Will Russia attack NATO? It depends

Recent U.S. intelligence assessments suggest that Russian President Vladimir Putin is increasingly tempted to authorize provocations targeting NATO states. Perhaps even including a limited military incursion designed to test the alliance. CIA Director John Ratcliffe’s unusual visit to Moscow this week added to the alarm. According to the Wall Street Journal, Ratcliffe warned Russian officials against escalating against NATO members, particularly the Baltic states.Perhaps. We need to remember that Russia is fighting a grinding war in Ukraine, sending more of its troops to die (nearly 500,000 Russian soldiers have been killed since the war began in February 2022). That means the most plausible Russian challenge today is not columns of tanks rolling toward Tallinn, but rather an effort to create uncertainty about NATO’s credibility. The often-discussed scenario is Narva, the predominantly Russian-speaking Estonian city sitting directly on the Russian border. Western strategists have long considered some variation of the “little green men” operation Russia employed in Crimea in 2014. Russian irregular or regular forces could fire on Estonian guards, briefly cross the frontier, hit a minor post, and withdraw. The aim would be to score a propaganda win and test NATO’s interest in retaliation without triggering a full-scale war.Moscow is unlikely to try such a move unless it believes the response will be limited. That is to say, unless it believes it can get away with it. Yet, if Moscow could demonstrate that an attack on a small member does not prompt a unified response, it would undermine NATO’s Article 5 mutual defense commitment. Hence, why Russia must know that any military operation against NATO territory will be answered in an overwhelming manner.Any larger operation against the alliance is unlikely for now. Ukraine has consumed enormous quantities of Russian manpower, equipment, money, and political attention. Moscow’s reduced room for maneuver has become visible far beyond Ukraine. Russia watched Bashar al Assad’s government collapse in Syria despite having intervened militarily to save it a decade earlier. In Armenia, Moscow stood by as Azerbaijan took back the Nagorno-Karabakh region. And Moscow was a spectator as Washington moved against Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela, despite years spent cultivating Caracas as a strategic partner.These cases expose the limits of Russian power. Russia can threaten, sabotage, and disrupt cheaply, but it cannot maintain several serious military commitments simultaneously. The key variable for the Kremlin is whether Putin believes the American guarantee behind NATO remains credible. While Europe possesses considerable military power of its own, for Moscow, the ultimate risk has always been that attacking an ally could mean fighting the United States. Should Washington appear unwilling to meet the defense commitments it has assumed, challenging NATO further down the line becomes more attractive.Another reason Putin might charge forward?TRUMP HAS THE CARTELS ON THEIR HEELS – NOW WITH COLOMBIA’S HELPIf Russia emerges victorious in Ukraine. If Putin succeeds in excluding Ukraine from Western security structures, the Kremlin may conclude that its otherwise painful use of force worked. It would emerge more confident, with a battle-hardened military, and highly likely to test NATO in the future. Conversely, a Russia that emerges from Ukraine defeated and convinced that American power remains firmly anchored in Europe has little incentive to gamble.Trump has fought with European allies over defense spending, burden-sharing, and strategy. Still, the White House has maintained that the U.S. will defend NATO territory. As long as Moscow believes the guarantee still holds, its rhetoric serves mainly to frighten the West away from supporting Ukraine.