Communication - GAPFOR - ROMANIA

[Bruno]

---

Privately, Lieutenant General José Rodrigo, the Current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, would contact in a private and encrypted communications set up, with the current member-states for the Peacekeeping Force, GAPFOR-Romania.
He would contact the Republic of Korea and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, which were the only nations to show interest in participating, much to the disappointment of the Republic of Spain, on the other member-states, which could have provided even token forces.
Contact details would inform that each nation would have to appoint a high member of the Military Staff for this communication panel.

---

​

​

Jamie​

Jay​

 

[Jay]

Point of Contact from the Korean Uniformed Military

• Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (ROK Armed Forces)
  • General An Syesang {Chief of the Air Forces}

ROK-GAPFOR-ROMANIA Mission Leader

• ROK 38th Homeland Division
  • Liet. Commander Jeong Seungeun

At the Korean Ministry of National Defense, a secure communication room was set up titled GAPFOR. Inside, 4 personnel from the army HQ, 1 from the navy, and 1 from the Air Force were present. This command unit was led by Colonel Lee Seongmin. The Colonel confirmed the uplink channel with the Spanish Joint Chiefs of Staff. The Point of Contact from the Joint Chiefs would be the Chief of the Air Force. General An Syesang arrived at the GAPFOR room, accompanied by a translator from the Ministry. He carried a briefcase with ROK-GAPFOR files from the training exercise, a compilation of concerns and questions, a base financing project, and other necessary documents. Via secured video communications, the Vice Chairman notified his counterparts he was there.

Bruno
Jamie

 

[Jay]

To: SGAPFOR Bruno UKGAPFOR Jamie

From:KGAPFOR

Subject: Election Monitoring and Process/Operation Questions

Security: Private and encrypted | Protected by the NIS and MoFA DPB

Esteemed commandants,

Attached below is a document towards the mission of electoral oversight in Romania. The Republic of Korea would like to expedite sending an advanced team of GAPFOR personnel to the region to assess the DMZ, outline areas of importance, gather intelligence, and meet with Romanian officials to discuss the current situation. Additionally, the Republic of Korea have a couple of questions with regards to the mission. Based off of a training exercise conducted by the ROK Army to train personnel for the upcoming mission, we have the following questions we hope that the Commander of the mission may address. Lastly, The Republic of Korea lacks strategic airlifting capabilities, can we work out an agreement for logistical supplying while in mission to transport equipment, weapons, and personnel from Korea to the mission area?


Question(s):

1) “If Romanian citizens, namely muslims civilians from outside the Area of Responsibility i.e. the 4km DMZ try to enter the safe zone due to the rise in anti-muslim attacks, do we have a responsibility or mandate to take them in? What exactly is it in this case, the mandate of the GAPFOR with regards to the internal affairs of Romania in how they treat minorities and other groups within their state?"

2) "What are the limits to who is protected by this mission, i.e. do we protect everyone that we can, or do we merely position ourselves to ensure that the stability of the border and state-to-state conflict is avoided. Meaning, the domestic conflict if applicable such as militias and criminals are outside the GAPFOR mandate?"

3) "Should we share patrol patterns with the Romanian and Moldovan government for our sector?"

4) "Should we apply active patrols with continual presence awareness and reassurance to local communities to if applicable, deter crime, deter state violence, and deter violations of the mandate?"

5) "Should we take active steps to gather information if militias, ultranationalist, etc…groups may plot attacks against civilians or even the GAPFOR, or are specifically asked to avoid interfering in the local affairs of our zone of operations?"




Signed with sincerity,
Liet. Commander Jeong
KGAPFOR Contingent

 

[Jamie]

---

GAPFOR ROMANIA
Security Classification: TOP SECRET

---

Two individuals from the British Armed Forces would join the call, their own lines private and encrypted. Brigadier Michael Burnett from the 7th Infantry Brigade, British Army, accompanied by Squadron Leader, Joey Grisby from the Royal Air Force. Hoisted in separate offices, they both introduced themselves and got caught up with what had already been said, if anything, before Brigadier Burnett chirped into the conversation. "The British Government have authorized the use of Army and Air Force assets to participate in the peacekeeping mission in the DMZ. Under instruction and authorization from the Commander, we'll be able to offer air policing in the form of our Tornado's, strategic airlift if necessary for others and naturally, ground forces to participate in the policing itself in the form of light cavalry. All of which will be, as per the peacekeeping resolution, bearing the Global Assembly color and symbols."

The Squadron Leader then continued, adding onto the call. "We have the flexibility, and naturally, funding, to offer a range of air assets but as you can expect, it is a long duration operation. We will be reviewing it but potentially looking at 6 month deployments before rotating with other units, subject to the governments commitment in the matter. With others involved, and the size of the DMZ, we will also be realistic in what forces are required. As such, it's likely a small flight of aircraft would compile the air assets and a contingency of a hundred or so forces on the ground. Although at this stage, it's too early to be certain. On top of the questions posed by my South Korean counterpart, I am also curious to hear the expected threat level in the region. Do we think that Romania and Moldova would breach the peace?"

---

Bruno Jay

 

[Bruno]

"I would like to thank you all for coming to this communication. I had hoped that more members had joined the GAPFOR-Romania, however I'm fully confident on the capabilities and strength that the United Kingdom, South Korea and Spain possess and no doubt will be able to complete this task to its fullest, with determination, quality and cooperation. The Current main objectives of this Peacekeeping force is the Maintenance of the DMZ in Romania for a period of 2 years, alongside overseeing the electoral process.

First I'll answer the Liet. Commander Jeong Seungeun. The first question I will have to ask the Undersecretary on their opinion on it, however for the time being, the DMZ will have to apprehend any civilian that tries to cross it, which will be put in GA custody until they can be returned to their country, if they however have a legal status of refugee, they will have to follow normal channels in the GA. That is my opinion as Force Commander. But as a human being, my opinion is that we should strive to protect these citizens as much as we can and we are legally able to, which is why I'm going to contact the Undersecretary and the Romanian Government to decide on this matter.

Answering the second question, our foremost objective is to ensure that the stability of the border and state-to-state conflict is avoided, as to not have a repeat that happen on the last conflict. Domestic conflicts that do not directly interfere with the DMZ are outside our mandate. If another military Force, or civilian force tries to force their way into Moldova and by extension our DMZ, then we have to act accordingly to defend the Peacekeepers and protect the stability of the DMZ. Our main objective is to prevent another conflict between Romania and Moldova, just like a safety net or mechanism. Anything that enters the DMZ will have to go into custody, and if our forces are fired upon, we answer in equal measures.

The third question, We aren't not allowed to cooperate with either government military forces inside the DMZ, however we can negotiate a patrol with Romania and Moldova where they patrol their side of the DMZ, with minimal forces.

Yes, citizens of either nation, inside the DMZ, bare in mind that this is not a DMZ like South and North Korea is, where no person can be in it, people will still live inside that 4km radius, as such they will still have to abide by the Laws of their host nation, we however will aid local police in deterring crimes if these same crimes put in jeopardy the stability of the DMZ. Remmember, our main objective is to prevent masses of military forces to be stationed in the border, not local crimes. Our main job is to prevent Military action by either nation.

Lastly, yes this is required, we will have to have intelligence gathering agencies to gather information on possible plots that put in jeopardy the DMZ and the stability of the region. Now, we will only be able to conduct said operations, inside the DMZ, however we will try to work closely with both Government on this.

Regarding your capabilities, I believe either the Spanish Air Force can provide you with airfliting capabilties using our own planes or even vessels, if you require, we are also were to work closely and in unision. So anything Britiain or Korea needs, Spain can provide if it possess those needs, and vice versa.

He would now also speak with the British.

"Good, I'm glad the United Kingdom as provided equipment and forces for the peacekeeping force, its greatly appreciated. That is the main idea, to have roation teams every 6 months to avoid moral drop and exhaustion of our forces. We are still reviewing the best course of action and plan, as these take their time. However I believe that the DMZ should be devided into 3 zones, each zone being controled by one or our nations, however logistically they would all be intreconnected to support eachother, military equipment would be light vehicles, patrol vehicles and AA systems, since mobility will be paramount. And needless to say all logistic equipment we require to contruct temporary FOB and perimiters borders for the DMZ. Regarding Air assets, I believe they are a must as such we should have Two nations working together to patrol the Air Space above the DMZ. So I believe 1 to 2 Fighters on duty would be enough, however what we will mostly use due to their capability will be helicopters which will have a better capability to patrol lower to the ground. Regarding Naval assets the river that seperates both Moldova and Romania is navagable, as such using small patrol boats and vessels to patrol the river for any incursions will also be required, the numbers we are looking at should be around 1 to 2 vessels.

The Main bulk of the forces will be ground personnel, as the border is very big, however there are few crosses, which is why I believe the main bulk of the forces should be in these passages, while Patrol Vehicles and vessels will patrol the inaccessible and non-travessable areas. Which means these bridge crossing will be home to our bases, with two sections on each side of the bridge, effectivly closing it to Civilian Use.

What are you ideas and suggestions on everything I have informed you?"

Jamie Jay

 

[Jay]

To: SGAPFOR Bruno UKGAPFOR Jamie

From: KGAPFOR

Subject: re:Spanish Operation Answers

Private and encrypted | Protected by the NIS and MoFA DPB

Liet. Commander Jeong: "Thank You Chairmen for answering the questions. I believe we can arrange the Spanish Air Force airlifting the peacekeepers and initial equipment while the ROK Navy can be used to ship supplies to the mission through GA logistical routes. We will according to the situation respond to the humanitarian aspect as well as being respective of the GA mandate. The questions answered were really helpful and are allowing us to readapt our expectations and planning for the next year and subsequent second year of the mission. I understand that the second portion of the question was addressed to our counterpart in the United Kingdom, however, the Republic of Korea believes that the currently laid out plan is an acceptable plan with having a main operating base equipped with the majority of needs and smaller outposts or fobs for operating in each of the zones. Due to the use of aircrafts in initiation of the previous conflict, perhaps having a small composite of 4 aircrafts to both intercept and monitor the air space above the DMZ would be a useful measure.

Is it possible to get an update on the local situation in terms of damage to buildings, electricity, water, healthcare facilities, and the crime rate?

The Republic of Korea can provide mobile SPAAG to support the mission, but can not provide any other anti-air assistance, as well as being able to provide a number of TA-50 aircrafts from the ROKAF if required. Due to the logistical limitations, the Korean Navy can not participate in patrols. Do either of your nations currently employ dedicated air surveillance drones in your arsenals, as they would be of immense help in maintaining overwatch and surveillance of both sides.

Additionally, would it be possible to erect a no-fly-zone over the DMZ for all military aircrafts and having a GA-AIDZ installed for civilian aircrafts operating to ensure proper identification and monitoring of the airspace above the DMZ. I was wondering when we could perhaps have a joint-call with the Romanians to discuss the current election plan as the current recommendations should be implemented ahead of the election season as well as having proper feedback to see how receptive all political parties could be if allowed the freedom too be established in Romania.

Do we have an expected deployment date for the bulk of troops to be deployed and an expected date for an advance team to be sent?"

 

[Jamie]

"The plan laid out in connection to the bases and zones sounds viable, it also prevents any unintentional conflict of interest between our respectable patrol areas as South Korea, Spain and the UK would each have their own zones. Our deployment of Peacekeepers would naturally involve light patrol vehicles but, echoing that of my South Korean counterpart, a no fly zone is recommended. This would then be enforced by GAPFOR, and would justify additional fighters, at least for the first rotation as a precaution given how fresh the conflict is. This would also prevent the need to have anti air batteries deployed which I feel could be more intimidating to both sides of the border and be shown as a military presence, not a peacekeeping one. We are also eager to hear of a possible deployment date to make our own preparations. To answer Commander Jeongs question, the Royal Air Force does not currently employ air surveillance drones. Our fighters have surveillance technology if necessary but hopefully ground patrols would be sufficient enough to maintain the peace. I do think we may need to be mindful of how our presence may be seen as more of an occupation by parties from Moldova, Romania or both. I believe the mission ought to have minimum forces, but enough to enforce the peace if needed.

I think the communication that led to a peace agreement between the countries show their commitment to working with the Global Assembly which is certainly promising and over rotations, see a reduced peacekeeping force. I am unaware of the local situation which I am hoping the GAPFOR Commander can advise but from what I recall hearing of the conflict, I don't think there's much concern regarding basic necessities and damage but I may be uninformed, but if that is the case then it certainly makes our jobs easier without worrying about desperate attempts for supplies."

Jay Bruno

 

[Jay]

To: SGAPFOR Bruno UKGAPFOR Jamie

From: KGAPFOR

Subject: re:Spanish Operation Answers

Private and encrypted | Protected by the NIS and MoFA DPB

Liet. Commander Jeong: "I am in agreement with the British commandants with regards to the essence of our mission, image is a major factor and if either party begin to see the GAPFOR as bias or occupational it may raise support for anti-GA sentiment and fuel militias that would destabilize the mission integrity. However, the lack of on-ground intelligence is also a modem for concern primarily because we aren't aware of the violence levels in the area, while state actors have officially ceased, whether they laid mines or boobytraps, unexploded ordinance, etc...could prove an under-noticed problem.

Our Foreign Ministries's intelligence and analyst division is highly worried that Romania may devolve into ethnic conflict due to the rising religious and ethnic persecutions of various minorities, this is all based on publicly posted videos by varying armed factions within Romania. It is currently unknown how extensive a build up of arms by factions in the de-escalation and de-militarized zone is. Which may complicate the future of the peacekeeping mission, would it be possible to ask the General Secretary how would our mandate take into the account of non-state actor violence?

I also am in agreement with my British counterparts that a phased withdrawal of peacekeepers with fair allocation of responsibility between our nations could be planned contingent on maintenance of the de-escalation and electoral process. This of course would be reversed in the case of a flare up of hostilities or dangerous rhetoric as seen prior to the initiation of conflict between Romania and Moldova. Nonetheless, the Korean Peacekeeping Contingent is prepared to serve the duration of the mandate and will be equipped with all necessary equipment to ensure the upholding of the resolution outlined by the General Assembly."

 

[Bruno]

"I agree with all here that was said, I'll be inviting the Undersecretary to this call Dutchy , for which I believe he could answer this questions more efficiently than I can. However I'm hopeful that neither Moldova or Romania will see our forces as an occupation force but as keepers of the peace. I know that Moldova was relieved to know that our peacekeepers will be arriving which would provide a sense of security for their people. Now, while there is a sentiment in Romania that the international community is out to get them, no doubt due to propaganda, the government was receptive of the DMZ, as it also provides legitimacy to their actions that strive for peace.

For a no-fly zone, it is paramount we establish this as soon as possible, as well as starting to send peacekeepers to the region. And regarding a possible future build up of forces, our top priority in that scenario is de-escalation, if we see that this is impossible, the immediate withdrawal of GA troops is out of question, we are there to establish peace, and prevent conflicts, this of crouse unless Mandated by the GA to leave, while diplomatic channels work around it. Now while I don't entirely agree with this idea, propaganda might have to play in our favor, to the citizens, we have to show us as being protectors and peacekeepers, that are helping them stay safe. having the people inside the DMZ against is a very complicated scenario. As such we must refrain from antagonizing them.

Now on to key points, operational details and the DMZ." He would send them a encrypted document with all the information he was telling them.

CROSSINGS	TYPE
Galați-Giurgiulești Bridge	Road, Rail
Cahul-Oancea Bridge	Road
Stoianovca-Fălciu Bridge	Rail
Leușeni-Albița Bridge	Road
Eiffel Bridge	Rail
Sculeni Bridge	Road
Stânca-Costești Dam	Road
Lipcani-Rădăuți Bridge	Road

"This are the main crossings to and from Romania and Moldova. We do not need to establish Bases all across the river and the borders, which separates both nations. Our priority is to set bases in both sides of these crossings, to prevent military and civilians vehicles from crossing, as the river will act as a natural barrier. These will have normal accommodations, storage, communications, check points, etc. And they need to be self sufficient, as to not rely on either nations power grid. then across both sides of the border, steel fences with spot lights, about 2 meter thick. As shown in the picture. They wont be able to be tossed aside or forcefully removed as they need specialized equipment to be removed, especially being reinforced on our side against pressured force from the opposite side. Alongside them separated by a few kilometres will be guard towers which will be able to survey the area around them for any incursions, not mentioned constant patrols both in air, ground and in the river."

"We have to keep in mind this is a temporary DMZ, as such we need to be as less interventive in our protections and security as possible, to then have a orderly removal of these constructions when we have to leave." He would pause. "Now onto operational capability, in order to effectively protect the DMZ from both sides, we will need a total of 10'000 to 15'000 troops from our calculations. These include manning the fortifications, patrolling, maintaining and securing the DMZ. We gladly have military access to Romania, as such we are able to use their airports to transport troops, as well as docks and ports. But that is all that we have access to. I have chosen for us to deploy on the Iasi International Airport as it is the closest to the DMZ possible, making our main DMZ base near it. We also have the New Basin Port but that would mean a long trek to the border. As such it would be preferable to use the airport."

"Now we would like to ask each of you, how many troops are your nations willining to deploy? With Spain being the force commander, I believe that it should be Spain to deploy the larger force and to take the brunt of the work, as such we are able to deploy around 8000 troops, with their equipment and enough logistic personnel with their vehicles to start working in the DMZ. We are also glad to annouce the Brazil will be sending help via logistic personnel to start helping us."

Jamie Jay

 

[Jamie]

Taking notes as the Spanish Commander spoke and addresses the relevant questions, the Brigadier nodding to each section in his own understanding but perked his brow at the mention of a calculated total, "Ten to fifteen thousand?" he asked himself, almost in shock at how many was required for the operation, but that was a point certainly to discuss. That was a combined effort of two British Army Brigades to fulfill that need. "Thank you for the elaboration, I believe we may need to quicken the pace to get peacekeepers on the ground before the situation becomes stale, or escalates. The fortifications you have mentioned are reasonable to maintain security and peace, in my eyes. Naturally, we can deploy engineers to aid in construction effort and we will be able to regularly move supplies to help erection of such towers and fences...

I must admit, however, I am concerned at the size of the force as been required. For a peacekeeping mission, I believe 10,000 to 15,000 personnel is of conventional war levels, on top of air policing? The United Kingdom doesn't have the resources to commit to such a large scaled deployment for peacekeeping. I am overly cautious that the size would present more as an occupation as you would also, equally, need to keep all those soldiers accommodated, supplied, not to mention the movement of equipment to be sufficient. We will be able to offer a flight of Tornado's, which are of air defence variant, for air policing. On the ground, we have the mandate of a number of ground vehicles, and at a push, a battalion of 600 men. These would be participating in rotations of 6 to 12 months, depending on requirements.

Bruno Jay

 

[Bruno]

"Yes I do understand that that number is inflated, however we have 681,3 km of border to control, however that is not per nation, that is all nations combined efforts, which include logistic personnel, air policing, soldiers on patrols via vehicles, foot and river, soldiers defend each border crossing etc. For real per military personnel such as soldiers we are looking at around 3000 soldiers which is the combined number of all nations. We are also looking to have each nation control two border crossings, while the two near the city of Iasi would be a joint effort between all nations."

​

"Spain would control the upper section in purple, South Korea would control the white portion and Britain the bottom section, while the blue section would be a joint effort between all of our Armed Forces combined, as it is the biggest and most used crossing from Romania to Moldova, and where the initial attack came from. Would your nations agree to this plan?"

Jamie
Jay

 

[Jay]

Liet. Commander Jeong: "Thank you for your hard efforts and continued work Bruno . With regards to the 3,000 troop request, the Republic of Korea could increase the number of troops to around 1,200 at any given time, however we doubt that we could increase the number to 3,000 in theater at any given time. We can mitigate this by deploying 2 F-16s for Air Patrol and 4 TA-50s for close ground support. However, we are hopeful we can equally share the burden, but, the given pressing threats against our country by North Korea that require priority over the current peacekeeping mission. The Republic of Korea does not object to the current map zones and we will make our preparations for the deployment to this zone.

Jamie

 

[Jamie]

Brigadier Michael Burnett paused, reviewing the proposed plan offered by the Spanish Commanding Officer "This is a viable divide between the Peacekeeping Forces. Echoing that of my South Korean counterpart, the numbers needed are not something we would be able to commit too. Unfortunately my position remains at 600 peacekeepers, especially now with the situation with the economy -- and Russia. This may change in the future as the economy recovers but until then, we're limited I'm afraid. We will still be able to commit a flight of aircraft for air policing. Might I confirm the date we will be deploying assets to the area? We will also, for intelligence gathering, deploy a Britten-Norman Defender who will be able to offer a slower, more accurate 'eyes in the skies' approach."

Jay Bruno

 

[Bruno]

The commander would ponder and stroke his ginormous and over the top handle bar mustache.

"We will then go with your advice, 600 peacekeepers for each participating nation, with prospects of being increased in the future if there is any need to do so. The Spanish Republic will commit that number, alongside logistic personnel and equipment, a patrol vessel which is capable of patrolling the navigable river. The Britten-Norman Defender is a excellent choice, to help with the Air Surveillance, the Spanish Air Force will also provide a Lockheed EC-130V Hercules which will be able to track any intruder aircraft in the air space and relay this information to British Jets. Perhaps then in future a rotation can happen where either South Korea or Spain do the air policing while Britain uses a air surveillance plane.

Regarding the South Korea forces, are you able to deploy using you assets? If not, Spain can provide a Galicia-class landing platform dock which can carrying your soldiers and equipment over to Romania if needed."

"For the deployment time, we are looking at the (29th) this date, due to the distance that South Korea is in they need time in order to arrive either by sea or air, which gives us enough time to prepare and start sending our equipment, the Spanish Republic will start preparations today, and will deploy in the following couple of days."

Jamie
Jay

 

[Jay]

Liet. Commander Jeong: "Whilst we have certain assets available to transport our forces, we believe that if Spain is willing to offer the Galicia-class landing platform ship, then we would very much appreciate it instead. As it would allow us to focus on North Korea and...the situation in India at the moment. Our forces are ready to deploy within 24 hours, we will be prepared for when the Galicia ship arrives to port at Busan Naval Base. Based on your previous statements, the ROKAF can provide 2-4 F-16C/D to replace the British Air contingent during the rotation, however, we do not currently have any air surveillance aircrafts we can spare. Distance is unfortunately a factor that plays a big role in affecting our ability, and we hope to minimize that affect through the multilateral cooperation we are showcasing."

Bruno Jamie

 

[Jay]

Liet. Commander Jeong: "Whilst we have certain assets available to transport our forces, we believe that if Spain is willing to offer the Galicia-class landing platform ship, then we would very much appreciate it instead. As it would allow us to focus on North Korea and...the situation in India at the moment. Our forces are ready to deploy within 24 hours, we will be prepared for when the Galicia ship arrives to port at Busan Naval Base. Based on your previous statements, the ROKAF can provide 2-4 F-16C/D to replace the British Air contingent during the rotation, however, we do not currently have any air surveillance aircrafts we can spare. Distance is unfortunately a factor that play"

Bruno Jamie