A war between Nato and Russia is at the closest point since the Western military alliance was set up in 1949 as a unified deterrent to kind of horrors seen during World War Two
Just over 75 years since its inception, Nato[1] is at its closest point to the type of war it was formed to deter, according to experts voicing fears over continuing Russian aggression.
After months of Vladimir Putin’s bullying tactics[2], with major incursions[3] into Romanian, Estonian and Polish sovereign territory, the alliance at last appears ready to stand up to the warmonger’s terror.
Western leaders have issued defiant statements in recent days, warning the Kremlin that Nato is ready to act[4] should Putin continue to breach the airspace of allied member states.
READ MORE: Russia hits back at Trump’s ‘deeply mistaken’ comments after he turned on Putin[5]READ MORE: Vladimir Putin advisor says Russia ‘must prepare to strike Europe with nuclear weapons’[6]
Speaking after three armed Russian MiG-31 fighter jets breached Estonian airspace on Friday, Nato chief Mark Rutte said there was “no need” to shoot down the Russian planes on this occasion. However, he added it doesn’t mean “we would not shoot down an aircraft immediately. We will first assess the situation”. “If necessary, we will do what is required”, he said.
The UK Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper issued a similarly defiant statement, warning that Britain is “ready to act” against Russian aggression. Donald Trump[7] has also recommended simply shooting Russian aircraft out of the sky.
The Mirror[8] has spoken to a number of experts who believe Nato is at the closest point it has been to conflict since its inception in 1949.
Professor Anthony Glees, a renowned European defence and security expert, believes Russia[9] is making a major miscalculation in thinking Nato will not respond with force this time.
He explained: “You ask ‘is NATO at the closest point to global conflict since its inception?’ and I believe the answer is ‘yes, yes, and yes again’, We in NATO have never been closer to real and major war with odious Russia than right now.
“Putin believes the European Nato powers huff and puff but will always back down because his bestest friend in the West, Trump will not send the US cavalry to protect us when his push comes to an armed shove, as it may do now, any day of the week.”
“However, in my view, Putin may be making a major and terminal miscalculation. Because things have changed, fairly dramatically.”
Professor Glees believes NATO should have shot down the three Russian fighter interceptors after Friday’s incursions, “no ‘if’s’, no ‘buts'”.
“Violation of NATO airspace by offensive jets should always be result in Putin’s planes being taken down immediately”, he added.
The professor suggested that failing to do so could be just as dangerous.
“Any humming or hahing will be taken by Putin as a clear indication he can claim control over the skies of eastern Europe at will, a vital first step for him in any military assault on the Baltic Republics, on Poland and on Romania.”
Ed Andrews, Senior Research Fellow for European Security and Nato expert at the Royal United Services Institute, agrees NATO has never been closer to armed warfare with the Kremlin. But he argues the alliance could have stopped Putin in his tracks far earlier.
He said the West’s main issue has been figuring out a way to properly “punish” Putin for these incursions, human rights abuses, and tyrannical behaviour over recent years.
“I’m one of those people who thinks that we should have gone harder and faster earlier. And when I mean earlier, I mean in 2014, not in 2022,” he said.
Moscow first sent Russian troops into Ukraine[10] back in 2014. The current conflict is seen as starting in 2014 rather than 2022 after Russia occupied and annexed Crimea from Ukraine. Moscow then bolstered its paramilitaries to wage war against the Ukrainian armed forces[11] in Donbas.
Mr Andrews, a former British infantry soldier, was stationed at NATO headquarters at the time. He said NATO should have acted then and stopped the emboldening of Putin into the dictator he is today.
“Yeah, we should have done more. But I think the position we’re in at the moment, is that we’re not punishing Putin. These incursions happen and we strengthen the eastern flank – My argument would be, if your direction is to defend every inch of NATO territory surely the eastern flank should be as hard as possible. The fact you’re still incrementally improving it in response shows that you haven’t gone hard and fast enough originally.
“So I think there is a lot more to do, but again, like I say, more planes, more money, more surveillance for the eastern flank – it’s all good, it all helps, but it doesn’t punish Putin.”
“And that’s where I think the downside is, we don’t really have any ideas of really how to punish Putin,” he added.
How NATO escalates a conflict
Political consultation (Article 4)
All NATO decisions start at the North Atlantic Council (NAC) – where ambassadors of all 32 member states meet. If tensions continue to rise, the alliance will make urgent consultations of Article 4, which is triggered when a member state feels its sovereign security is under threat.
Intelligence assessment
Before any military action is taken, NATO relies on its intelligence fusion centre and inputs from member states. Military and civilian experts analyse satellite imagery, cyber activity and ground reports before presenting them to the alliance to inform their decisions on a proportionate response.
Military options developed
Potential responses – which range from deployment of forces to active operations – are then suggested to the military committee.
Among the options are:
- Reinforcing forward-deployed troops on the borders of member states.
- Increasing air policing and naval patrols.
- Cyber defence measures.
- Full-scale warfare.
Step-by-step escalation
Rather than jumping into combat, NATO will often escalate step-by-step. These steps could involve deploying troops to frontline states, enhancing air patrols, or moving naval task groups into contested waters. Rather than provoking an enemy, these measures are designed to deter further aggression while showing resolve.
Rules of Engagement
Once the step has been taken, NATO will adjust its rules of engagement (ROE) dependent on the evolving situation. This can shift from defensive to active deterrence.
Collective Defence (Article 5)
The highest level of escalation is invoking Article 5 – the collective defence clause that states an attack on one member is an attack on all. Once agreed by member states, NATO can launch a joint combat operation. Article 5 has only been triggered once before – the day after the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the twin towers.
However, the build up of escalation is not always linear, and not all steps need to be taken to reach Article 5.
References
- ^ Nato (www.mirror.co.uk)
- ^ months of Vladimir Putin’s bullying tactics (www.mirror.co.uk)
- ^ major incursions (www.mirror.co.uk)
- ^ warning the Kremlin that Nato is ready to act (www.mirror.co.uk)
- ^ Russia hits back at Trump’s ‘deeply mistaken’ comments after he turned on Putin (www.mirror.co.uk)
- ^ Vladimir Putin advisor says Russia ‘must prepare to strike Europe with nuclear weapons’ (www.mirror.co.uk)
- ^ Donald Trump (www.mirror.co.uk)
- ^ Mirror (www.mirror.co.uk)
- ^ Russia (www.mirror.co.uk)
- ^ Ukraine (www.mirror.co.uk)
- ^ armed forces (www.mirror.co.uk)