As the world lurches from one crisis to another, with some predicting the possibility of another world war, Europe faces a longstanding challenge: its security. This issue, once taken for granted by Western Europeparticularly Germany, Italy, and the Nordic countrieshas now come to the forefront. During the Cold War period, Europe's security was a shared responsibility of the NATO, which in turn was heavily reliant on the U.S. military.
However, President Trump, during his previous term, emphasized that European nations could no longer expect a "free ride" and needed to contribute more to their defence. This message has had a lasting impact. Currently, 23 of NATO's 32 members allocate at least 2% of their budgets to defencea significant increase from just three countries meeting this threshold before 2016. Trump has also signalled that, when he takes over the White House again in January 2025, he would push for the NATO standard to rise to 3%, replacing the previous 2% norm. In contrast, the U.S. has consistently spent over 3% of its GDP on military expenditures, underscoring the disparity in defence commitments.
Against this backdrop, the new threat scenario facing Europe becomes clearer as the Russia-Ukraine war grinds into its third year. Russian President Vladimir Putin shows no signs of scaling back his military intervention, having already seized control of over 20% of Ukrainian territory. Even if a truce were to be declared now, European leaders fear Russia would use the respite to bolster its military and potentially launch strikes against other European nations at a more advantageous moment.
It is important to note that Putin has never reconciled with the dissolution of the Soviet Union and remains deeply committed to preserving Russia's sphere of influence. For nationalist figures like Putin, this sphere extends from Eastern Europe to Central Asia. While the Central Asian states have largely remained aligned with Moscow since the Soviet Union's collapse, Eastern European countriesespecially the Baltic Stateshave drawn closer to Western Europe. This encroachment by the West into Russian sphere of influence was never tolerated by Moscow.
The tipping point for Putin came when Ukraine indicated its intent to align more closely with the European Union and NATO. For him, this represented an unacceptable further erosion of Russian influence and he responded by ordering his troops into Ukraine.
European concerns about Putin's true intentions have been amplified by incidents of sabotage, cyber-attacks, and widespread misinformationacts that NATO and European leaders largely attribute to Russian efforts. Moscow, however, vehemently denies these allegations, dismissing them as baseless and accusing European leaders of harbouring unfounded "Russo-phobia."
Is Europe, then, spiralling back into a Cold Conflict mentality?
While the answer remains uncertain, European leaders are clearly taking no chances. NATO has deployed multiple battle-groups of approximately 1,000 troops each across the Baltic States and Hungary. These units are designed to delay a potential Russian advance for a few critical days, providing time for NATO reinforcements to arrive.
One strategic flashpoint is the Suwalki Gapa narrow 65-kilometer corridor between Belarus and the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad. This corridor links Poland with the Baltic States, making it a vital lifeline for NATO. Both NATO and Russian military planners keep a close watch on this region. In the event of war, should Russia seize the Suwalki Gap, the Baltic States would be effectively isolated from NATO's land-based support. Under such circumstances, NATO would be forced to rely on operations from the Baltic Sea, with Finland serving as a crucial staging ground for its troops.
Following the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union, NATO countries gradually reduced their defence expenditures. For instance, at the end of the Cold War, West Germany maintained 36 Patriot missile systems; today, it has only nine. Recent conflicts, such as the Ukraine-Russia war and the Israel-Iran confrontations, have highlighted that long- and medium-range missiles, rather than aerial bombardments by manned combat aircraft, cause the most significant damage in civilian areas. In regions like Israel and, to some extent, Ukraine, air defence systems, such as the Patriot, have proven to be the most effective shields against missiles and drones.
The sudden Russian invasion of Ukraine has forced the Western European nations to rush for these systems. According to an estimate by Reuters, Europe may require over 1,000 such units to ensure adequate protection against potential Russian attacks which may take almost 10 years to get fully operational. The Russians on the other hand have ramped up their defence industry to its highest capacity, amassing a vast arsenal of missiles for both offensive and defensive purposes.
The signs point to a renewed Cold War sweeping across Europe. However, this cold conflict will differ greatly from the one seen in the last century.�While Russian tanks may not roll into Western Europe, the warfare is likely to be hybrid in nature. Cyber attacks could target telecommunications and economic systems, leaving them highly vulnerable. Artificial intelligence-driven misinformation campaigns with severe consequences could spread rapidly across the continent. A coordinated assault of this kind could destabilize nations, potentially bringing them to their knees, paving the way for occupation forces to follow.
European leaders are acutely aware of these risks. Regardless of Putin's true intentions, Russia poses a significant threat if European defences falter. With the United States shifting its strategic focus toward China and the Indo-Pacific, Europe must seriously consider building a unified military force to secure its future.
