NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has issued a stark warning that Russia may be ready to launch military action against the Alliance within five years, calling for a “quantum leap” in defence spending and industrial mobilisation to avert future conflict.
Speaking at Chatham House in London, Rutte delivered a detailed address ahead of the NATO Summit in The Hague later this month, outlining a vision for a “stronger, fairer and more lethal” NATO in response to a rapidly deteriorating global security environment.
“Russia could be ready to use military force against NATO within five years,” he stated. “Let’s not kid ourselves, we are all on the Eastern flank now.”
The comment marks one of the clearest and most urgent warnings yet from the NATO leadership about the scale and speed of the threat posed by Moscow’s ongoing rearmament.
Rutte said Russia, aided by partners including China and North Korea, is rebuilding its military power faster than previously estimated.
“Putin’s war machine is speeding up – not slowing down. Russia is reconstituting its forces with Chinese technology, and producing more weapons faster than we thought,” he said.
“In terms of ammunition, Russia produces in three months what the whole of NATO produces in a year. Its defence industrial base is expected to roll out 1,500 tanks, 3,000 armoured vehicles, and 200 Iskander missiles this year alone.”
These figures serve as the foundation for a major shift in NATO’s strategic planning. Rutte confirmed that the upcoming summit will seek approval from Allies to increase defence spending to 5% of GDP—more than double the previous target set in 2014.
“At the Summit in The Hague, I expect Allied leaders will agree to spend 5% of GDP on defence,” he said, describing the shift as “a defining moment for the Alliance.”
This new target would be split, with 3.5% to go directly toward core military needs such as new platforms, ammunition, and capabilities, while the remaining 1.5% would support industrial investment, infrastructure, and broader defence-related spending.
“5% is not some figure plucked from the air, it is grounded in hard facts,” he said. “The fact is, we need a quantum leap in our collective defence. The fact is, we must have more forces and capabilities to implement our defence plans in full. The fact is, danger will not disappear even when the war in Ukraine ends.”
Referencing classified defence planning targets approved by NATO Defence Ministers last week, Rutte outlined the Alliance’s ambitions in concrete terms: a 400% increase in air and missile defences, millions more artillery shells, thousands of new tanks and armoured vehicles, and significant expansion in logistics, transport, and medical capacity.
“Our militaries also need thousands more armoured vehicles and tanks. Millions more artillery shells. And we must double our enabling capabilities, such as logistics, supply, transportation, and medical support,” he said.
Rutte also praised the United Kingdom directly for its support to NATO, highlighting its forward-deployed troops, air policing missions, and naval command roles.
“I want to thank the United Kingdom for more than seven decades of continuous commitment to NATO. It makes vital contributions to our shared security,” he said, adding that he “warmly welcomed” the UK’s new Strategic Defence Review and planned increases in spending.
The Secretary General’s speech comes amid mounting concern over NATO’s industrial readiness. He warned that without rapid increases in production capacity, even higher budgets could be wasted.
“Otherwise the commitment to spend 5% of GDP on defence will be lost to production costs, rather than invested in defence,” he cautioned. “We will support increased defence production, remove barriers to cooperation, and harness cutting edge-technologies.”
Rutte also struck a note of urgency about NATO’s overall readiness to confront looming threats.
“To preserve peace, we must prepare for war. Wishful thinking will not keep us safe. We cannot dream away the danger. Hope is not a strategy.”
Citing a famous line from Winston Churchill—“Will there be time to put our defences in order? Or will the awful words ‘too late’ be recorded?”—he reinforced the stakes of inaction.
The Hague summit will also address burden-sharing across the Alliance. Rutte stressed that the new approach would not only increase total spending but rebalance contributions, with European and Canadian Allies expected to carry more of the weight.
“America’s Allies have broad shoulders, and Europe and Canada will do more for our shared security,” he said. “And that will be backed by America’s rock-solid commitment to NATO.”
He ended with a call for unity and resolve in the face of rising authoritarian threats, warning that peace cannot be taken for granted.
“There are no second chances when it comes to our security. So, we will deliver in The Hague… Together, we will secure peace through strength. Together, we will build a better NATO.”
I’d suggest they’d strike in 2 or maybe 3. We have too many centres of gravity
When you have someone senior like this making such comments you sure hope that behind the scenes things are getting actioned as a priority to deal with this heightened treat. Does anyone honestly think Putin will stick to any calendar? As you say prepare for half that and up arm what you’ve got and get some GBAD in place.
A nationwide public air raid shelter system too.
I was thinking that the T89/90/91, whatever number it will be, missile barge could also be useful as part of GBAD just more SBAD. Could be parked in naval and non- ports around the country, integrated into a radar network, as a hybrid Aegis ashore-afloat as part of a missile shield system and not just a side buddy to a ship.
*non-naval ports…
I find it amazing that you have Tory MPs asking for the government to reinforce military bases provide HAS and bunker sites, national warning system and some form of protection for the civilian population. Yes all of that is needed. What exactly were the Tories doing over the last 14 years except for cuts cuts cuts and now there is an absolute giant mess to sort out.
It’s completely impossible to shelter everyone nationwide regardless of how many billions are thrown at it.
But it is morally indefensible to not make an effort in good time. Let them eat cake eh?
We could face multiple missile & drone strikes any time & as Putin has shown, he doesn’t care who they hit.
The head of NATO is effectively a polictican and want the limelight and so downplaying Russia doesn’t achieve that. Anything they say should be taken with a grain of salt. Especially as NATO members are investing more in their militaries, so it’s in everyone’s interest in oversellng the risk so the general public don’t vote against the investment.
Also depends what he means by strike. Russia doesn’t have the capability to do a direct military action (not if they don’t want to be wiped out by the reaction) against NATO whilst the Ukraine war continues and there’s is little current hope of that ending, and even if a cease fire happened, Russia would just rebuild to go again. They won’t give up until they have the whole of Ukraine or Putin and his supporters are removed by a local coup.
Putin is a bit nuts, but appears to be sane in that his actions arent completely delusional. Zero care for who dies, Russian or Ukrainian, to get his objectives for sure.
There is a chance that we will have another little green men style action though.
I don’t think these are hollow threats. Rutte is a liberal – it’s not his style to overhype the threat. The new Chanceller Merz is equally alarmed by the pace of RU rearmament. Churchill was also a politician.
Is Russia rearming? It’s currently losing more kit than it can build or repair. Yes it’s getting highly experienced soldiers and if they learn from their mistakes can create a decent nco corp but without the force multipliers of tanks/artillery/air defences/jets they can’t take on NATO. Once and if the war ends they will be able to rapidly rebuild (assuming the sanctions are lifted as their economy is on its knees currently and their labour force is seriously challenged due to poor birth rates and mass deaths), but that isn’t realistically going to happen anytime soon.
Don’t get me wrong I think NATO needs to rearm and that will take time, but Russia a serious threat within 5 years is not realistic.
Without the US we’re toast! and with Trump in charge that’s not looking good. According to Heappey we’ve enough ammunition for just 10 days. We don’t even make our own artillery or tanks anymore whilst RU does, we’ve binned off FJ pilot training to a trickle such we can probably sustain an 8 ship deployment. What GBAD do we possess? What SEAD capabilities do we have? Without the US the battle group in Estonia isn’t supportable (binned off Bulwark/ Albion/ Puma force) and we aren’t going to be helped by Denmark, Netherlands, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Belgium in a meaningful way. Also what’s our national will to fight? It’s been eroded, undermined by devolution, mass migration and ongoing prosecution of service personnel for carrying out orders. As for NATO it’s untested! as soon as the first casualties it’ll be every nation for themselves. Are Spain going to throw every Typhoon they have at it? no – it’ll be self preservation.
Without the US glue RU have rightly assessed we’re there for the taking. Add on their growing competence in drone warfare and a China wanting to assert itself in the Pacific.
No – I think we’re in real trouble
Russia doesn’t really need to take on NATO, just a Baltic state and whatever tripwire forces are there.
Once they’ve taken the land they can quickly dig in and defend with drones like they have in Ukraine: something we have no counter to.
After that European leaders will be hesitating on whether to jump in or wait and see if the US does more ‘escalation management’.
@Tomartyr
Fair point and this has always concerned me about NATO, as a treaty doesn’t make nations to anything polictics does that. Saying that Russia still needs the forces to do that and with almost all their forces either defending their east, Moscow or deployed in Ukraine they don’t have much left. NATO Easter bloc won’t go down without a fight.
These warnings come on the back of a revised estimation of Russia’s true war production.
We last year knew Russia in 2024 could produce upto 600 MBTs per year and around 1500 other armoured vehicles.
Now that estimate is +1500 MBTs per year of the T90-M series and 3000+ armoured vehicles.
How are they doing that? Help from China, Iran, North Korea probably.
Plus they’ve increased again their munitions production which was thought to be impossible last year.
Russia is unable to produce hundreds of high performance helicopters or fighter jets as they just don’t have the capacity but a proliferation of drones and cruise missiles most definitely they can. Somewhere around 300 cruise missiles a month of all types. 200 Isklander and around 100 Zhirkons at the top end of the scale but the rest are likely Kalibres. None of which have proven very accurate but the numbers being produced are eventually going to lead to a resupply of Russia’s munitions.
It’s high time a big 150+ radar guided 40mm Bofors order was placed for UK and overseas based protection. I’d also get 30+ truck mounted phalanxs and at least 10 more batteries of land Ceptor. GBAD wasn’t sorted out in the SDSR but urgently needs to be.
So the driver of these alarms is Russia’s rearmament and armaments replacement programme, especially for their army. Russian steam roller tactics potentially being considered as a means to smash NATO in a lightning strike through Baltics, Sulaki gap and possibly through and using Hungary as an ally.
That can only happen if the Ukraine war is concluded in favourable terms to Russia (something the Donald is trying to do)
I don’t think 5 years. I think 2-3 years max until a conflict against Russia drawing off European NATO attention whilst China attacks Taiwan and likely strikes US bases in South Korea, Japan, Guam and possibly even Australia and Singapore.
The only way we can get to military preparedness is to cut and stop all benefits to illegal migrants. Return them home and deport them the second they arrive.
Cut welfare. Freeze expenditure on the NHS as to be fair there is huge efficiency that can and should be made. Stop the pensions triple lock and put up taxes. Then sure we could rapidly get to 5% or higher.
It’s all about priorities. If you have people like Rutte sounding the alarm it is for a reason.
Our best defence is looking like a Putin voodoo doll. Get the pins out!
I agree with the increase in defence spending across all NATO countries, but I don’t think Putin would be stupid enough to deliberately get into a war with NATO. He can’t really think he could take on most of Europe and America. Maybe if America got into a full-scale war with China and had to withdraw most of it’s forces?
Highly likely Xi will try to invade Taiwan in cordinatition with a Russian attack on the Baltics, N Korean attack on S Korea & maybe an Iranian attack somewhere too. Trump will probably be in a quandary at best, pro Russia at worse. Either ay the free world would be almost overwhelmed by the crisis.
Russia is even unable even to defeat Ukraine. Please finish hysteria.
It’s not hysteria – they are rearming exceptionally quickly. As Metz says ‘US lawmakers have no idea of the scale of Russian rearmament’… lots of people have their heads in the sand.
So do you think the Russians are just using the donkeys to pull logistics and e scooters for meat assaults for fun then?
Secretly they have this massive armoured vehicle production some where? Anyone seen them make any planes recently? Even if they could make
1500 tanks ( current figure is between 200 and 390) how long would they last in the face of NATO air power with no AirPower and only the S400 to rely on.
One Typhoon can carry 16 Brimestone alone.
I’m not sure Russia have committed their best assets yet, and are holding back in favour of sending in the ‘expendables’. All while they hone their TTPs on drone warfare. Merz and Rutte are getting intell that you and I are not privy to. Their message is very clear and the clock is ticking.
This war is costing Poo tin billions of rubies do you honestly think that he would hold back and not try to get this done? His economy is going down the drain and his war manufacturing is operating in the red borrowing money to meet targets with no way of repayment of the loans due to the interest rates etc!
Where do you think they are keeping all these tanks? NATO seems unable to find them with satellites.
Maybe under ground in some giant layer James Bind style 😀
russia soesnt have any “best assets”
Tanks are not even a big thing in the war…as with all vehicles on both sides > Drone bait
Think you will find that they are running out of tanks, and their latest tanks will have \ would have to come straight off the production line to the front line
They will run out eventually, according to statistics
Some of the vehicles they are trying to use make you laugh
North Koreans are supplying them with loads of stuff
Depends : if the us walk away from Europe or nato, i would not be that confident. After all, Ukraine has been able to resist thanks to us ressources mainly.
Europe has supplied more aid to UKR than the USA. It’s only Trump whinging about it that gives the contrary impression.
As frank said Europe has given more than the US by a fair margin, plus the stuff given is excess stock, mainly stuff that NATO countries have stopped using. Put the current top end gear against Russia and Russia would face serious difficulties. Also don’t forget the combined European armies far exceed the US in numbers. Plus the European manufacturering capability far exceeds Russia if it was put to work. Ok highly unlikely they would all join the fight and fully commit.
Correct it is the new realisation and determination that Russia has more than doubled their war industrial output in the last year.
Now production of 152mm artillery shells (their main type) is 20X their pre war production
Tanks up from 30/ month to 1500/ year= +120/month X4 their pre war production
Other armoured vehicles up from 100/ month pre war to +4000/annum now so a 4x increase over their pre war production
Cruise missiles- Kalibre up from 10/ month to around 300
Isklander up from 5/ month to around 200-300/ year so again a 4-5x increase.
This level of war industrial output won’t be switched off as it gives the Russian peasants work and well paid jobs at huge national expense and effort.
To return to a civilian industrial pattern is unthinkable to Mad Vlad so yes in 2-3 years time expect a converted coordinated attack on Taiwan by China, Baltic states by Russia. Flare up on north/ south Korea and Iran doing everything it can to disrupt the west and hurt Israel.
Time is running out. Our national defences are in a perilous state (thanks to the Tories) and we urgently need to be rearming and crucially fortifying.
Fortifying our few military bases, putting in armoured HAS , bunkers, GBAD and really doing everything we can to make the effort to take out the UK and it’s industrial base from the NATO equation as difficult as possible.
The only Author of the SDR who served General Sir Richard Barrons mentioned very clearly that there is no need for panic in the current or predicted threat environment.
Mark Rutte gutted the Netherlands defence budget starting in 2010, he disingenuously signed up for the NATO 2% target in 2014 and made no attempt to meat it. In 2021 when the UK was putting in large budget increases Mark Rutte was cutting the Netherlands defence budget.
And now I have to listen to him telling us that we should spend 5% of GDP, gut our economy, infrastructure, health care and poverty prevention all while having to pay higher taxes in a vane attempt to placate an American president who is clearly not playing with a full deck and changes his mind as often as he changes underwear.
And what a loss leader for NATO the worlds premier airforce to have a 400% increase in ground base air defence. Like that’s the way to win a war against Russia instead of buying more air planes.
Deterrence, at its core, rests on the three H’s –
Hard Power
Heightened Readiness
Hypothetical Retaliation
“I am the Game, and I am that damn good!”
The three Cs are vital with capability ( power ) only valid as a deterrent is it’s communicated ( the enemy knows and believes you have the power) and credibility ( the enemy believes you are actually willing and able to use the power to full effect) .. essentially the west’s communication and credibility has crumbled.. making its power far less relevant as a deterrent.
“essentially the west’s communication and credibility has crumbled.. making its power far less relevant as a deterrent.”
Completely agree Jonathan.
Ukraine is now hitting hard and Russia’s logistics are not finite; in fact, some are dwindling as a result of Ukraine’s far-reaching drone and missile strikes. I would not be surprised by just how damaging their campaign will be if it continues at its current rate, as nowhere in western Russia appears to be safe anymore.
Rutte is just a blowhard. 14 years as Dutch PM during most of which his country spent less than 1.3% of GDP on defence and got rid of all their MBTs. Of course we need to be wary of Russia despite its failure to overcome Ukraine. Of course we need to have effective defence forces. But jumping to 5% of GDP is neither necessary nor achievable.
The build timescales of new warships are so long that nothing not already committed to would reach IOC before 2030. Expanding manpower numbers is not quick or easy either unless conscription is imposed.
Finally, most NATO members have large government debts which make the increase demanded unaffordable.
Making good the years of failure to meet the agreed 2% target should impose greater demands on some countries whilst others who have broadly met the target every year should have a lower increase agreed.
For the UK, finding money for 2.7 then 3% , will be very difficult. Health, schools, universities, local government, housing associations all jockeying for more funding. As to reducing the welfare budget, not going to happen as we have seen today.
And
” From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic,, an iron curtain has descended across Europe”
Now look at the overall strategic position.
Yes look at Asia.. Russia is now essentially surrounded by allies or potential allies. With its now friendly next door neighbour being the new superpower on the block .. the USSR spent all its time looking over it’s shoulder at a poor underdeveloped China.. now it’s bear buddies with a superpower with a population of 1.4 billion people, controls most of the world’s vital mineral deposits
The USSR had 10% of the world’s GDP..at the time China was 2.7% but still essentially a potential enemy state..Russia and its clients now have 3.% but China russias new protector holds about 19% of the worlds wealth.. so China and Russia together have well over twice the wealth and industrial power than the USSR ever had also the USSR had a population of 280 million Russian its allies and China are about 1.6 billion.. essentially China and Russia today are a profoundly greater long term geostrategic risk to the west than the USSR ever was… the west in the end isolated divided and destroyed the USSR.. China and Russia are doing a pretty good job on nato at present.
China has long claimed parts of eastern russian. Thier alliance is one of convenience, with Putin now very much a junior partner. It’s only a matter of time before china decides it’s time to expand west. Probably after it’s dealt with taiwan.
Don’t get me wrong China is in it for itself.. but that is irrelevant.. alliances are only tools.. but that will not stop it funding and supporting the Russian war machine to remove Europe from its equation of how to destroy US pacific power and hegemony.. and let’s not fool ourselves I suspect Russia would sell a chunk of its empty far east for massive support to win its aims and objectives in Europe.
Russia isn’t giving up it’s east to china, it’s fought wars over it and the same logic as why Putin wants Ukraine applies, he feels it’s historically part of Russia
China needs western trade more than it needs Russia. Especially if trump keeps polarising the world, china has a chance to capitalise on it
The rearmament rate for Russia is far above the last estimate by RUSI at the beginning of the year. Which was a maximum construction rate of 300-400 T-90Ms per annum, 1250-1500 other armoured vehicles. 100 cruise missiles a month.
These figures are exponential more. So I’m guessing Russia are receiving the required micro processors, circuit boards and targeting sensors required from China in large numbers.
If these numbers are right and Russian production hasn’t just peaked but can potentially increase further. I’d think 3 years after the end of the Ukraine war maximum before Russia is set to attack a NATO country and achieve early localised overwhelming numerical superiority.
Long term the debate then is whether NATO can sustain destroying large numbers of Russian hardware with smart munitions and keep doing so faster than Russia can replace loses.
So our industrial base and resilience and persistence as an alliance is vital and yes that will require NATO upping it’s tanks, air defence systems, drones, air defence systems.
Rutte says a 400% increase….yet the SDSRs only new aircraft are some F35As for nuclear strike. No new F35Bs or Typhoons and only £1 billion for ground based air defence. Not enough when a single dragon fire is costing £250 million each.
In summary, the UK will have to go further, faster and harder to reconstitute our armed forces. Labour are certainly being battered by a perfect storm of pent up demand for investment after 15 years of virtually zero investment under the buggering Tories.
Or Mark Ruttes being economical with the truth.
I’m sure Russia “plans” 1500 tanks a year.
Like I plan to marry Sydney Sweeney 😀
Have no fear, the UK reassures us all that 148 CH3s will address the balance. What is the government smoking?
Jim. It’s what they are building now. At current rates but it’s already increased by X4 in the last two years and is on an upwards trajectory.
Russia is clearly having massive industrial support, tooling and possibly workforce from China, Iran and North Korea.
1500 MBTs per annum is now.
4000 other armoured vehicles is now
Munitions x20 their pre war production is now
How much more they can produce is most definitely the worry.
How many of them build or more likely rebuilt tanks are being wiped out and annum. The figures I saw for actual new tanks was far far lower, closer to the 20-30. Either way they currently have a net loss.
That was flawed intelligence. A revised estimate of true industrial output in Russia is more worrying.
Question if as is current trajectory Russia can get upto 5000 MBTs per year production and they are T90-Ms what then? Does the west have enough ATGW to destroy and continue to destroy such large numbers of armoured vehicles and tanks? Probably but for how long?
This is not based on facts. Where are these armoured vehicles? Plenty of people are scanning sat images of the bases and seeing the numbers just plumpet. There is zero indication of a build up of forces by open intel or any independent source. NATO/us/UK intel that has been published all shows massive losses and plummeting stockpiles. If Russia was really building hundred of tanks a year where are they?
Russia is unlikely to launch an all-out attack against NATO any time soon. The country is a mess. I agree that we should take the threat seriously but is a decrepit Putin really going to start that kind of war in 5 years?
In my view the 20 year timeframe is more concerning. Enough time for new aggressive leadership to take over, for Russia to seriously rearm with advanced weapons, and for a new generation of young men to come of age – who have grown up believing Europe to be their enemy.
The sad truth is that according to a lot of intel the Russians are happier than they have been in a long time.. they have more money in their pockets and the war has created jobs and wealth.
Look at what happened after ww1 and ww2 for the Uk, when those jobs vanished and government money run out the country hit serious economic issues (plenty of other examples not just UK). Russia is already hitting them issues and there is no sign of the war ending any time soon.
A country can only survive so long on government funded jobs. If there is another oil/gas price crash for example then Russia would be in serious trouble or if China lost faith in them and decided it wasn’t in their interest to keep buying russian oil/gas.
Hi Steve, I was reading an economic report on Russia and that is what they through would happen.. but it’s actually not happening.. Russia is actually in a different situation to that
“ The Russian economy has lived many lives since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. After the initial shock of the invasion wore off, the country experienced a dramatic sugar high thanks to historic hydrocarbon revenues and the government’s surging military spending.”
It’s now settled a bit into a steady state but there is now every indication the Russian economy can sustain this war for years..
Where are you seeing data on it being in a steady state, everything is indicating the reverse.
1. Inflation is still going up
2. Unfilled jobs are going up
3. Interest rates are going up
4. Exports are going down
5. Debt is going up
That is not a steady state to me.
Sounds just like every other economy really, does it not.. the question is, “ is it collapsing” and the answer is no it not. Maybe if Ukraine can drag the war on for another 3-4 years, you would see very significant harm.. but at preset it managing well.
Really and where did you get that gem? Most don’t care abou the war or Putin. Many are still only getting by as we all do day to day and have little interest in expanding the state. Russia has very high inflation and interest rates so money value is fallling all the time.
Russia has lost a lot of good folks and most are fed up with the hot air coming from the Kermlin. And this is from those that live there.
Look at what the occupy in the current war and at what cost. I’m more concerned about the invasion from the Middle East and Africa and we are letting openly happen. Open your eyes and see the World as it really is.
Hi Angus it was a review by one of the geopolitical publications.. they were looking at how the war had actually rebalanced Russian society.. basically because of the fact they have essentially used large payments and death benefits it’s actually spreading a lot of wealth into very poor parts of Russia… the fact they have kept the voluntary high payments approach has had a positive impact on views..
The very big problem we have with Russia is that we made the mistake of assessing its danger as the west always does on the ability to concentrate military power and win battles.. but the west even after overwhelming evidence still will not admit that overwhelming military power is a great deterrent, but it is not the thing that wins wars.. because in the wars that truly matter your original military power will be destroyed and made over.. Britain has never won a major war with the army it started with ( generally the standing army has always been dead on the first couple of campaigns ). So although have a superior military force in no way means your going to win.. the US has lost to any number of enemies vastly inferior to its armed forces..
Once the war kicks off the things that matter are:
1) unfettered access to industrial capacity
2) money
3) political support of your population
4) willing allies that are cohesive ( unwilling or incoherent allies can be worse than useless)
5) Geostrategic position and access to raw materials and markets.
The problem for the west is we have totally underestimated a few things about Russia and the wider geopolitical and geostrategic picture and western hubris is quickly leading us down the toilet…
1) overwhelming force.. yep ENATO has that but for overwhelming force to act as a deterrent it needs the 3C.. communicated ( all NATO has communicated is political split and disharmony) capability ( well yes we have capability but have we successfully communicated that… NO… ) Credibility ( well NATO nations have constantly backed down in the 20c from North Africa, Afghanistan, Iraq and Ukraine all Russia sees is a lack of credibility)..this means because the west has utterly mishandled the 3 C our huge levels of forces are now not a truly effective deterrent to Russia and China..
2) This means we are going to war, now as the western alliance has started to crumb int dust the alliance between Russia and China has grown..with China now spending a lot of energy to become the hub of an alliance web.. Russia and its client states, NK, Pakistan, Iran.. with a drive to ensure India, Africa and South America stay friendly neutral ..
3) this mean that Russia geostrategic position is massively improved and its essentially got land boarders with likely allies, friends or neural parties across the entire Asian land mass…Russia is also a pacific power as well as a European one..that means isolation is impossible.. access to resources and other nations industrial capacity difficult to prevent. It also has a massive land mass with which to use as a buffer.. Russia is 9000km long, try hitting industrial targets Russia hides 5000km from any western base…
4) wealth.. what the west did not anticipate is its loss of control of financial systems.. essentially it thought it could strangle Russia.. that has not been the case.. the Russian sovereign wealth fund stands at about 145billion dollars.. that’s up about 5-10 billion on last year.. more importantly Russian debt to GDP stands at about 15%.. yep 15% .. that give Russia in the region of 1.7 trillion dollars of potential credit before it becomes a problem.. just to consider.. what extra credit do you think the UK could get on the international markets maybe an extra .2 trillion if it was lucky..because we are sitting at our maximum level of dept.. do we have a 145billion sovereign wealth fund.. no we don’t .. neither does the rest of Europe..this means the chance running Russia out of money.. as the western and Ukraine has discovered.. fuck all chance.
5) population.. contrary to what anyone would think the Russian population actually likes the Ukraine war.. because whatever we may think Russia is fighting that war with the idea of national cohesion.. it is not using conscription.. instead it’s paying very good wages and very good golden handshakes and death benefits.. this means it’s pushing significant wealth into its poorest populations and is creating an economic renaissance in many parts of Russia.. its poor Russians dying but its older poor Russians who are leaving their families a lot of money.. Russia has a controlled society that is resistant to political warfare and will take suffering.. just like its ally China.. infact they use the very same political war book.. the west on the other hand is essentially unable to resist political warfare.. just look at the US and the state of nato.. finally our population does not believe.. even people on this site think 5% is insane and Russia and China will be beaten like dogs..
All this comes together to show that Russia and it ally China are willing and able to fight a years long even decades long war against a west that may well fold like a wet paper bag when the economic pain hits, our economies crap our, we have no wealth to fight with.. our populations rebel under political warfare attack.. etc.. specific in the moment military power does not win a war.. it stops you immediately losing it.. but in the long run it’s the foundation of your society to keep fighting for ever which is your population’s resistance to political warfare, the money you have and can raise, the industrial capacity and raw materials you can access..
I wouldn’t underestimate the power of the collective West or the resolve of its ruling classes. Russia is militarily weak, and its ability to bully Ukraine (an even weaker ex-Soviet country with a direct land border and transport links) will not translate to NATO or even Europe. The Russian Armed Forces would be completely annihilated in such a war – at least for now – and their leadership knows it. Also we could probably assassinate Putin pretty quickly, which removes any incentive for him to start a war.
Russian conscripts are historically known for being a mass of stupid, disloyal brutes. The war in Ukraine has done little to change that stereotype. I don’t want to underestimate the damage that they could do, but this isn’t like 1939 when we were facing a rearmed Germany.
It the long war which is the issue.. yes nato would win those initial campaigns.. but how do you actually knock Russia out of a war.. it will just keep fighting.. the west has zero appetite for the long war.. if a bunch of tribal peoples keep fighting for long enough the west will loss the will to keep going.. and the issue is always the power behind Russia.. which is China .. ENATO is never beating a Russia that is fully supported by china. We just don’t have the industrial, population, wealth or political depths to fight a long war with Asia. Yes we will win battle after battle.. but that does not win you the war.
China supports China. It is not really allied with Russia. The destruction of Europe is not in China’s interests because their economy is largely based around selling stuff to the West, and because they still need Western technology. China needs Russia to be strong enough to keep Europe and the US distracted, but not strong enough to actually attack them – or China itself.
The power behind Russia is vodka and brutality.
Unfortunately China does not need the west and trade with the west for China is a tool, just as alliance with Russia is a tool.. but all alliances are tools of self interest, nothing more…
We often forget China is not a nation in the western sense , it is a nationalist communist state. Which means its national interest is as follows
1) the will of Xi and his interpretation of the goals of the CCP.
2) control of the Chinese population and preservation of the primacy of the Chinese communist party.
3) the reunification of China
4) Chinese hegemony
Any goal or national interest beyond that is nothing more than a tool for the first four and China will use any and all methods to achieve that.. even a world war.. because the tools are irrelevant to it, it will happily break them.
So China uses capitalism, markets and the west, but ultimately sees the west and capitalist markets as its enemy, China is a communist state it actually sees wealth and markets as nothing more than a tool. The ultimate aim is control, reunification and hegemony that is it, not wealth and growth.. if it can have its goals and be a nation of poor peasants in a shattered world of poor peasants it would be happy as a pig in shit. So to think any market is Import and a goal of China is to miss understand.. a hammer or screwdriver is important to you.. but you would not give a shit if you broke it.
China has realised to achieve two of its goals it needs, military power, industrial power and wealth..and it has pursued those for that purpose only.. it know knows it needs allies for the same purpose.. hence its developing itself as the central power of a wider group of anti western nations..
But it knows to achieve it’s aims of hegemony and reunification it must destroy or reduce the US and by proxy Europe.. I assure you our use as a market is therefore only as a way to aid its goal for reunification and hegemony.. but above that it will need to either separate Europe from the US or have Europe reduced with the US.. and for that it will happily use and ally with Russia.
The west’s obsession with markets and the primacy of markets has become one of its key weaknesses. It was the driving force behind the concept of the end of history and last man.. the belief that the fact the pursuit of profits and the market will unit and bind the world, but it’s BS.. communist and authoritarian states don’t give a shit about the market or markets beyond being a tool of subversion and control..if they decide destroying markets and making everyone poorer will support their power and control of their populations that is what they will do..
Disagree on the wealth. We have enormous wealth, it’s just squirreled away in offshore accounts by the super rich. If they can be pursuaded to join the effort(Rather than the idiotically, terminally selfish Thatcherism, “We don’t believe in society”), then there’s funds sufficient.
Unfortunately it’s the capital, liquid wealth and credit that is available to the nation state ( government) that matters not individual wealth.. in any world war the fact western nations are at a serious disadvantage in regards to raising and accessing wealth the US has a debt to GDP of 120% European nations are around 100%, Japan is 250%.. there are no real sovereign wealth funds in the west and nothing left of the national debt credit cards.. China on the other hand has a sovereign wealth fund of 1.5 trillion dollars, Russia 150 billion.. Russian debt is 15-16 % Chinese debt is at 60%.. their ability to fund a war machine is actually greater than the wests.. why do you think the US as the richest nation on the planet is now producing about 1 escort for every 15 that China produces… even as China moved to war production on its navy the US failed to respond… the same with Europe.. because the truth is they cannot raise the funds without destabilising their credit..
Australia is generally in a better position financially to fund a future conflict than most Western countries (and we may need to be if we have to stand on our own as seems increasingly likely).
Australia has $290 billion in sovereign wealth (Future Fund and other sovereign funds), $80 billion in foreign currency reserves and access (via regulation) to $3.7 trillion in private superannuation funds while our debt to GDP ratio (less than 32%) is around a third of the UK (103%) and a quarter of the U.S. (124% and rising).
Issue for Australia is not so much access to capital but access to industrial capability.
Australia has let its manufacturing sector atrophy (although significant steps are now being undertaken to improve sovereign military industrial capacity) but we have demonstrated the ability to pivot in the past. In WWII Australia manufactured aircraft before we had our own car industry.
Question is can the pivot happen in time??
@oz
Yep Australias issue is its industry capacity, access to some key resources, low population and geostrategic isolation..
It does have a pretty easy solution and that is a strategic alliance with Indonesia.. an Indonesian Australian defence block would be a pretty sold affair
Excellent post – does the UK population still possess the strength of national pride to mobilise if the time comes? or have politicians, lawmakers and subversives succeeded in undermining it over the last 30 years. I fear the latter and so defeat could be staring us down a barrel.
Of course it does. Same question was asked about Ukraine pre war, it was a highly fractured population with a government involved in heavy corruption that no one trusted. However once they had a common actual enemy the country came together and no one would question their willingness to fight.
The uk has no serious threat to the UK itself, so people get focused on silly things. If you look back throughout the history of our nation there were people questioning the countries willnsss to fight and the younger generation back to year dot and yet when it mattered the country came together everytime
Probably not at the moment. But full scale mobilization/conscription is not needed in any realistic war scenario. The only time this is truly necessary is to defend against foreign invasion, and we haven’t had to fight invaders on home soil for a thousand years.
A very pessimistic view. Certainly Russia has access to vast natural resources but its ability to manufacture modern precision weapons is severely depleted. Much of its most modern equipment has been destroyed and cannot easily be replaced.
It does use conscription but softens discontent by paying large wages.
Its financial position has been affected but not critically damaged by sanctions. But it is now running budget deficits and depleting its sovereign wealth fund.
The popularity of the special military operation is hard to judge – dissent is crushed and the main media outlets state controlled. Independent platforms, like the Moscow Times , have been banned.
The performance of the Russian armed forces has been shockingly inept. How much of this is known by the Russian population is unclear but the exodus of skilled young men, reluctant to risk conscription, to does suggest the Kremlin’s efforts to hide the truth have not been wholly successful.
The big question is what could bring an end to the war. Even Trump has finally realized that Putin has no real interest in peace. Nor, as you suggest, have the consequences of the war been harmful enough to Russia to hope that the current operation will be terminated voluntarily. Russia could keep its current level of violence going for years.
But eventually, cracks in the forced unity will appear. Maybe only when Putin dies will big change occur.
In the meantime, all that NATO can do is keep supporting Ukraine and improve their own armed forces in a way that doesn’t bankrupt them.
What will Russia use to strike?.. The Bolshoi Ballet? The Russian navy is hiding from Ukrainian no-navy. The valuable Russian bomber fleet has been decimated by Ukraine. Probably most of Russian nukes can not be launched. During the Cold war, Russian strength was over rated, same again. The whole problem from the get go was that Russia really wanted to be part of the West. But US needs an enemy, and encircled Russia ( and China) – – it is like cornering an animal. When every is settled, Russia and Ukraine must be normalized, not regarded as enemies.
Thoughtful post. As the saying goes, all roads lead to Constantinople and the great schism of 1054. In its heart Russia wants to be a western country. It lacks the faith and courage to ditch Bolshevism.
If Russia was very very stupid they could easily strike the UK. They have more than enough cruise missiles carrying subs to do some serious damage across the UK. The issue is then what, they don’t have the land force to capitise on it since they are tied up in Ukraine and let’s face it their professional army no longer exists they just have meat wave tactics which required volume.
I don’t think Russia or China have to do anything. Another ten years and we’ll destroy ourselves, socially and economically. cheaper for them to just wait
Exactly.
However, Russia is in no position to attack anyone today and I do not see that changing in the medium term. Putin is old and looks worse each time I see him. One thing the ‘Europeans’ could do is ram home effective sanctions.
The problem with Europe and ourselves is that we’ve become afraid of saying NO. Doesn’t matter what it is . We are now a nation of “oh,alright then, don’t upset me” The Chagos”deal” is a good example. Everybodyis against it, including the U.N except Stamer and our potential enemies.
What a load of nonsense. The UK economy is doing well and our culture is fine. We have a few nutters that seem to believe in white nations that the UK has never been but they aren’t the majority and will never be. I’m proud of coming from a multicultural counter that believes in tolerance and friendship. The media is amplifying the racist message but it’s not the UK I was born in or live in.
The funny thing is they link back to Churchill etc and yet he was massively pro Europe and it was brave soldiers from around the common wealth that died saving this country, in far far higher numbers than natives did
What’s racism got top do with anything? My cousin is married to a West Indian and two of my oldest friends are gay. As for the economy you obviouly don’t read the newspapers. After the Tory debacle Stamer and Reeves have managed to increase borrowing, inflation, taxation, the national debt to £50 billion and unemployment. As for the Commonwealth I lost a uncle at Casino and a cousin form the U.S. in the Atlantic so I may know the cost better than you.
Common lack of understanding how economies work. The current government is borrowing to invest in the future. It’s borrowing for no investments which is the issue, and what the conservatives did (name one major infustructure project they started in their term). The country is flagged as having full employment, yes there is unemployed but economic term of full employment account for that. The country is struggling with not enough workers for roles post Brexit.
Don’t blindly believe the very biased media fact check things.
Well, sticking to defence how about the Dreadnoughts; Type 26; Type 31@ Tempest and others. Just to mention a few civilian infrastruture projecta as per your request how about Brent Crossor Hinkley Point or Northern Powerhouse or Teeswas Freeport.?
As for being blinded by the media the Guardian,and the Telegraph along with the main TV channels can’t all be wrong. The things I mentione have all gone up since S and R came to power. Not bad for eleven months.
Never mind 5 years, they could do so now! It might not turn out so well but then it might do! What are they not deploying to Ukraine now that their ammunition resupply capabiloity has been ramped up? What are their reserve stocks like?