Is Europe Ready to Deter a Russian First Strike on the Baltics?

28 December 2023, 10:00 PM

On December 18, after signing a plan to deploy a Bundeswehr brigade in Lithuania to confront Russia permanently, German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius declared it "a historic day and moment.” So, how do we assess the pace of Europe's preparations for a possible war with Russia and the strengthening of the "eastern flank."

In Germany, this has been written about in classified materials since 2017, but it was voiced at the level of the Minister of Defense only now. It has only come up because of a very closed and frank conversation between Washington and Berlin over the past three months.

Many people have noticed that as soon as there are brakes in Washington on assistance to Ukraine or pauses in the supply of equipment, weapons, and ammunition, German compensators immediately kick in. Moreover, it may surprise many that today, the leadership in rhetoric in support of Ukraine has shifted from London to Berlin. This is not a discovery; it is a logical, approved policy within the framework of the top political leadership of Germany, the Bundestag, and especially the military and political leadership of the state. Many people are surprised that Pistorius, as a well-known figure in German politics, has moved from reasonably loyal views and assessments of Russia to serious radical statements, let alone actions.

Putin's statements suggest that we should think about it

We all remember that when Pistorius was appointed, many people, including myself, argued why he would not be allowed to take such a pro-Ukrainian position. But, as one of the classics of Ukrainian politics said, one's seat determines one's views.

Germany is now not only at the forefront of supporting Ukraine but is also successfully, albeit belatedly, fulfilling its obligations regarding the so-called eastern wall. What was announced, the deployment of the brigade in Lithuania and statements concerning other things, is the implementation of NATO's Bucharest decisions, which were later confirmed (two years ago) in Budapest. Today, the fulfillment of these commitments is about two-thirds behind schedule. This applies to the number of troops deployed, equipment, and armored forces, not to mention the provision of necessary ammunition and their coordination. It's one thing to deploy all these units and sub-units, and quite another to work out coordinated actions between them in case of aggression.

These factors were very seriously summarized in an analytical work (fundamental, in my opinion) by the RAND Corporation, which deals with fracture. The phrase that has become very popular now was said by President Joseph Biden: "The world is at a turning point." The previous world order is dead; we need to think about a new world order, and so on. This is a summary of this RAND Corporation analytical paper.

From the perspective of development prospects, they are considering an option quite likely after the pause in the Russian-Ukrainian war: an attack on the Baltic states. It is no coincidence that everyone woke up like this, as if by surprise. This Atlantic paper by the RAND Corporation is three months old and has been under discussion. Moreover, it was used as the basis for training exercises at the National Defense University in Washington, D.C., including those involving artificial intelligence.

What happened in Lithuania on December 18 is only a small component of the work that will be done in the coming months. Indeed, after these states have been quite seriously involved and continue to do so in helping Ukraine, there is a relatively weak spot in the defense of the NATO system. In fact, the countries of the North Atlantic Alliance are demonstrating that the fifth point is not just a line on paper. It is dire, and no one within NATO will question this position. As for the decisions that Putin can make, many people were surprised by this. During a more than four-hour meeting with journalists and citizens, he said, among other things, that we will not continue aggressive actions. Later, in separate interviews, he emphasized this several times. But the principle here is simple. If Putin says something, it means that the truth will be exactly the opposite. That is why these statements, among other things, prompt us to think about it. The armies, including national armies, especially those of the two or three founders of the European system who are members of NATO (France, Germany, and the United Kingdom), need to be seriously strengthened.

The aforementioned RAND Corporation paper has a line from an analytical note by the French Army Chief of Staff, which states that, with the intensity of the fighting in Ukraine, the entire French army will last for three days. In other words, this work analyzes the armies of all the key European countries in great detail and indicates which fragments need to be strengthened.

The decisions made within NATO are now sufficient. Moreover, even national governments have decided to increase their armies and provide for them. Unfortunately, the funding for these programs and their implementation is about the same as the million shells that Ukraine was supposed to receive from the European Union in 2023. This is a problem. These deceitful words of the Moscow Fuhrer just emphasize that the Kremlin is very well informed about this. After all, the security systems of European countries are saturated with many Russian informants.

A striking example is the very recent prosecution of a Bundeswehr officer. This shows that European countries, especially at the level of national armies, have huge problems. If they can still hope that they have the support of the United States within NATO, then the issue of the eastern rampart, the east flank – that is, the reaction to Russia's likely first attacking aggressive actions – needs to be secured. Until all the mechanisms come into play, it is necessary to fight.

Therefore, a number of analytical reports, including a recent letter from 70 German scholars and politicians to the German government, state that the principle of modern warfare, especially Russian warfare, is to seize foreign territories and then hold them. There is no potential to drive the invaders out of the occupied territories in the current situation. This issue is being worked out very carefully in many international and national institutions that deal with the issue of war. This tactical tool – occupation of territory and strengthening of positions – has become a foundation stone today. No one knows how, in the current conditions, to drive such an enemy out of the occupied territories while maintaining the potential of the present army and in compliance with the framework of international law of war.

That is why Europe and NATO are facing several challenging and complex tasks. From the point of view of comparing the current situation, how long does Europe need to somehow bring its systems to the point of countering Russian aggression, not taking into account the military potential of the United States, to deter the first strike? It will take 3-5 years, depending on the set upper parameters. The key point is that the defense industries of most of these countries are not set up to provide the army with such a vast amount of weapons, equipment, and ammunition, which the Russian-Ukrainian war shows are needed.

Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Google News