Online media outlet Politico published a highly imaginative piece of speculative fiction Wednesday with an article envisioning a future war between Russia and NATO. In the year 2027, US President Donald Trump has abandoned the longstanding military alliance in author Laura Kayali’s framing of events. Conflict explodes when Russian forces, for reasons not fully explained, venture into the Baltic republics with an invasion of Estonia.
Veteran analyst Dr. Alessandro Politi opined on the website’s exercise in creative writing, calling it “more campaign bluster” than serious analysis. Still, talk has persisted for decades of an integrated European military force capable of defending the continent. Politi spoke with Sputnik about the prospects of a European military and the major roadblocks such a proposal would face.
Firstly, the idea would face serious practical and economic challenges, according to Politi. “There is an example of how a European army today would look,” said the Luxembourg-based strategist. “It's like the Ukrainian army today – a logistical nightmare. Bottom line is it's not so much about spending more, but about spending better, which means we have to standardize our armaments.”
Politi noted the idea would likely prove unpopular with European defense industries because it would “reduce profits.” Weapons manufacturers would earn less income from producing a smaller selection of widely-adopted armaments produced by other companies throughout the continent. Recently, British arms industry exports ballooned to over $10 billion annually, representing an important part of the country’s economy.
Still Politi said “standardizing is not any more an optional” choice for European military planners, insisting, “it is a must.”
An integrated European military would also face substantial political barriers. Politi said the creation of NATO had gone some way in reconciling military culture throughout the continent, calling it “a great amalgamator.” But he claimed more progress was necessary.
Further, he insisted a compulsory draft would be necessary to fight off any significant threat to the continent – a highly controversial proposal. “Even the best professional army doesn't simply keep up with the losses that happen on battlefields,” the analyst claimed. “If people talk about scenarios and then they say, well, we have just to procure more weapons, I think they are deluding themselves.”
Politi also noted that internal politics in countries like France and Greece had threatened military cooperation throughout the continent in the past, and such tensions could do so again.
But the analyst concluded that the marker of success in military integration is not ultimately measured in soldiers recruited or Euros spent, but in whether peace prevails.
“The strength of NATO is that, for a number of actions and circumstances, it has avoided a war,” said Politi. “It was reciprocal deterrence, of course, but there was no war fought. This is a major achievement.”
Historical events since the 1990s may leave some observers to conclude the reciprocal nature of Cold War deterrence is at risk, with the United States fomenting the Euromaidain coup in Ukraine and NATO recklessly expanding towards Russia. If the balance of power is upset, one party naturally seeks to take advantage of the situation. Therefore the true way to peace may lie in restoring mutual respect between Russia and the West.
“Instead of thinking about war fighting, which is a consequence if deterrence fails, we need to think about a credible deterrence, that then would allow to have a security agreement that reassures everybody,” said Politi. “Which is not the case now.”