。
「我們的戰鬥機飛行員擁有一系列可以採取的措施。他們行為極其專業，但不會讓自己受到挑釁。他們知道自己在做什麼，也知道自己能做什麼，」皮斯托利斯在與瑞典空軍飛行員帕爾·瓊森會晤後表示。
德國歐洲颱風戰鬥機
瓊·瓦爾斯/蓋蒂圖片社
德國多次在軍事基地和其他敏感地點發現可疑的無人機活動，其中包括基爾運河上的一艘貨船似乎發射了一架無人機來監視附近的一艘德國海軍船隻。
從週四開始，德國武裝部隊將舉行一場模擬敵方襲擊漢堡的演習，其中包括無人機幹擾和在重要軍事造船廠發生的「大規模傷亡事件」。
芬蘭武裝部隊總司令雅內·亞科拉將軍週末在赫爾辛基安全會議上發表演說時也發出警告，不要隨意擊落俄羅斯飛機。
他說：“我們必須根據威脅程度、違規行為的嚴重程度做出反應。所以飛行員會採取相應的行動。他們很專業，在每種情況下都會採取專業行動。但這並不意味著他們什麼也不做。”
反駁的觀點很簡單：批評者說，俄羅斯會繼續堅持下去，直到遇到抵抗為止。
The real danger, according to Gabrielius Landsbergis, the former foreign minister of Lithuania, lies in the failure to draw a clear red line: “We are still struggling to respond to incursions that wouldn’t even be happening if we were willing to do what’s necessary to deter them. Instead of asking if we risk starting World War Three, the question is: will we risk stopping it?”
Landsbergis has made the case for telling Moscow that any further drone violations will be punished by cruise missile strikes on the sites the drones were launched from.
Few Nato leaders are prepared to go quite as far as that at present. Poland, however, has indicated that it is willing to shoot down any Russian military aircraft that enter its airspace. Sweden has suggested it would consider doing the same.
The Lithuanian parliament has just granted the armed forces powers to attack foreign drones that stray into prohibited or restricted zones in peacetime. Denmark and Estonia are looking at similar legislation.
There are other ways to send a warning. Lieutenant Colonel Christof Kühn, chief of staff at Nato’s cyber defence centre of excellence in Estonia, said there was already a mechanism for allied states to covertly carry out “pre-emptive” cyberattacks on Russian targets. “Nato can raise its hand and say ‘Hey, we would like to have something done over there’. And then a nation can raise its hand and say, ‘Yeah, we will take care of that. Don’t ask how we do it’,” Kühn said.
He added: “My personal opinion is we are already in a war. It’s about false information. It’s about interrupting critical infrastructure. It’s all about testing our willingness to fight back.”
In the near term, this sort of less theatrical option might prove more attractive than downing Russian aircraft. It is hard to imagine a single Nato member unilaterally taking this step unless it were confident of unequivocal political and military support from the rest of the alliance, and in particular from the United States.
The frontline states have taken note of the way Trump prevaricated when he was asked whether America would underwrite such a measure with its own armed forces.
Another difficulty is that not all of the Nato states that are subjected to these provocations necessarily have all the tools to shoot down drones and warplanes on their own, and some largely rely on allied aircraft or air defence batteries.
Military analysts in Estonia, for example, have argued that the country currently depends heavily on F-35s and a SAMP/T surface-to-air missile system deployed by Italy, which tends to take a cautious view of these matters.
推廣內容
沒有留言:
張貼留言
注意：只有此網誌的成員可以留言。