There has been a concerning development in the political discourse of European leaders and military commanders throughout the early months of 2024: the Russia-Ukraine war is being discussed as a potential NATO wide conflict. After the recent BRICS expansion, as well as a burgeoning Russia-China-Iran axis; it’s hard to ignore how the geopolitical landscape is fracturing into a West versus Rest dynamic. With these seismic shifts in global politics, a negotiated peace in Ukraine is imperative. Unfortunately, the increasingly hawkish discourse from officials and defense specialists across Europe indicates an unwillingness to make concessions. This will undoubtedly accelerate the process of Western isolation in a multipolar world.
We know that the U.S. State Department intended to use the Ukraine conflict as a proxy for draining Russia’s military resources. The goal was to deter future aggression towards NATO allies in Eastern Europe. U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said this himself in April 2022, not long after the war began. Yet the West did not envisage the systematic overhaul of Russia’s military industrial base. Some reports have Russia manufacturing seven times as much ammunition as Western arms makers. In January, Commander of the Estonian Defence Forces, Martin Herem, stated that NATO has vastly underestimated Russia’s ability to produce millions of shells and recruit hundreds of thousands of troops at such a speed.
That same week, Chairman of the NATO military committee, Rob Bauer, declared that Western nations must prepare for an “all out war” with Russia, as they were “too optimistic” regarding Ukraine’s chances in 2023. Citizens in Sweden feel that the hyperbole surrounding imminent war, as well as their recent NATO ratification, have undermined the nation’s centuries long history of mediation efforts and peace advocacy. Emmanuel Macron’s comments on the possibility of sending NATO troops to Ukraine reinforced this hawkish transformation in Europe’s security discourse. NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg claimed that the West is doing more from a defense perspective because Russia has geared its entire economy for war, and a long war at that. So, is the West reacting to Russia’s changing military industrial capacity? Is Russia reacting to what they see as a unified threat from the West? It’s largely irrelevant now. The result is heightened tensions and cynicism rendering diplomacy ineffective. For those interested in peace, these developments have been inauspicious.
Besides a renewed understanding of Russia’s industrial capacity, European leaders fear Donald Trump’s re-election could lead to a relaxed stance on Russian aggression from their American allies. As a result, a clear shift in Europe’s security landscape has been taking place. NATO members are expanding military exercises and preparing the necessary infrastructure for the mobilization of troops and resources to Eastern Europe. There is a widely held consensus that Russia will invade a NATO ally after Ukraine, despite the implications of Article 5, which would draw Russia into an unwinnable war against the U.S. and most of Europe. For those that subscribe to the perspective of realism within the context of international relations, the more logical consensus would be that this is an inconceivable strategic error; one that Russia will avoid at all costs.
Western officials are convinced otherwise, however. The recent Munich Security Conference in February illuminated this trend. Denmark’s defense minister was one of several leaders saying, "It cannot be ruled out that within a three to five year period, Russia will test Article 5 and NATO's solidarity. That was not NATO's assessment in 2023. This is new knowledge that is coming to the fore now,". This renewed risk assessment of Russia has been reiterated all throughout 2024. In January, the Chief of Norway’s armed forces said that we have “perhaps three” years to stockpile weapons and increase spending. The timeline for a future conflict seems to be roughly understood by Europe’s defense specialists. All in all, officials from at least 10 NATO countries have indicated that Russian aggression against an allied member is a legitimate concern.
Gradually, the preparations on the ground are following suit, with Germany actively preparing for a NATO wide conflict. Leaks from the German Defense Ministry have revealed a blueprint for deploying 300,000 NATO troops to Eastern Europe. Germany will build critical infrastructure, including roads and railways, to provide logistical support to the region. These measures go beyond last year’s “race of logistics”, as Stoltenberg described it. Meanwhile, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania have gone a step further with their preparations. The battlefield infrastructure is already being developed by the Baltic states. They are constructing a network of 600 concrete bunkers, anti-tank mines, and barbed wire trenches to secure vulnerable border territories. If Putin or the West are awaiting a casus belli to escalate proceedings, this new dynamic in Eastern Europe’s highly militarized borderlands could function as a tripwire for such a scenario. Finally, there is “Steadfast Defender 24”. It is NATO’s largest military exercise since the Cold War, involving all 32 member states. This is the most comprehensive military collaboration in Europe for decades and it underscores the recent discourse surrounding the likelihood of war.
It’s fair to say that these developments are just part of proper risk management and defensive military posturing, but when combined with the type of rhetoric outlined above, it nonetheless demonstrates the mindset of European militaries going forward; one defined by a potential regional conflict. The hope for diplomatic resolution is dwindling, especially considering the fact that a diplomatic stalemate is what got us here in the first place. Whether a conflict breaks out in the coming years or not, a veritable Cold War dynamic has returned to Europe. This time, with no buffer zone and Ukraine as the Iron Curtain.
Image: Spc. Stephen Solomon
Comments