Is NATO Ready for War? An In-Depth Assessment of Defense and Deterrence

[Social Media]

 

Two years ago, in response to Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, NATO adopted a "back to the future" strategy, emphasizing forward defense and deterrence. This shift marked a significant moment for the alliance, with allies committing to various measures to enhance their collective defense capabilities at the 2022 Madrid Summit. As NATO leaders gather in Washington for the alliance’s 75th anniversary summit, it is crucial to evaluate the progress made in bolstering NATO's defense capabilities.

 

Significant advancements have been made in several areas, including defense spending, forward defense, high-readiness forces, command and control, collective defense exercises, and the integration of Finland and Sweden. While NATO appears ready for war, the question remains whether it is prepared to sustain and deter a protracted conflict. Achieving this goal requires increased spending, boosted industrial capacity, addressing critical capability gaps, and enhancing national resilience.

 

The Latin adage "Si vis pacem, para bellum"—if you want peace, prepare for war—aptly describes NATO's purpose. Preparing for war is essential to averting it, and this logic of deterrence has guided NATO's actions, especially in light of recent developments in Ukraine. Russia's actions have validated fears that Vladimir Putin seeks to continue the Stalinist subjugation of Russia's neighboring regions. The conflict underscores the necessity of NATO's worst-case planning regarding Russia's ambitions. Putin's propensity for aggression and strategic miscalculation makes him a formidable and challenging adversary to deter.

 

Despite substantial losses in Ukraine, Russia has "almost completely reconstituted militarily" to pre-war levels through national mobilization and a war economy supported by China, Iran, and North Korea. Beyond Ukraine, Russia is issuing nuclear threats against NATO and increasing hybrid threats across Europe. Several European leaders have warned that Russia could attack NATO allies within the next few years. China's assistance to Russia's military reconstitution and the potential for coordinated aggression between Moscow and Beijing pose significant challenges for NATO, especially concerning U.S. force posture in Europe.

 

To paraphrase Prussian military theorist Carl von Clausewitz, what kind of war should NATO prepare for? Perhaps the most pressing scenario is a rapid territory seizure by Russian forces in the Baltic region. This scenario, frequently analyzed and wargamed, remains a critical concern. It represents the "most likely" and "most dangerous" course of action for Russia. While it might not be the likeliest overall scenario, it is a significant NATO-Russia war scenario due to the local force balance favoring Russia.

 

 

NATO must be prepared for such an invasion, which risks nuclear escalation and is difficult to reverse. Any NATO operation to reclaim lost territory would require establishing air superiority and control of the Baltic Sea before amassing a significant local ground force. Even with NATO assurances, this situation could prompt Moscow to deploy non-strategic nuclear weapons, forcing NATO to threaten nuclear use to compel a Russian withdrawal and reestablish deterrence.

 

This is why Baltic officials advocate for a "repel, don’t expel" strategy. NATO's new strategic concept emphasizes deterrence by denial and forward defense, akin to Cold War strategies. While deterrence by punishment, relying on U.S., UK, and French strategic nuclear forces, will continue to be crucial, forward-based "shield" forces will strengthen conventional deterrence and defense.

 

One of the most notable achievements since the Madrid Summit is the inclusion of Finland and Sweden as full NATO members. Their formal invitation and eventual accession, following concessions from various allies, sent a strong political message to Moscow and enhanced NATO's deterrent capabilities. Finland and Sweden's integration is ongoing, facilitated by their prior deep military cooperation with NATO as Enhanced Opportunities Partners. Their formidable air power, developed over decades, is now integrated with NATO forces.

 

 

Challenges remain in fully integrating Finland and Sweden, including developing appropriate command structures, adjusting regional plans, and addressing both nations' defense requirements across all domains. The United States and the United Kingdom play critical roles in this process, given recent Nordic defense cooperation agreements and the Joint Expeditionary Force's integration of Finnish and Swedish forces.

 

NATO has significantly expanded its exercise program to focus on collective defense since Madrid. The recent Steadfast Defender was the largest NATO exercise since the Cold War, involving 90,000 personnel from all allies across all domains. It included maritime and amphibious drills in the High North and multi-domain exercises across Europe, emphasizing military mobility. The exercise program has also focused on multi-domain operations. In the air, Germany hosted its largest Air Defender exercise, while Vigilant Falcon tested Baltic air policing. At sea, Neptune Strike 2024 included five carrier strike groups in the Mediterranean, and Dynamic Mongoose focused on anti-submarine and anti-surface warfare. The 2023 Baltops exercise marked Finland's first participation as an ally.

 

NATO has also tested new domains, such as cyber and space. The Vulcan Guard exercise focused on space operations, while the Locked Shields cyber defense exercise, hosted by the NATO Cooperative Cyber Defense Centre of Excellence in Estonia, remains the world’s largest. The Coalition Warrior Interoperability Exercise in June will test interoperability across all domains and NATO command and control systems.

 

Despite substantial progress, challenges remain for NATO to be fully prepared for a protracted conflict. Allies must increase defense spending, enhance industrial capacity, address critical capability gaps, and bolster national resilience.

 

As NATO celebrates its 75th anniversary, it has made significant strides in strengthening its collective defense since the Madrid Summit. The integration of Finland and Sweden, enhanced collective defense exercises, and a renewed focus on forward defense and deterrence have bolstered NATO's readiness. However, to be fully prepared for a protracted conflict and to effectively deter adversaries, NATO must continue to address remaining challenges and ensure its capabilities are robust and resilient.

 

Credit: CSIS 2024-06-21

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

[Tug]

Putin would lose and quickly + the oligarchs would dispose of the little tyrant putin knows it.I almost wish he would attack a notorious country so nato can jump in and run that animal out of Ukraine!!

[Hakuna Matata]

https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2024/06/19/russia-will-consider-dispatch-of-f16s-to-ukraine-as-aggression-that-activates-its-mutual-defense-agreement-with-north-korea/

 

Russia will consider dispatch of F16s to Ukraine as aggression that activates its mutual defense agreement with North Korea

 gilbertdoctorow  Uncategorized  June 19, 2024 4 Minutes

There are many elements in the agreements signed today by the Russian and North Korean leaders following their 5 hours of one-on-one talks and 90 minutes of talks with the participation of their government delegations. Needless to say, these consequential agreements on an ‘All-encompassing Strategic Partnership’ were not the product of this one day, but of the intense work of both sides at various administrative and executive levels since the visit of Kim Jong Un to the Russian Far East nine months ago.

 

Allow me to cut to the quick, and set out here the most surprising development which emerged in Vladimir Putin’s speech following the signing ceremonies as stated in the title above that I give to this essay.

 

Vladimir Putin remarked that the Partnership has a military component which affirms that each side will come to the aid of the other if it is under attack. Then, gratuitously, one might say, he mentioned the impending dispatch of F-16s by NATO countries that are to use Ukrainian territory to strike deep into the Russian Federation heartland.  The juxtaposition of these two points in his speech leaves little doubt to those of us trained as Sovietologists that Putin considers what NATO is about to do at its Western borders as the very act of aggression that will trigger Russia’s Strategic Partnership with North Korea and present the United States with a live threat to its military bases in Korea, in Japan and in the broader region.

 

Whether we choose to consider this scenario as ‘symmetric’ or ‘asymmetric’ response is beside the point. The net result will surely be as effective in waking up the dullards in Washington, D.C., in Brussels, London and Berlin to the fact that Russia means business, is not bluffing, and can wreak massive destruction on U.S. and Western military assets at any moment of its choosing if there is further escalation in the Ukraine war.

 

At the recently held St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, Putin went up against the political scientist Sergei Karaganov who for more than a year has called for Russia to stage a tactical nuclear strike in Europe to shake the hubristic West from its foolish belief in its invulnerability and exceptionalism.  It would appear that with the stroke of a pen today, Vladimir Vladimirovich has accomplished the same with no loss of life and without opening the Pandora’s box of nuclear arms.

 

Mr. Putin’s travels in East Asia do not end today. On the contrary, he is headed next for Vietnam, where we may expect additional agreements that amount to check-mate to the Aukus and So.Korea-Japan gambit of Messrs. Biden, Sullivan and Blinken. They thought they had done so well to ‘contain’ China and Russia during their first term in office. It would appear now that these vast efforts at cajoling, black-mailing and otherwise dominating America’s ‘allies’ in the Pacific created just an updated version of the Maginot Line that did not survive a German end-run.

 

And so, ladies and gentlemen, let us all thank our lucky stars that in this day and age of pygmies and cowards at the helm of states in Europe and North America, there is at least one rational and courageous leader to save the day.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2024

 

Translation below into German (Andreas Mylaeus)

Russland wird die Entsendung von F16-Kampfflugzeugen in die Ukraine als Aggression betrachten, die sein gegenseitiges Verteidigungsabkommen mit Nordkorea auslöst

 

Die Vereinbarungen, die die russische und die nordkoreanische Führung heute nach ihren fünfstündigen Einzelgesprächen und 90-minütigen Gesprächen unter Beteiligung ihrer Regierungsdelegationen unterzeichnet haben, enthalten zahlreiche Elemente. Natürlich sind diese folgenreichen Vereinbarungen über eine “allumfassende strategische Partnerschaft” nicht das Ergebnis dieses einen Tages, sondern der intensiven Arbeit beider Seiten auf verschiedenen Verwaltungs- und Führungsebenen seit dem Besuch von Kim Jong Un im russischen Fernen Osten vor neun Monaten.

 

Gestatten Sie mir, dass ich mich kurz fasse und die überraschendste Entwicklung aus der Rede Wladimir Putins im Anschluss an die Unterzeichnungszeremonien darlege, wie sie im obigen Titel, den ich diesem Aufsatz gebe, zum Ausdruck kommt.

 

Wladimir Putin wies darauf hin, dass die Partnerschaft eine militärische Komponente hat, die besagt, dass jede Seite der anderen zu Hilfe kommen wird, wenn sie angegriffen wird. Dann erwähnte er sozusagen grundlos die bevorstehende Entsendung von F-16-Kampfflugzeugen durch NATO-Länder, die über ukrainisches Gebiet tief in das Kernland der Russischen Föderation eindringen sollen. Die Gegenüberstellung dieser beiden Punkte in seiner Rede lässt für diejenigen unter uns, die als Sowjetologen ausgebildet sind, wenig Zweifel daran, dass Putin das, was die NATO an ihren westlichen Grenzen zu tun gedenkt, als genau den Akt der Aggression betrachtet, der Russlands strategische Partnerschaft mit Nordkorea auslösen und die Vereinigten Staaten vor eine reale Bedrohung ihrer Militärstützpunkte in Korea, Japan und in der gesamten Region stellen wird.

 

Ob wir dieses Szenario nun als “symmetrische” oder “asymmetrische” Reaktion betrachten, ist nebensächlich. Das Endergebnis wird sicherlich ebenso wirksam sein, um die Dummköpfe in Washington, D.C., Brüssel, London und Berlin wachzurütteln und ihnen klar zu machen, dass Russland es ernst meint, nicht blufft und jederzeit massive Zerstörungen an den militärischen Einrichtungen der USA und des Westens anrichten kann, wenn es zu einer weiteren Eskalation des Ukraine-Krieges kommt.

 

Auf dem kürzlich abgehaltenen Internationalen Wirtschaftsforum in St. Petersburg trat Putin gegen den Politikwissenschaftler Sergej Karaganow an, der seit mehr als einem Jahr einen taktischen Atomschlag Russlands in Europa fordert, um den überheblichen Westen in seinem törichten Glauben an seine Unverwundbarkeit und seinen Exzeptionalismus zu erschüttern. Es scheint, dass Wladimir Wladimirowitsch heute mit einem Federstrich dasselbe erreicht hat, ohne Menschenleben zu verlieren und ohne die Büchse der Pandora zu öffnen.

 

Herrn Putins Reisen in Ostasien sind heute noch nicht zu Ende. Im Gegenteil, als Nächstes reist er nach Vietnam, wo wir mit weiteren Vereinbarungen rechnen können, die das Aukus- und Südkorea-Japan-Gambit der Herren Biden, Sullivan und Blinken schachmatt setzen werden. Sie dachten, sie hätten es in ihrer ersten Amtszeit geschafft, China und Russland “einzudämmen”. Jetzt stellt sich heraus, dass diese gewaltigen Anstrengungen, Amerikas “Verbündete” im Pazifik zu umgarnen, zu erpressen und anderweitig zu dominieren, nur eine aktualisierte Version der Maginot-Linie geschaffen haben, die einen deutschen Ansturm nicht überlebt hat.

 

Und so, meine Damen und Herren, sollten wir alle unseren Glückssternen danken, dass es in der heutigen Zeit der Pygmäen und Feiglinge an der Spitze der Staaten in Europa und Nordamerika wenigstens einen vernünftigen und mutigen Führer gibt, der den Tag rettet.

[Hanaguma]

You can take the numbers in this article with a very LARGE grain of salt. Germany, for example, actually has only about 100 battle ready tanks (Leopards). France, perhaps 200. Italy, as few as 50 that are operational.  Their air forces are in similar states. They have very little in the way of lift capability or force projection.

 

NATO members have been starving their militaries for decades. And it is now showing.  They have been relying on Uncle Sugar for too long.

[Jingthing]

No, they're not ready yet, but the trend is that they're waking that they have no choice but to counter the dictatorship axis.

However if the Putin adjacent fascist forces take too much power within the west, especially if Trump takes power again in the U.S., then things will be looking quite grim. 

[Hanaguma]

5 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

No, they're not ready yet, but the trend is that they're waking that they have no choice but to counter the dictatorship axis.

However if the Putin adjacent fascist forces take too much power within the west, especially if Trump takes power again in the U.S., then things will be looking quite grim. 

The Donald told them to get their <deleted> together years ago, and they laughed. Well, who's laughing now? Germany spending 1.4% of GDP on defence is a sad joke, the rest of NATO not much better. They are reaping what they have sown. You think Putin would have invaded in 2022 if NATO had provided any kind of credible military response capability? Doubt it.

[wombat]

If NATO continues prodding Vlad to drop a nuke at the behest of the proxy country which is making money from supplying things that go bang in the night to Ukraine the only thing they are prepared for is to throw their hands up in horror saying we told you so

[johng]

9 hours ago, Tug said:

I almost wish he would attack a notorious country so nato can jump in and run that animal out of Ukraine!!

 

NATO has been in a proxy war with him for 2 years  everything they threw so far has failed ( all too little too late) should they try the ultimate ?  remember he also has the ultimate.

[Purdey]

Does Russia still have sufficient professional soldiers to attack several countries at once? I assume they have to win in Ukraine first or find their armies struck in the back.

[johng]

9 minutes ago, Purdey said:

Does Russia still have sufficient professional soldiers to attack several countries at once?

They got about a Million (estimated)

Does NATO have sufficient soldiers to attack Russia ?

[johng]

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

if Trump takes power again in the U.S., then things will be looking quite grim. 

  grim for you maybe  for everyone else who wants peace  maybe a great relief and saviour from WWIII.

[jvs]

7 minutes ago, johng said:

They got about a Million (estimated)

Does NATO have sufficient soldiers to attack Russia ?

NATO does not need any soldiers to attack russia,they never will!

Russia has maybe 1 million soldiers?Maybe on paper but that would also include cooks and adm.

personnel.

Russia is not afraid of NATO attacking them,just look at what is happening at the Finnish border,

most equipment and personnel are leaving to fight in the Ukraine.

Looking at the graph of how much each NATO country is spending on defense?

The numbers are up a lot and most are around 2% now.

Putin has mentioned a lot of red lines and all he can do is whine about F-16s that are coming.

They maybe used above russia but not really likely,Crimea is going to be a prime target and the jets can also be used to climb high inside of the Ukraine and send bombs across the russian border.

Do not under estimate NATO,they are sending(like the USA) mostly old equipment and they still have a lot of spares.

They had 2 years and no one has been idle.

Russia is getting more and more desperate.

[johng]

3 minutes ago, jvs said:

NATO does not need any soldiers to attack russia,they never will!

Just send those brave Ukrainians ?

[johng]

4 minutes ago, jvs said:

Do not under estimate NATO

Do not underestimate Russia  they have the nukes too !

[Woof999]

17 minutes ago, johng said:

grim for you maybe  for everyone else who wants peace  maybe a great relief and saviour from WWIII.

 

Quit with this "no wars under Trump" bullcrap.

 

1.) He buddy's up to Putin. Do you think that Putin in any way, shape or form either admires or fears Trump? He WANTS Trump in office.

 

2.) He has already told Putin to "do whatever the hell he likes" with any country he feels are "delinquent" on their defence spending. Is that what a peace lover does?

 

3.) No new wars may have started on foreign soil during his presidency (do you honestly think that was because of any proactive work done by Trump?), but he riles up his fellow nationals domestically. Such as "stand by" for the Proud Boys, and numerous others and stood by doing nothing while his followers marched on the Capitol, being fed a whole heap of lies about a "stolen election".

 

Bless you anyway.

[Hanaguma]

7 minutes ago, jvs said:

NATO does not need any soldiers to attack russia,they never will!

Russia has maybe 1 million soldiers?Maybe on paper but that would also include cooks and adm.

personnel.

Russia is not afraid of NATO attacking them,just look at what is happening at the Finnish border,

most equipment and personnel are leaving to fight in the Ukraine.

Looking at the graph of how much each NATO country is spending on defense?

The numbers are up a lot and most are around 2% now.

Putin has mentioned a lot of red lines and all he can do is whine about F-16s that are coming.

They maybe used above russia but not really likely,Crimea is going to be a prime target and the jets can also be used to climb high inside of the Ukraine and send bombs across the russian border.

Do not under estimate NATO,they are sending(like the USA) mostly old equipment and they still have a lot of spares.

They had 2 years and no one has been idle.

Russia is getting more and more desperate.

Yeah, now they have to catch up after more than a decade of underspending on the military. Even now American spending is more than the entire rest of the organization.

[johng]

11 minutes ago, Woof999 said:

He buddy's up to Putin

Better to be buddies than at war ?

 

11 minutes ago, Woof999 said:

"do whatever the hell he likes" with any country he feels are "delinquent"

 

Exactly what the US does.

 

12 minutes ago, Woof999 said:

his followers marched on the Capitol, being fed a whole heap of lies about a "stolen election".

They marched, they believed the election was stolen, it was a

"mostly peaceful insurrection" without guns  one protester shot by police died..

who now sits in the Whitehouse ? ( basement )

 

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, johng said:

  grim for you maybe  for everyone else who wants peace  maybe a great relief and saviour from WWIII.

The opposite.

[CharlieKo]

3 hours ago, Jingthing said:

No, they're not ready yet, but the trend is that they're waking that they have no choice but to counter the dictatorship axis.

However if the Putin adjacent fascist forces take too much power within the west, especially if Trump takes power again in the U.S., then things will be looking quite grim. 

 World war 3 won't be a conventional war. It will go nuclear, and be over in a couple hours. There won't any winners and most of Europe and the states will be obliterated.  

[newbee2022]

3 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

Germany spending 1.4% of GDP on defence is a sad joke, the rest of

Wrong! It's more than 2% !!!

[tandor]

1 hour ago, johng said:

They got about a Million (estimated)

Does NATO have sufficient soldiers to attack Russia ?

+ 1,000,000 promised by NK, and arms factories.

[tandor]

23 minutes ago, CharlieKo said:

 World war 3 won't be a conventional war. It will go nuclear, and be over in a couple hours. There won't any winners and most of Europe and the states will be obliterated.  

..but aren't the 'ancients' going to intervene and put out the lit fuses!

[Hanaguma]

1 hour ago, newbee2022 said:

Wrong! It's more than 2% !!!

...and for the previous decade? The 2% is an estimate only for this year. Believe it when I see it. Plus they have decades of neglect to make up for.

[Jingthing]

2 hours ago, CharlieKo said:

 World war 3 won't be a conventional war. It will go nuclear, and be over in a couple hours. There won't any winners and most of Europe and the states will be obliterated.  

In that case you're talking nuclear winter.

[newbee2022]

47 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

...and for the previous decade? The 2% is an estimate only for this year. Believe it when I see it. Plus they have decades of neglect to make up for.

Yeah, go back to 1938. How was it there?

It's irrelevant to look into the past. Important is the present and maybe outlook into the future 🙏

[herfiehandbag]

I understand that at a recent Command Post Exercise ( wargames sound so much more glamorous) the question arose of whether a counterattack into Russia was possible. The Finns reckoned they could be at Saint Petersburg  in 3 days, but it would be messy 'cos the Poles would get in the way after day 2!

[jvs]

1 hour ago, Hanaguma said:

...and for the previous decade? The 2% is an estimate only for this year. Believe it when I see it. Plus they have decades of neglect to make up for.

NATO allies in Europe this year will invest 380 billion dollars,

[Tug]

6 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

The Donald told them to get their <deleted> together years ago, and they laughed. Well, who's laughing now? Germany spending 1.4% of GDP on defence is a sad joke, the rest of NATO not much better. They are reaping what they have sown. You think Putin would have invaded in 2022 if NATO had provided any kind of credible military response capability? Doubt it.

The felon was busy cutting and running creating a vacuum for his pal putin to fill….remember the felons first day in office?that’s when he had the Russians in the Oval Office without an American representative……remember his private meeting with his pal in helinsky again without American a record or a American representative humm??the Donald indeed…..he’s the biggest asset Putin has.in my opinion in these modern times nato would destroy putins supply’s before the material arrives in theater.one thing Ukraine has exposed is the inferior systems the Russians have with sufficient resources and manpower Russia would be annihilated and sent packing rather quickly.the Russians need to take care of their (problem) and rejoin the world to thrive as a nation 

[Hanaguma]

32 minutes ago, jvs said:

NATO allies in Europe this year will invest 380 billion dollars,

Big deal. Still half of what Uncle Sugar spends all on his own. Plus notice the 10 years previous. Lots of catching up to do.

[Hanaguma]

19 minutes ago, Tug said:

The felon was busy cutting and running creating a vacuum for his pal putin to fill….remember the felons first day in office?that’s when he had the Russians in the Oval Office without an American representative……remember his private meeting with his pal in helinsky again without American a record or a American representative humm??the Donald indeed…..he’s the biggest asset Putin has.in my opinion in these modern times nato would destroy putins supply’s before the material arrives in theater.one thing Ukraine has exposed is the inferior systems the Russians have with sufficient resources and manpower Russia would be annihilated and sent packing rather quickly.the Russians need to take care of their (problem) and rejoin the world to thrive as a nation 

It would be nice to stick to the topic at hand instead of your usual laundry list of talking points, dont you think? 

Trump called out NATO and made them a bit nervous. Good. They needed a wake up call. Hopefully it will be permanent. IF, as you say, Trump was a Putin puppet, he would never have done so. He would have let NATO quietly continue to starve their military forces of funds and materiel. Your accusation has no basis in fact. Trump also never would have warned Germany about the dangers of relying on Russia as their primary source for energy, IF he were a Russian stooge. So your crackpot theory has no basis in reality.

 

As for destroying Russia's supplies, NATO doesn't have the long range strike capability to do that. The majority of their aircraft are strictly 'over the field of battle' types.