# Baltic States (Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia) mull merging armed forces



## CougarKing (12 Aug 2013)

Defense News link



> *[size=18pt]Baltic States Divided On Merging Armed Forces[/size]*
> 
> 
> WARSAW — While budget cuts are jeopardizing acquisitions of new arms and equipment across Europe, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia are intensifying their military cooperation in line with NATO’s “Smart Defense” policy and collaborating on joint arms purchases.
> ...


----------



## tomahawk6 (15 Aug 2013)

Nice idea,but not practical.Russia invades again what then ?


----------



## pbi (16 Sep 2013)

How would this work for powers of command, which stem from national law? Under which legal authority would officers in a "merged" Armed Forces give orders and expect them to be obeyed?  And if the orders are disobeyed/violated, under whose laws are the violators tried?

This sort of thing appears to "work" under shared command arrangements such as NATO and the UN precisely because there is no "command": all countries retain  full command on their national chain, and give some lower C2 relationship to the international force. In the end, it's only the national chain that you "must" obey when a conflict arises. 

Good old "Combined and Joint" will probably give the Baltic countries as much of a military relationship as they need to present a credible resistance to Russia, which is probably the underlying (and fully justified) intent here.


----------



## Robert0288 (16 Sep 2013)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> Nice idea,but not practical.Russia invades again what then ?


Then all 3 countries explode instead of one?



> How would this work for powers of command, which stem from national law? Under which legal authority would officers in a "merged" Armed Forces give orders and expect them to be obeyed?  And if the orders are disobeyed/violated, under whose laws are the violators tried?


Under their equivalent of a combined NDA or USMJ



> This sort of thing appears to "work" under shared command arrangements such as NATO and the UN precisely because there is no "command": all countries retain  full command on their national chain


  What happens if they decide to integrate all the way up to the CDS level and only have their own respective ministers of defense for their own government?


----------



## Journeyman (16 Sep 2013)

One Presidential comment, using the waffling terms "could" and "one day," suggests the ink isn't quite dry on that planning document yet.


----------



## pbi (17 Sep 2013)

Robert0288 said:
			
		

> What happens if they decide to integrate all the way up to the CDS level and only have their own respective ministers of defense for their own government?



This what I'm getting at. I don't see the legalities of this working. I can understand pooling their resources in training, procurement and operations: no issues. But what, exactly, is gained by a "merged" Armed Forces that isn't achieved by the above measures plus working as "Combined and Joint"?


----------



## Robert0288 (17 Sep 2013)

Think of all the HQs and useless staff positions they can now get rid of ;D


----------



## GreenMarine (17 Sep 2013)

I'm sure this process has been mulled over many times here at home to fight finicial issues, bottom line would be loyalty as somewhat suggested earlier with Officers respecting law and which laws applied.

I would be wieghting my options if the CF was offered to Merge with the USMilitary.


----------

