On the fourth anniversary of Russia's full-scale war against Ukraine, numerous analyses have been published examining the causes of the war, the current situation and its future prospects. Opinions have run the gamut. Some believe that Russia will ultimately prevail anyway, while others argue the opposite — that Russia's economy cannot withstand a prolonged war.

The most interesting views, however, concern what comes next if, by chance, some kind of ceasefire can still be reached in Ukraine.

Deceptive ceasefire

In this context, it is worth dwelling on an article published in the influential journal Foreign Affairs, authored by American analyst Samuel Charap and Finnish scholar Hiski Haukkala. The article is titled "Europe's Next War."

The article's postulate is that a ceasefire would mean an even more dangerous situation for Europe and that the possibility of a direct military conflict between Russia and NATO is extremely high. The authors recall that during the Cold War there were far more contacts between NATO and the Soviet Union, which made it possible to prevent escalation caused by miscalculation. Since February 24, 2022, however, those contacts have been reduced to a minimum and missteps by either side could lead to a military clash.

A few examples. If the United States concludes that war is imminent and deploys long-range missiles to Europe, Moscow may interpret this as preparation for an attack. The West, in turn, may view Russia's latest military exercises as potentially escalating into aggression — just as happened in the case of Ukraine.

In any event, Russia does not view European security in the same way as the West. All signs indicate that Russia is preparing for war with NATO. Finland's security report notes that Russia intends to more than double its forces on the northern flank, from 30,000 troops to 80,000. Estonia's Foreign Intelligence Service report, incidentally, points to Russia's plan to establish a drone army.

For its part, one could add that Russia's economy has been shifted almost entirely onto a war footing and reversing that shift would be extremely difficult. Moreover, what is to be done with a million battle-hardened cutthroats? They cannot simply be dispersed across Russia.

It is no secret that kinetic conflict is preceded by Russia's hybrid attacks — acts of sabotage, cable cutting, "stray" drones and the like. We are already witnessing all of this.

The article also refers to the role of the United States. Russia is undoubtedly encouraged by disagreements between Washington and Europe, for example over Greenland. But if the United States believes it can stay out of a potential war in Europe, it is mistaken. The United States and Europe are far too closely intertwined for that.

NATO 3.0

It is well known that Donald Trump's administration is forcefully demanding that Europe contribute significantly more to its own security, including within NATO. The Pentagon's deputy chief, Elbridge Colby, recently argued that NATO must return to its original roots — its "factory settings." This plan has been conditionally dubbed "NATO 3.0." In other words, the alliance should abandon divisive out-of-area missions such as Iraq and Kosovo and focus solely on the security of its own territory.

This also fits with a plan to reduce the involvement of allies that are not NATO members in the alliance's affairs. Thus, there is no desire for Indo-Pacific countries — Australia, New Zealand, South Korea and Japan — or Ukraine to participate (in the official portion) of NATO's next summit in Ankara.

At this point, it is worth recalling that when people speak of NATO's "factory settings," the alliance was created to prevent an attack on Europe by Soviet hordes. Today, a similar situation exists with Russia. Yet in the United States' new national security strategy, defense strategy and in the statements of leading politicians, Russia is not named as a threat or an enemy.

The claim that the United States does not regard Russia as a global power but merely a regional actor and that its principal adversary is China does not stand up to scrutiny. Russia is the only country in the world that possesses even more nuclear weapons than the United States and in the event of war it could wipe Washington off the face of the earth.

It has become a well-worn saying that Ukraine is currently defending all of Europe. It is on Ukraine's shoulders that the obligation enshrined in NATO's "factory settings" now rests. Its defeat — or a deceptive ceasefire — would only embolden Vladimir Putin's ambitions. So as Washington's strategists dream of NATO 3.0, they would do well to incorporate Ukraine into it. At present, there is no readiness to do so.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and X and never miss an update!