admin
Bulldozers and diggers are building field defenses in the rural areas of Poland, Finland, and the Baltic States, more than 1,500 kilometers (900 miles) from London. Tank traps, pillboxes, and anti-tank ditches are being constructed and put into place. Minefield construction, including contentious anti-personnel minefields, is being actively considered in each of these nations.
In order to defend its eastern border from Russia’s increasing threat, Poland is investing at least €2.5 billion (£2.1 billion) in border defense measures, including the construction of a sky shield system similar to Israel’s “Iron Dome.”
“It is essential to create an iron dome against missiles and drones,” said Donald Tusk, the prime minister of Poland, at a May conference with European leaders in Warsaw. “Europe has every reason to have its own missile defense shield,” he said, indicating that the project was under way. He went on to say that it doesn’t take much imagination to realize that Europe, like Israel, is in peril.
In order to develop early threat detection and monitoring systems, Poland’s defense initiative incorporates physical anti-tank obstacles, bunkers, and AI-powered anti-drone technology. Poland will be positioned as a European defense leader with what may be the largest national security investment in the nation’s post-war history.
Poland currently spends €37 billion (£30 billion) on defense overall, which represents 4.7% of its GDP, and more hikes are being considered. In the meantime, the Baltic republics are investing hundreds of millions of euros to fortify their defense lines in response to the “hybrid war” tactics on many Baltic fronts. This is part of a larger project that is being planned by NATO members Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania and is scheduled to start in 2025.
More than €1 billion is being rapidly spent on the construction of new ammunition installations throughout much of northern Europe, especially for 155mm artillery shells, which Ukraine is firing at rates not seen since World War II.
And how is the United Kingdom reacting to a growing worldwide threat? Ships, drones, and helicopters valued at £500 million are being discarded by the nation, which will next evaluate its strategic defenses to determine its next course of action.
The Strategic Defense Review (SDR) won’t be released until late February 2025, if we’re lucky, even though Defense Secretary John Healey stated last week that the cuts are occurring in the midst of “war in Europe, growing Russian aggression, and conflict in the Middle East.” Whitehall bureaucracy may postpone it till the summer, according to some.
Meanwhile, time is running out. The liberal-democratic governments of northern Europe, which are highly regarded for their services and quality of life, concur that if Ukraine loses its war against Russia, Russia would feel more confident about launching a military campaign against Finland, Poland, or the Baltic states.
Many analysts concur that this will happen in three to five years. From the perspective of defense planning, that is essentially tomorrow. A fighter plane takes 28–30 months to order and deliver, a tank takes 18–24 months, and a frigate takes 30 months, even at maximum pace.
In addition to the current events in Western Europe, defense budgets are increasing. By 2027, French defense spending is expected to overtake that of the UK on a like-for-like basis, having increased during the previous eight years. Two years ago, the Netherlands reversed decades of defense budget cuts, and within five years, it intends to treble its spending. The defense budgets of Sweden, Norway, and Denmark are likewise rising, frequently by double digits annually.
Additionally, the European defense powerhouse has awoken. Since Russia’s 2014 invasion of Crimea, Germany, which was one of the first countries to significantly cut defense spending following the Cold War, has increased its military budget by two-thirds.
Importantly, the 2022 invasion of Ukraine marked a Zeitenwende (or “turning point”), with Olaf Scholz, the chancellor, promising an instant €100 billion investment to fill munitions and equipment shortages.
Since then, Berlin has spent more over €60 billion on ammunition and missiles since February 2022, and €30–40 billion on F-35A fighters and other weapons supplied by the US.
Returning to Eastern Europe, defense is viewed as an absolute requirement rather than a “nice-to-have” in these countries. Over the previous five years, many nations’ defense budgets have risen or even tripled. Why, then, does the UK today seem more like a laggard than a leader in Europe?
One of the main causes is what I refer to as the “1,700km duvet.” Russia would have to travel through Finland and the Baltic nations before crossing the Baltic Sea and facing Germany, Sweden, Denmark, and Norway before navigating the North Sea to get to the UK.
In response to a question concerning the possibility of a missile strike on the United Kingdom, former Defense Secretary Grant Shapps jokingly said that NATO members would deal with such threats because they are situated between the United Kingdom and Russia, implying that he also believed in the “1,700km duvet” that the United Kingdom still snuggles beneath.
But the danger is getting closer. Fears of Russian interference were heightened this week by events involving damaged underwater internet cables in the Baltic Sea. Western intelligence authorities believe Russia was responsible for this summer’s fires at shipping terminals in Britain and Germany, and there are alleged Russian plans to test security systems and install incendiary devices on cargo flights in Europe.
Many think that the UK will soon experience power outages as a result of wind farm cables inexplicably failing or that our internet will be disrupted when the telecom backbone fails.
In actuality, the UK is helpless against many types of contemporary attacks. At a recent conference in Berlin, Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, the chief of the defense staff, acknowledged as much while emphasizing the need to emulate the Nordic and Baltic nations in strengthening their civil and military preparedness for conflict.
The Royal Navy cannot deploy an aircraft carrier group without depending on US and ally ships and aircraft, notwithstanding audacious bluster. The Army has insufficient ammunition to fight for more than a month and is unable to mobilize a complete division of 15,000 men out of a 70,000-strong force. Out of a fleet of more than 100 Typhoons, the RAF only has roughly two dozen that are combat-ready.
The defense secretary is correct to emphasize that improving spending is more important than simply increasing it. But money does matter. The UK cannot afford to postpone its reaction by citing economic restrictions if a NATO state invokes Article 5, which calls for collective defense. Many analysts in the Nordic and Baltic regions feel that this scenario might occur within five years.
