Key Points – While Russia exhibits belligerent moves, including military buildups near Finland and the Baltic states, a conventional war against NATO would be “extremely stupid” for Moscow due to the alliance’s overwhelming superiority in aircraft, ships, and armored vehicles.
-Russia’s conventional forces have been significantly degraded in Ukraine.
-Therefore, any Putin-led aggression against NATO would likely not aim for a conventional victory but rather a swift seizure of Baltic territory, followed by nuclear threats intended to fracture NATO’s resolve and prevent a collective response under Article 5. NATO’s key to deterrence is robust border defenses and unified political will.
Could Russia Still Go To War Against And Attack NATO?
Recent bellicose moves by Russia are seen as a sign that Russian President Vladimir Putin is considering going to war against NATO. Some intelligence analysts believe that it could happen within two years.
While there are some overt signs of preparations, such as massing troops on the borders with the Baltic nations and Finland, Russia would need to be prepared to suffer as many losses in three months or less of war against the alliance as it has sustained over three years in Ukraine.
In another hint at possible aggression, Russian ships were observed loitering over undersea cables in the Pacific. Severing communication cables would benefit Russia during a war with NATO. Further, the Russians are tracking British submarines and have increased subversion attacks on the U.S. and European Union more than tenfold since 2022.
It would be extremely stupid for Putin to begin a war with NATO. But here we are.
And here is how it would probably play out.
Putin’s Gamble To Break NATO’s Resolve Would Go All In
Putin’s conventional forces have been bled nearly dry in Ukraine. Yes, they have unlimited manpower in reserve, but their best units have been decimated. And in two years, their armored forces would not be ready for a large-scale armored battle. They have never embraced combined-arms operations, which is why they have taken such a beating in Ukraine.
NATO forces constantly use and train in combined-arms operations. The U.S. military defines combined arms as operations that synchronize different military units and capabilities, such as infantry, tanks, artillery, and air power, to achieve a greater effect than each would if used separately.
This approach, crucial for success on modern battlefields, relies on complementary tactics and coordinated actions to overwhelm the enemy.
Putin’s approach isn’t to beat NATO in a conventional war that he could never win; it is instead to break NATO’s resolve by splintering the alliance from within.
Putin therefore would plan to attack one or more of the Baltic states – Estonia, Latvia, or Lithuania – and take it quickly in a lightning-fast assault. Moscow would then threaten the West with nuclear weapons if it responded to the attack. If this sounds familiar, it is because he already tried this approach with Ukraine.
The gamble would be that NATO’s Western nations – France, Germany, Italy, the UK, and the U.S. – would not defend the attacked nation. Any refusal to intervene would fracture the alliance, rendering all other nations vulnerable to attack piecemeal.
Thus, Putin’s goal of regional dominance and reversing Russia’s Cold War defeat would come closer to fruition.
From NATO’s point of view, the key is to stop the Russian high-intensity attack cold by having layers of defense up close to the border. NATO member-states’ defense industries need to start ratcheting up now rather than later.
Putin’s Ambition Does Not Stop At Ukraine
French President Emmanuel Macron said in March that Russia’s rearmament showed Moscow’s intentions range far beyond Ukraine. This echoed a warning by EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, who, while still Estonia’s prime minister in 2024, said that “it’s a question of when they will start the next war.”
Estonian Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur in November said that if the fighting in Ukraine stops, and Russian soldiers now in Eastern Ukraine are no longer needed there, “hundreds of thousands of troops” will be available for Putin to move closer to the Baltic States.
However, some NATO leaders believe it will take longer than two years for Russia to be ready to take on NATO. Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, the British chief of defense staff, said that it would take the Kremlin five years to restore Russia’s army to its prewar strength, and another five to rectify the weaknesses that the war has revealed.
Finland Is a Key NATO Ally
Finland shares a 1,300-kilometer (800-mile) border with Russia. The Russian military has set up a large tent city capable of housing more than 2,000 troops, along with tank warehouses and renovated aircraft shelters, at Kamenka, only 60 km from the border, and another at Petrozavodsk,160 km from the border.
According to the Wall Street Journal, the Russians are setting up an army headquarters there to oversee tens of thousands of troops. The Severomorsk-2 helicopter base is also being renovated. That base, high up in the Arctic Circle, was shuttered in 1998 and reopened in 2022.
The Finns hate the Russians. If the Russians attacked the Baltic nations, it is quite conceivable that Finland would threaten the Murmansk Peninsula, where Russia’s Northern Fleet and nuclear forces are stationed.
Finland’s army has huge stockpiles of arms and ammunition, and arguably the best artillery of all European NATO nations. Its Air Force has purchased 64 U.S. F-35 stealth aircraft.
Conclusions
While Russia has increased the size of the army, its quality has diminished. Barely trained conscripts are thrown into the fray in Ukraine to get chewed up in senseless frontal attacks.
Al Jazeera correctly said, “Russia is in no shape to take on NATO. Russia’s invasion in 2022 revitalized the alliance, and its members’ defense spending has soared.”
And what would happen to his military if Putin’s gamble on NATO’s fracturing fails? Russia has about 4,957 military aircraft, compared with NATO’s combined 22,377, and 339 military ships compared to NATO’s 1,143.
Russia is decisively outnumbered by NATO for tanks (5,750 to 11,495), and in terms of armored vehicles overall: its stock of 131,527 is vastly inferior in numbers and quality to NATO’s 971,280.
NATO airpower would obliterate Russia’s conventional troops in short order. That is Putin’s gamble.
About the Author:
Steve Balestrieri is a National Security Columnist. He served as a US Army Special Forces NCO and Warrant Officer. In addition to writing on defense, he covers the NFL for PatsFans.com and is a member of the Pro Football Writers of America (PFWA). His work was regularly featured in many military publications.
Europe’s Ukraine War in Focus
Pingback: Russia's MiG-21 'Fishbed' Fighter Gave NATO a Headache - National Security Journal