European countries have sufficient capabilities to deter any Russian ground attack

At the end of last month, the Romanian Ministry of Defense announced that about 700 American soldiers would be withdrawn from its borders. Although some members of the US Senate expressed their concern about this withdrawal, the number of soldiers is negligible in the balance of power between NATO and Russia on the European continent.

However, even if the United States withdraws all its ground forces from Europe, European countries have sufficient capabilities to deter any Russian ground attack, and they should. Europe is rediscovering the truth of international politics that effective statecraft requires its own efforts to deter any Russian attack.

The question is: What should it do to deter Russia? Although the war in Ukraine has demonstrated Russia’s weakness, history is full of cases of defeated armies that learned from their mistakes and reshaped themselves into more powerful fighting armies.

Above all, European countries must define their military objectives. These goals should include deterring Russia from attacking NATO territory, and minimizing escalation, if Russia decides to do so.

To achieve these twin goals, European members of the alliance must decide what kind of strategy they want to implement, a crucial task.

Allied European countries must also implement a “defense doctrine,” which includes deploying sufficient European forces to deter and confront any Russian attempts to attack. Such a doctrine would also be much better than the alternative represented by the “deterrence doctrine,” which requires the adoption of sufficient military capabilities to punish the attacker. For Europe, this will not be enough to deter Russia, which has shown its willingness to accept increasing casualties.

NATO also needs to take five steps to deter Russia. With the defensive principle in mind, the European-led alliance and US policymakers should take five steps to create an effective conventional deterrent against Russia to empower European allies.

First: US policymakers must begin withdrawing their ground forces from the continent. Although the European countries in the alliance have the military capacity to confront any potential Russian aggression, these countries still depend on the United States for their security. Strategically, the United States has more important domestic problems to address, such as threats in the Western Hemisphere and a rising China. By withdrawing US ground forces from Europe, US policymakers will incentivize European countries to take on their own security.

Second: European countries must increase their defense spending, and this does not mean merely adhering to spending pledges of 5%. Committing to such simple ratios of defense spending to GDP actually limits Europe’s defense spending, because it shifts the focus from meeting real security needs to meeting rising spending targets. NATO must abandon this rule of defense spending and focus on goals that concretely secure Europe against any Russian attack.

Third: Allied European countries must improve the ability of their armies to mobilize and deploy quickly in the event of a Russian attack. This means improving its infrastructure to move equipment and personnel eastward, training more troops, and improving command, control, communications, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities. If Russia attempts to attack a NATO country, European member states must be prepared to deploy their forces to fight as quickly as possible.

Fourth: European NATO member states must deploy light defenses in the Baltic region. With Russia and Belarus to the east, and the Baltic Sea to the west, the Baltic states do not have enough space to station heavy armored units and weapons in the region. Instead, the deployment of light defences, light infantry units, artillery, anti-tank weapons and air defense capabilities would slow the progress of the Russian offensive through urban warfare. Although this option is not ideal for the Baltic countries, it is the best option given the geographical situation of the region.

Fifth: European partner countries must deploy heavier military capabilities – tanks, armored infantry vehicles, armored and mechanized brigades, aircraft, and medium- and long-range air defenses – throughout Germany and Poland. These weapons and military units will achieve two goals: preventing a deep Russian incursion from Belarus into Poland, and serving as an operational reserve in case Russia attacks the Baltic states.

To achieve these goals, a European-led NATO must deploy these forces in a checkerboard-like pattern across Germany and Poland, with each acting as an island of resistance.

The European reluctance to rearm against Russia is understandable. War is one of the worst things humans can hope for, and few ordinary citizens want to leave their families and friends to risk their lives in order to defend another country. There is an understandable fear that rearmament on the continent will lead to militarism and a return to the repressive regimes and wars that have plagued the continent in the past.

However, every country needs ways to protect its freedom and its citizens. The presence of a strong NATO does not mean that Europe will become enamored with militarism and that it will once again move toward military influence. By implementing these measures, peace can be maintained in the rest of the European continent. About “National Interest”

---

A turning point in Europe’s approach to security

The EU’s new €800 billion defense programme, Rearmament Europe, represents a turning point in Europe’s approach to security. This program focuses on three main goals: strengthening European defense capabilities, investing in European defense industries, and ensuring long-term contracts for military production, in addition to reducing strategic dependence and moving away from dependence on American and non-European suppliers. Finally, ensure Ukraine’s ability to defend itself, by maintaining and expanding military aid to Kiev, even in the absence of American support.

The plan seeks to amend strict European Union rules, which require countries to maintain budget deficits below 3% of gross domestic product. Through this amendment, member states will be able to increase their defense spending by up to 1.5% of GDP over four years, which could provide an additional €650 billion for the European defense sector. The plan includes easing financial restrictions on military spending, and lifting restrictions that prevent the European Investment Bank from financing military projects, which will make it easier for governments to finance large military projects, and become able to support defense industries, including army and police equipment, although it will not finance weapons and ammunition directly.

. NATO must abandon the norm of defense spending and focus on goals that tangibly secure Europe against a Russian attack.

. Although the war in Ukraine has demonstrated Russia’s weakness, history is full of cases of defeated armies that learned from their mistakes and reshaped themselves into more powerful fighting forces.