How Russia Could Test NATO’s Article 5 Pledge

Narva is a pristine city in Estonia, rich in history, culture, and conflict. Located adjacent to the Russian border, Narva and its Estonian inhabitants face threats not only from the Russian government but also from the Russian minority, which is increasingly becoming a major security concern.

Increased Russian intelligence activity along the Estonian border remains a threat to Narva. Like Ukraine, the Kremlin could be slowly laying the same groundwork and playbook in the city.

Heightened tensions between NATO and Russia have led many to believe that the Suwalki Gap could be the alliance’s flashpoint of war. Still, Narva could ultimately be the city Moscow tries to test Article 5 of NATO’s mutual defense obligations.

Russian Population Transfer in Narva

Narva was a flashpoint in the Estonian War of Independence against Russia. Through negotiations, Estonia was able to fully incorporate the city into its sovereign country, which the collapsing Russian Empire acknowledged.

However, the Soviet Union under notorious tyrant Josef Stalin would renege on the independence of Estonia and the rest of the Baltic states and have the Red Army invade all three countries in 1940 and deport hundreds of thousands of Estonians, Lithuanians, and Latvians.

Subsequently, Nazi Germany would then occupy Narva and the majority of Eastern Europe during Operation Barbarossa in 1941. The Soviet Union would counterattack in 1944 and recapture the city, while the German army was able to evacuate with much of its garrison before encirclement. The German military would evacuate most of the city’s population before the battle, but this move later played into the hands of Stalin.

Labeling the Baltic states as ‘counterrevolutionaries’ and ‘German collaborators,’ Stalin barred the re-entry of the Estonian inhabitants and deported over 22,000 Estonians. Instead, Stalin repopulated the city with ethnic Russians and Russian speakers, leading to a major demographic shift.

The Soviet Union would build a clandestine uranium plant in 1947 in which ethnic Russians would migrate to the city. The Kremlin and Russian nationalists would draw their disdain at Estonia’s independence and Narva’s restoration in the Estonian Republic instead of Stalin’s old borders. However, a sizable Russian minority would stay in the city, laying the groundwork for future tensions.

Tensions in Narva

Narva is increasingly becoming a flashpoint of potential Russian hybrid warfare activities against the West, especially in the past few years of disintegrating relations between NATO and Russia.

The ethnic Russian majority is increasingly sympathetic to Putin’s regime, and the Russian irredentism of a new empire is making Estonians concerned about a potential fifth column. As many of the ethnic Russians are from the older generation, some are aligning with the Kremlin talking points of ‘NATO expansion’ and conspiracies about the Ukrainian government.

Integration is a major obstacle for ethnic Russians, as a decent minority have Estonian passports but not direct Estonian citizenship due to their ‘grey’ status from the fall of the USSR. Whereas in the majority of Estonia, language tests are a requirement for residency and citizenship, in Narva, the requirements are non-starters, making integration into the Estonian nation less likely.

How Russia Could Create Chaos Through the City

Narva’s majority ethnic Russian and Russian-speaking population—settled post-destruction of the city during WWII is the perfect pretext for hybrid warfare and testing NATO’s deterrence policies all in one.

A major pretext Russia used to invade Ukraine is that their military is “protecting” Russian speakers, though the destruction of Russian-speaking Ukrainian cities tells a different story.

Already having major conflicts with Estonia and the rest of the Baltics over language requirement laws, the Kremlin is stoking tensions for dissent and espionage—and Narva is ripe to exacerbate tensions for the ‘Russian world.’

Russian spies, active throughout Europe could organize rallies in Narva against the government. They could distribute leaflets and posters for ‘autonomy’ and call for more Russian diplomatic pressure against Estonia.

The diplomatic provocations can quietly turn into hybrid and informational warfare, as seen in prior operations in Georgia and Ukraine. Moscow will accuse Tallinn of “genocide,” akin to how the government of Kyiv was falsely labeled by this tactic in Ukraine’s Donbas region.

Propaganda efforts such as disinformation campaigns of closures of Russian-speaking schools and language would be a focal point of Kremlin hybrid methods—especially towards a Western audience that doesn’t understand Eastern European politics.

Laying Groundwork to Test NATO Article 5

Akin to pretexts in Ukraine and Georgia, Russia would likely use the same groundwork for Estonia, a NATO member, through a myriad of tactics to ultimately test NATO’s Article 5.

Russian foreign intelligence (SVR), already conducting sabotage operations across Europe, could embed themselves in Narva. In the city, Russian intelligence could conduct false flag operations against Estonian assets, and due to the security risks dual nationals held in Narva, Tallinn’s security apparatus would step up surveillance against ethnic Russians.

Through stronger surveillance and more stringent measures against the population of Narva, the SVR would recruit disenfranchised Russians and start promoting stories of “persecution” akin to tactics of Igor Girkin, a former high-ranking FSB officer who admitted to starting the war in the Donbas region.

Over the past few years, Russian hybrid warfare in the continent includes purposely sending migrants through the Mediterranean and Eastern Europe in hopes of propping up far-right parties sympathetic or directly tied to the Kremlin. Parties in power directly tied to the Kremlin, such as Smer in Slovakia and Fidesz in Hungary, are already igniting discontent in Europe, with others, such as the AfD and Freedom Party in Austria, having a foothold in politics.

Growing discontent in NATO through pro-Russian parties with countries refusing to participate in certain missions, such as Hungary with Ukraine, will ultimately help Moscow lay the groundwork to have a foothold in Narva.

Current US presidential elections are also playing a major role in the future of NATO and European security, as former President Trump openly stated he would allow Russia to attack members of the alliance if they are perceived as not paying a fair share. As a contingency, 24 NATO members have reached the 2% GDP allocations for 2024, and France is stepping up immensely to potentially lead a training and advising mission in Ukraine.

The Kremlin, focusing on a wartime economy, is banking on ending their invasion of Ukraine on favorable territorial concessions, particularly through nuclear threats, as a domino effect of Kyiv being abandoned through unfavorable settlements would lead to other domino effects.

Russia itself does not have to attack Narva directly but instead convince the world that Russians are being “persecuted,” akin to what we have seen Putin use as justifications for other wars. From here, the foreign intelligence services will provoke Estonia into using lethal force, which the Kremlin would use as a “limited operation” to “protect” Russian speakers.

False flag operations would heighten, and Russia, through the UN Security Council, would justify a “referendum,” hoping Estonia wouldn’t allow it, giving a pretext for a military operation. NATO’s immediate response will have to be firm, as the alliance cannot afford a Chamberlain moment but instead peace through strength and deterrence.

For now, a Russian operation in Narva is just a hypothetical scenario, but increasing activity toward Estonia and heightened rhetoric should not be underestimated. Already feeling emboldened by perceived weakness, the Russian Federation is more unpredictable than ever, and to truly test NATO’s will, a limited operation towards a smaller member will be on the table in lieu of renewed Russian imperial irredentism.

About the Author: Julian McBride

Julian McBride is a forensic anthropologist, SOFREP contributor, and independent journalist born in New York. He reports and documents the plight of people around the world who are affected by conflicts, rogue geopolitics, and war, and also tells the stories of war victims whose voices are never heard. Julian is the founder and director of the Reflections of War Initiative (ROW), an anthropological NGO which aims to tell the stories of the victims of war through art therapy. As a former Marine, he uses this technique not only to help heal PTSD but also to share people’s stories through art, which conveys “the message of the brutality of war better than most news organizations.” McBride is also a Contributing Editor to this publication.