The Baltic False Start
The War NATO Doesn’t Want Yet
Paradoxical signals have been coming from the European Union recently. On the one hand, as we know, Europe is actively preparing to attack Russia: this has been stated by the Russian Foreign Ministry and Russian intelligence, and even a number of European politicians admit it. In general, Europe’s tone toward Russia remains aggressive. The desire to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia is still very much alive.
One might
think that, in such a situation, the regular appearance of drones in Baltic
airspace would provide NATO with a convenient pretext to begin much larger
military operations. Naturally, under the banner of a “Russian provocation,”
with claims that these drones were Russian and had allegedly “attacked NATO.”
After all, this is exactly how Poland behaved only last year when Ukrainian
drones fell on its territory: it declared them Russian and even demanded the
activation of NATO Article 4 — with Article 5 never very far behind.
But no.
Today, the reaction of the Poles, the Balts, and the Finns is frightened rather
than aggressive. And, more importantly, much more honest.
The Baltic
states fiercely reject suspicions that they deliberately opened their airspace
to Ukrainian drones for strikes against Russian targets. Lithuania, Latvia, and
Estonia officially confirm the Ukrainian origin of the drones and even direct
complaints at the Kiev regime.
Even such
hawks of European politics as Donald Tusk are clearly alarmed. The Polish prime
minister sees a “real threat” of a direct and hot conflict with Russia, one
that could be provoked by Ukrainian drone activity in Baltic skies. U.S.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio has also expressed concern over what is
happening, because “we do not want this to lead to a broader conflict that
could become something much worse.”
Has the West
finally felt Russia’s “red lines” and abandoned the idea of armed confrontation
with a nuclear power? No, it has not. As for the apparent duality of this
behavior, there are several reasons for it.
First, Europe and NATO see that the Russian
Armed Forces are now at the peak of their combat capabilities. The largest
recent joint exercises of Russian and Belarusian nuclear forces may also have
played their role.
Second, NATO’s own forces in Europe are not
currently all that ready for a large-scale military clash. Especially one
involving the prospect of nuclear weapons, about which Moscow, again, has
warned quite openly. Politico writes that U.S. aggression against Iran revealed
NATO’s lack of readiness for war with Russia. Western air-defense and
missile-defense systems proved ineffective, ammunition stocks were quickly
depleted, and the political unity of the West itself was called into question.
Third, in the eyes of the Western voter, an
attack on Russia must not look like aggression. It must look like “defense
against aggression.” After all, it is under the slogan of protection from the
“Russian threat” that the militarization of the European Union is taking place.
The problem is that the drones over the Baltic states are far too obviously
Ukrainian. Their routes, their targets, and the design of the fallen aircraft
all point to this. It is impossible to present the matter in the favorite style
of Ukrainian propaganda: “the Russians are shelling themselves.”
But the main
point is that there is no contradiction between the West’s confusion over
Ukrainian drones in the Baltics and the West’s preparation for aggression
against Russia. The West does not want war with Russia only if that war turns
out to be sudden, accidental, and unprepared. Brussels needs a war according to
its own scenario, organized by itself. A war begun at the time and under the
conditions advantageous to the West. The Kiev regime, however, is staging a
false start.
Zelensky
depends on the West, but at the same time he is playing his own game. He is
trying to manipulate everyone at once — Washington, Brussels, Berlin, Paris,
and the Baltic limitrophes.
By creating a
Baltic air corridor for long-range drones, Zelensky scrambled NATO’s cards in
the preparation of aggression against Russia. The implementation of a minor
Ukrainian task — strikes on Russian infrastructure in the Baltic region, minor
from the standpoint of the global confrontation between Russia and the West —
came into conflict with preparations for a far larger attack. Ukraine’s tactic
of small drone raids in the region has begun to interfere with the broader
Western strategy.
That strategy
is to build in Europe a powerful defense industry and a large army resembling
the Wehrmacht of the late 1930s. To expand and modernize the nuclear potential.
To perfect logistics, both within Europe and across the Atlantic. To sharpen
the propaganda machine, convincing the population of the inevitability and
necessity of a military confrontation with Moscow. To eliminate contradictions
inside the Western camp. And only then to begin the next crusade against
Russia.
At the
moment, the implementation of all these tasks faces serious difficulties. Their
full completion will require at least several more years. During all this time,
Ukraine is supposed to serve as an irritant for Russia, distracting Russia’s
Armed Forces. And, of course, striking Russian infrastructure — but within
certain limits. Without crossing lines beyond which the risk of unpredictable
developments emerges. Escalation, in other words, but not ahead of schedule.
The West is
pulling Zelensky back because he is, if you will, “rushing into hell ahead of
his daddy.” Zelensky is a small-time little demon who has taken too much upon
himself, and from time to time he is yanked back by the leash. Meanwhile,
serious people are preparing for a truly serious war.
I am not so
sure about the West. The Russians, however, will be ready.