Russia-Ukraine War: loose cannons on the NATO deck?
Russia-Ukraine War: loose cannons on the NATO deck?
A formal NATO meeting is coming up in July. Not surprisingly, Ukraine will be a major topic.
The Guardian headlines, “Nato members may send troops to Ukraine, warns former alliance chief.“1 This sounds pretty serious, that NATO countries would send troops to fight directly against Russian troops in Ukraine. By almost any interpretation, that would be a direct war between NATO and Russia, no longer any kind of “proxy war” between Russia and the Western alliance. And it somes from a seemingly substantive source:
A group of Nato countries may be willing to put troops on the ground in Ukraine if member states including the US do not provide tangible security guarantees to Kyiv at the alliance’s summit in Vilnius, the former Nato secretary general Anders Rasmussen has said. [my emphasis]
Who is Anders Rasmussen?
To The Guardian’s credit, the immediately following paragraph notes:
Rasmussen, who has been acting as official adviser to the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, on Ukraine’s place in a future European security architecture, has been touring Europe and Washington to gauge the shifting mood before the critical summit starts on 11 July. [my emphasis]
Yes, that means that we have to presume that Rasmussen is speaking here not as a disinterested expert but as a lobbyist for the Ukrainian government (de facto or de jure, but “official” sounds like de jure).
Rasmussen founded Rasmussen Global, which describes itself on its website2 at this writing in the following ways:
So, Patrick Wintour’s Guardian report describes this warning from Zalenskyy advisor Rasmussen this way:
He made his remarks as the current Nato chief, Jens Stoltenberg, said the issue of security guarantees would be on the agenda at Vilnius, but added that Nato – under article 5 of the Washington treaty – only provided full-fledged security guarantees to full members. …
Rasmussen said: “If Nato cannot agree on a clear path forward for Ukraine, there is a clear possibility that some countries individually might take action. We know that Poland is very engaged in providing concrete assistance to Ukraine. And I wouldn’t exclude the possibility that Poland would engage even stronger in this context on a national basis and be followed by the Baltic states, maybe including the possibility of troops on the ground.
“I think the Poles would seriously consider going in and assemble a coalition of the willing if Ukraine doesn’t get anything in Vilnius. We shouldn’t underestimate the Polish feelings, the Poles feel that for too long western Europe did not listen to their warnings against the true Russian mentality.” [my emphasis]
Without speculating about how much we should take this as a threat from the Ukrainian government to NATO - the Rasmussen group as seen above says it is “conducting a pro-bono campaign for President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on long-term security guarantees for Ukraine“ (my emphasis) - this sounds like reckless saber-rattling.
Loose cannons starting to roll around on deck?
Ukraine presumably perceives that its own interest would be helped by direct participation of NATO forces in combat against Russia. This would not be in the interest of NATO and most NATO countries. Although some of the leaders in Poland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania may see it that way, as well. On the other hand, those four nations all border on Russia, so they would be prime targets for a Russian response to a clash of NATO troops directly with Russia.
Whichever countries and leaders may approve the statement by Rasmussen (or not!), it is a reminder that the US and its NATO partners seemed to look at the expansion of NATO to countries including Poland and the Baltic nations as largely a “freebie.” That is, they thought the possibility of having to step up to a war with Russia in Europe in defense of those nations was very low. They saw NATO enlargement as beneficial for expanding US power and influence but low risk.
But what if your allies decide to take loose-cannon actions like sending their national forces to directly fight Russian troops in Ukraine? And then Russia responds with direct attacks against those countries?
It should be obvious that the US, Germany, and France along with other NATO countries that are not in a loose-cannon mode in their evaluation of the costs and benefits of a Third World War would mean need to be very clear to their allies that they aren’t going to let, say, Poland escalate the dangers of a direct NATO-Russia war out of some narrow nationalist calculations of their interests.
And the NATO countries should also make sure they are really clear about whether Rasmussen’s threat is coming from Ukraine or Poland, or if it’s just a lobbyist with an impressive resume shooting off his mouth in a loose-lips-sink-ships mode.
Poland’s push for greater influence
There has been speculation in the press about whether Poland’s important role in supporting Ukraine in the current war will enable it to increase its own influence within NATO and the EU, diminishing the relative weight of Germany and France.
Rolf Nikel, a former German Ambassador to Poland and head of the German-Poland Institute, recently made the following observations:
The U.S. will be interested in a close relationship with Poland due to the stationing of [US] soldiers [in Poland]. But at least the current administration has no interest in a permanent feud between Warsaw and Berlin and encourages the Polish government to settle its dispute with Berlin on compensation claims and with the European institutions on the rule of law. Poland's ability to form coalitions has also not grown in all directions with the Ukraine conflict. While the so-called Bucharest Nine [3] grouping of NATO members is thriving on the eastern flank, the Visegrad Group [Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia] is losing importance.
Poland's weight in the North Atlantic Treaty will increase. But will this also be accompanied by greater influence? The relative amount of the Polish defense budget targeted for 2022 may sound imposing by NATO standards. But in absolute terms, the Polish military budget weighs in at only a third of Germany's defense spending.4 [my emphasis]
Poland’s influence is growing. But it’s unlikely that the rest of NATO is ready to let Poland order them around or blunder into World War Three without their allies noticing.
Let’s all hope not!
Wintour, Patrick (2023): Nato members may send troops to Ukraine, warns former alliance chief. The Guardian 06/07/2023. <https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jun/07/nato-members-may-send-troops-to-ukraine-warns-former-alliance-chief> (Accesssed: 2023-08-06).
Rasmussen Global website. <https://rasmussenglobal.com/> (Accessed: 2023-08-06).
Widakuswara, Patsy (2023): Biden, Stoltenberg Meet Bucharest Nine Leaders Anxious About Moscow's Expansionist Ambitions. VOA News [Voice of America] 02/22/2023. <https://www.voanews.com/a/biden-to-meet-with-nato-eastern-flank-leaders/6973617.html> (Accessed: 2023-09-06).
Rolf Nikel, Rolf (2023): Gut gerüstet. Der Pragmaticus June 2023, 41. Translation from the German is mine.
What method would Russia use to retaliate if NATO directly intervenes?
Much earlier I though Russia would attempt to “shut down” Ukraine using nuclear EM pulse. Russia is doing that using conventional means. Please use your imagination. bc note the USA test affected Hawaii at some distance from the high altitude nuclear explosion near the equator. Far from the equator the effect is much greater.