Caught On Video: Russian, NATO Jets In Near Standoff After F-16 Buzzes Defense Minister's Airplane

A day after a Russian fighter allegedly flew within 5 feet of a US reconnaissance plane traveling over the Baltic Sea, Reuters reports that a NATO F-16 fighter jet returned the favor when it tried to improperly approach a plane carrying the Russian defense minister. The plane was traveling to the city of Kaliningrad, a Russian enclave along the Baltic coast, where Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu was scheduled to discuss security issues with defense officials on Wednesday. The NATO aircraft was warded off by a Russian Su-27 jet, according to RT.

In an accounting of the incident, Reuters notes that one of the Russian fighter jets escorting Shoigu's plane had inserted itself between the defense minister's plane and the NATO fighter and "tilted its wings from side to side to show the weapons it was carrying, Russian agencies said." After that the F-16 promptly left the area.

A clip of the encounter was caught on tape by Russian journalists:

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that he has no information about the incident.

“It’s probably better to ask the Defense Ministry,” Peskov said in answer to journalists’ questions.

The latest provocative maneuver represents yet another escalation of tensions between the US and Russia. On Monday, Russia suspended cooperation with the US in Syria under the "memorandum of incident prevention in Syrian skies", warning that its missile defense would intercept any aircraft traveling in Russia’s area of operation after a US fighter jet shot down a Syrian regime aircraft on Sunday.

Russia slammed the US for shooting down the jet, calling the attack an “act of aggression" and claiming that the move benefited terrorists in the area. The Syrian regime says its jet was pursuing a fleeing ISIS convoy around the time it was shot down.  US officials claimed they tried to contact its Russia counterparts via an established “de-confliction line," though Russia has denied this, saying that if the US had reached out, the incident could’ve been avoided.

A US jet also downed a pro-regime drone on Monday in what Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy described as a “dangerous escalation" of tensions between the US and pro-Syrian regime powers like Iran and Russia.   “I think we’re getting closer and closer to open conflict between Iran and Russia and the American public need to know that we are moving very fast towards what could be another war in the Middle East – something Donald Trump promised he wouldn’t do when he ran for office.”

As RT notes, encounters between US and Russian warplanes over the Baltic are becoming more frequent. A Russian fighter jet intercepted a small group of US warplanes, including Boeing KC-135 Stratotanker military refueling aircraft, two B-1 bombers and one B-52, during a BALTOPS (Baltic Operations) annual training exercise on June 10.


ThaBigPerm barndoor Wed, 06/21/2017 - 10:21 Permalink

This seemed like a clean intercept to me.  First, "alongside" in fighter doctrine is not aggressive.  In fact it's the opposite - intended to communicate that, at least at the moment, you've no intention or ability (except with a few over-the-shoulder SRAAMs or something) to bring weapons to bear.  Also, looked like the F16 was armed to the teeth with drop tanks and nav lights (and however many rounds that may or may not have been loaded for the gun).  As for the SU, again, show up, get alongside, wave your wings ... but in his case then dropped back I suppose "just in case" he needed to respond.

In reply to by barndoor

Socratic Dog BullyBearish Wed, 06/21/2017 - 17:08 Permalink

Australia has a long and proud history of providing cannon fodder for whatever the power of the day is, on demand.

I read a story once about LBJ visiting Australia in (I think) 1966 to request cannon fodder for Vietnam. Up on stage the Australian Prime Minister Harold Holt came out with his new line: "All the way with LBJ". LBJ was standing to one side, looking at him with an indescribable look on his face, like he's thinking "I can't believe that moron just said that".

Holt disappeared a couple of years later, going for a swim in huge surf at (I think) Portsea. I like to think he was taken by a shark. Not many countries can boast of having their Prime Minister taken by a shark.

In reply to by BullyBearish

virgule ThaBigPerm Wed, 06/21/2017 - 13:48 Permalink

It's odd that you guys are discussing to what extent this was an interecept, or if the plane was NATO or US. You do realize it's the Russian defense minister, buzzed over the baltics?If this had been the US defense minister buzzed by a Mig over the great lakes, we've be at defcon 3 right now...

In reply to by ThaBigPerm

MEFOBILLS ThaBigPerm Wed, 06/21/2017 - 14:25 Permalink

It boils down to Atlantacist rim power vs land power.  Pipeline wars are part of the mix.Rims are those areas of the world touching oceans.  Rim land, if it is controlled, then controls the interior.  Large interiors, especially those of Continental countries, are not allowed to develop.  Atlanticist rim theory has been a longstanding process used by British.  England became turbocharged with Rim doctrine when Amsterdam's Jews invaded England and inserted themselves as a parasite by 1694, this with advent of debt spreading Bank of England.  Rim theory then meets debt spreading which meets illuminism.  Zionism forms shortly thereafter with money powered Rothschild meeting Herzyl, and then City of London - which is not under English Control, but instead controls England. was a land power, who made attempts to escape to the seas.  Russia is a land power who attempts sea access, especially in the Baltic and Black sea. Atlantacists are mistaking Russia's defenseive littoral posture as agression, because Atlantacists demand control of the Rim lands.  Atlantacists have gone beserk because Russia has full control over Crimea and hence Black Sea, and now Turkey allows Russian movement through Bosporous, to then access the Med.Here is a discussion by our neo-con friends, and notice how rim theory is mixed into their thinking. cosmic link, there is a quote from Friedman - who let slip in a moment of weakness how they really think:Friedman:  The United States has a fundamental interest.  It controls all the oceans of the world.  No power has ever done that. Because of that we get to invade people and they don’t get to invade us; it’s a very nice thing.Maintaining control of the sea and control of space is the foundation of our power.  The best way to defeat an enemy fleet is to not let it be built."The way the British managed to make certain that no European power could build a fleet was to make sure the Europeans were at each other’s throats.  The policy that I would recommend is the one that Ronald Reagan adopted toward Iran and Iraq.  He funded both sides so they would fight each other, and not fight us.  This was cynical, it was certainly not moral, it worked, and this is the point.  The United States cannot occupy Eurasia"Modern Neocon doctrine dovetails exactly with Reventlow's assessment, done centuries before.  Atlantacist doctrine passed to the U.S. after WW2.  By this time, our ((friends)) had already maneuvered Woodrow Wilson for progressive era ammendments (16,17'th and Federal Reserve Act).The U.S., since its founding, has been under British and by extension Zionist attack.  NeoCons today are largely the sons and daughters of Pale of Settlment Jews who emigrated from 1880 to 1926.  Fortunately, Congress of that era had an immigration cut-off (1926), otherwise these type of people would be in the U.S. in even greater numbers.addition quote by Ezra Pound:“ We have solved the problem of production, now we have to solve the problem of distribution” — said Benito Mussolini on October 6, 1934 — meaning:  we are able to produce enough food, clothing and other things for every resident of this planet;  but we have to come up with a method by which the residents of this planet, who produce all these articles, may receive the purchasing power to buy for themselves what they are able to produce.  Mr. Pound admired this Mussolini who had such ideas, this Duce who considered the state the spirit of the people !! 

In reply to by ThaBigPerm

SDShack MEFOBILLS Wed, 06/21/2017 - 18:43 Permalink

Just like the Aircraft Carrier made Battleships obsolete, modern super-sonic anti-ship missles will make all surface ships obsolete in a generation. Surface Navy Ships are fine for maintaining shipping lanes against 3rd world pirates, but a super power war, even only between proxies, will rewrite Naval Strategy forever (see the Falklands Island War and HMS Sheffieid). There is a reason why the Soviets concentrated on boomers (nuke capable subs), and attack subs, instead of surface ships, as well as ship radar jamming, and anti-ship missle technology. Admirals are famous for fighting according to the history of the last war, with devastating results.

In reply to by MEFOBILLS

el buitre SDShack Wed, 06/21/2017 - 23:25 Permalink

"anti-ship missles will make all surface ships obsolete in a generation."In a generation?  Try last week.  Can any US warship stop the Russian hypersonic  missiles?  From that video from the Donald Cook, even though that Russian plane shut down the Cook's offense electronics, it seemed to allow some sailor's iPhone video to work :-)

In reply to by SDShack