Danish Defense Minister Troels Lund Poulsen said Russia could attack a NATO country within three to five years. But he's not the only one. Back in December, his German counterpart Boris Pistorius called on Europeans to strengthen their military capabilities as the increasingly belligerent Vladimir Putin could spark a conflict against the Atlantic Alliance in less than a decade. The head of the Estonian secret service also sounded a similar alarm, pointing out that the Russian military industry was in full swing, enabling the Kremlin not only to continue the war in Ukraine to the bitter end, but even to end it Opening of another front. In France, the government has launched a recruitment campaign for aviation, touted as a normal profession of the future.
And last month, General Patrick Sanders, head of Britain's armed forces, called on Her Majesty's Government to “mobilize the nation” to prepare for war with Russia. As for the political and military leaders of Sweden, which has shelved two centuries of neutrality after the Russian attack on Kiev and wants to join NATO following the example of Finland, they urged their citizens to “mentally prepare for war.” ».
The war is among us again. After Putin unleashed it by invading a sovereign country, it is no longer just a theoretical hypothesis. And the scenario of a Kremlin leader who, after Ukraine, directs his expansionist efforts against another European country is increasingly appearing in the thoughts of politicians and in the conversations of diplomats and experts. The statements of the former and possibly future US President Donald Trump, who threatens not to help Europe in the event of a Russian attack if it does not pay its alleged debts, raise a dramatic and existential doubt, which, in the minister's opinion, is dramatic and existential NATO General Jens Stoltenberg raises doubts “undermines the security of everyone”. And the uncertainty about the outcome of the elections in America is triggering a debate that, in reality, no one who will be in the White House in less than a year can escape.
Chekhov said that if in the first act of a play there is a gun hanging on the wall, in the third act that gun will be fired. And it is a fact that at this moment the imaginary walls of the European stage are covered in weapons. Micael Johansson, head of Saab, one of Europe's largest defense companies, says Russia is now capable of producing between 4 and 5 million artillery shells a year, more than 10 times more than Europe. “We are investing too, but is it enough?” he told the Financial Times, explaining that “European governments are struggling to understand how far we have to go in terms of deterrence and resilience to the threat coming from the East to have.” . . While Vlad Gheorghita, the head of the Romanian Armed Forces, warns that if Putin succeeds in Ukraine, Moldova and the Western Balkans would be the next targets: “Russia will not stop here and I think the escalation would be rapid.”
The zeitgeist is turning to mobilization. On January 30, Germany, the Netherlands and Poland signed an agreement to build new “dual-use” rail links that will enable faster and more effective transport of people and material from North Sea ports to Europe's eastern borders. A week earlier, the European Commission allocated 800 million euros to finance 38 military mobilization projects in ten EU countries. But we are still dealing with logistics.
The need for Europeans to prepare for the possibility of armed conflict dominated the security conference held in Munich over the weekend. However, according to many participants, there was a lack of sense of urgency: “There was a lack of clarity about the way forward, I didn't see a strong demonstration of European solidarity,” Steven Sokol from the American Council on Germany.
And instead, explains former German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer, “the return of war to our continent puts common security at the center and above all else.” Caught between an imperialist Russia and a more isolationist America, “Europe must take a leap into reality and prepare here and now for the worst imaginable scenario.” This means nothing more and nothing less than “coordinated rearmament to dramatically increase our defense and deterrence capacity, including a common nuclear shield.” Let's not kid ourselves, warns Fischer, “everyone in their own way, Putin and Trump are forcing us to make a historical and fundamental paradigm shift.” The time of naivety in the question of our security must never return.” Ursula von der Leyen, who spoke yesterday from The German CDU, who was officially nominated for a new mandate at the head of the European Commission, promised to appoint a defense commissioner if she was re-confirmed. But is that really necessary?