Key highlights:
- NATO is devising “land corridors” to hasten the deployment of US and allied forces to the frontline in case of a broader European conflict with Russia
- A NATO operation to reclaim lost territory would require establishing air superiority and control of the Baltic Sea before deploying a substantial ground force
- Germany agreed to contribute 30,000 troops and a combination of 85 ships and aircraft, all mobilizable within 30 days
As Russia’s conflict with Ukraine persists into its third year, Europeans confront challenging decisions regarding their approach over the next twelve months. Sustaining support for Kyiv is crucial to equip them adequately in their efforts to repel Russian forces.
Moscow’s military force is poised to decimate Kharkiv, the second-largest city in Ukraine, and advance on multiple fronts. Amid the ongoing European discourse, Moscow has boldly redrawn borders, asserting ownership over extensive territories.
Russian missiles and drones have breached NATO airspace multiple times targeting Ukraine, and provoking growing anger within NATO. Consequently, NATO is now devising “land corridors” to hasten the deployment of US and allied forces to the frontline in case of a broader European conflict with Russia. This move comes after prior alerts from NATO leaders to brace for potential conflicts with Russia in the forthcoming decades.
NATO Rings Russia with Potential Troop Corridor Options
The newly established troop pathways aim to facilitate rapid deployment, with American soldiers anticipated to land at designated ports and then follow pre-established routes based on potential scenarios of Moscow’s aggression. This development builds upon existing arrangements made last year during the Vilnius summit, where NATO agreed to maintain 300,000 troops in a state of high readiness.
According to current plans, US forces are slated to land at ports in the Netherlands and then proceed through Germany en route to Poland by train. Should Russia invade a NATO ally, the troops would initially gather in Rotterdam before advancing eastward. However, in light of potential threats to the Netherlands or the destruction of northern European ports by Russia, the alliance is now considering altering these entry points for troops.
Alternative strategies under consideration involve US troops arriving at ports in Italy and then traveling overland through Slovenia and Croatia to reach Hungary, which borders Ukraine. Additionally, deployments could entail troops being sent to ports in Greece or Turkey, followed by a journey through Bulgaria and Romania to access the eastern sector of the alliance.
What’s More in the Plan?
Additional strategies involve the deployment of troops to ports in the Balkans, Norway, Sweden, and Finland.
“Every aspect is carefully crafted to ensure the necessary resilience — robustness, reserves, and redundancies,” stated Lieutenant General Alexander Sollfrank of the Joint Support and Enabling Command (JSEC), discussing the plans.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has escalated his rhetoric in recent days, particularly in response to both the US and Germany granting Ukraine permission to utilize its weaponry against certain targets within Russian territory. On Wednesday, June 12, Putin cautioned that Russia might supply long-range weapons to its allies for use against Western targets, and insinuated that Moscow would resort to nuclear weapons if its authority were threatened.
How NATO Must Respond to Russian Nuclear Coercion?
A NATO operation to reclaim lost territory would require establishing air superiority and control of the Baltic Sea before deploying a substantial ground force. Russian doctrine views such a scenario as threatening enough to potentially use non-strategic nuclear weapons for coercive or military purposes, forcing NATO to consider nuclear threats to compel withdrawal and reinstate deterrence.
Baltic officials advocate a “repel, don’t expel” strategy. The 2014 Defense Investment Pledge (DIP) required member states to allocate at least 2% of their GDP to defense, with 20% for modernization by 2024. In Vilnius, allies agreed that 2%should be the minimum. While only 3 allies met this target in Wales, 18 are projected to achieve it this year.
NATO expects European allies to collectively invest 2% of their GDP this year. European allies have increased their investment by one-third since 2014, totaling $380 billion. Norway plans to double its expenditure over the next 12 years, and the UK aims for 2.5% by 2030, pledging an additional £75 billion ($96 billion). However, Canada’s additional CAD 8.1 billion ($5.9 billion) by 2030 still falls short at 1.76% of GDP.
Despite progress in defense spending, 3 key questions remain for NATO allies. Firstly, whether the Vilnius agreement to consider 2% as a minimum is enough to sustain a positive trajectory and provide robust forward defense capabilities.
Secondly, the allocation of spending needs scrutiny. European allies must address capability gaps and reduce reliance on the United States for high-end collective defense missions. Lastly, the effective use of funds is crucial. Increased spending has seen a decline in cooperation, making defense more costly and less efficient.
Air Defense Scrambling to Keep Up
NATO’s combined capabilities significantly surpass those of Russia, even when the United States is excluded. The two-year conflict in Ukraine has severely impacted Russia’s military, reducing its active main battle tank fleet by 41% since 2022 and decreasing its active personnel by nearly 20%, despite partial national mobilization.
Additionally, non-US. NATO members possess more modern equipment than Russia. About 71% of non-US. NATO’s combat aircraft fleet was produced or upgraded after 1990, in contrast to only 53% of Russia’s fleet.
Moreover, in light of the substantial US military presence in Europe, estimated at approximately 100,000 personnel, with a significant portion stationed in pivotal nations like Poland, Germany, and Italy, preparations are underway. These efforts entail reinforcing the existing footprint through the augmentation of US combat air power with 20,000 personnel and logistical units across the continent, particularly following Russia’s incursion into Ukraine in February 2022.
Apart from the US, Germany agreed to contribute 30,000 troops and a combination of 85 ships and aircraft, all mobilizable within 30 days. The United Kingdom offered combat aircraft, ships, aircraft carriers, and brigade-sized land forces.
However, despite these measures, apprehensions persist regarding the adequacy of air defense capabilities to protect these mobile forces. Recent reports indicate that NATO’s eastern flank air defenses are only equipped to counter a mere 5% of a potential attack, revealing a critical gap in the alliance’s defenses that demands immediate attention.
But, NATO appears prepared to “fight tonight.” Any scenario involving a serious conflict between Russia and NATO that does not conclude swiftly will escalate into a clash not only between armies but also between societies. This will turn into a contest of resilience and preparedness, industrial capacity and supply chains, depth of resources, logistics, sheer numbers, and, crucially, the “will to fight.”
The ongoing efforts and challenges to boost defense spending, transform defense industrial capacity, address critical capability gaps, and enhance national resilience—all necessary to reinforce deterrence and defense—must be recognized, tackled, and surmounted.
