The experience of the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East is forcing military commanders to reconsider methods of countering the Russian army. For decades, the defense of NATO's eastern flank relied on erecting barriers and checkpoints. But after nearly five years of war in Ukraine, the alliance's strategists have concluded that a potential Russian invasion cannot be thwarted merely by impeding the advance of troops. The Wall Street Journal reports this, writes UNN.
Details
"Deterring the Kremlin's conventional armed forces now requires more active prevention, or, in military terms, denial. This involves not only destroying the troops that may pour across the border, but also striking military bases, supply depots, and industrial facilities in the rear, on Russia's own territory."
The Supreme Allied Commander Europe, Alexus Grynkewich, outlined this approach in his own "theory of victory." According to it, the allies will first block the initial wave of the attack and then deprive the enemy of the ability to continue its pressure.
"We will dismantle the warfighting system being used against us by striking both the forces advancing and everything that supports, supplies, or controls those forces," Grynkewich said.
The published plan does not envisage a transition to the use of nuclear weapons, the publication emphasizes.
Polish Major General Ireneusz Nowak stressed that the main lesson of Ukrainian resistance is the need to respond to an aggressor with force. According to him, "defense also means striking back."
"In the event of an armed confrontation with Russia, we would definitely want to strike its defense-industrial complex. We must treat precision strikes deep in the rear as a deterrence tool," Nowak emphasized.
He added that the Alliance's joint message to Moscow should be clear: "Don't do anything foolish, because we can punish you. But to be credible, we need to have these capabilities."
The strategy essentially repeats the principle of "striking the archer rather than defending against the arrows," which Ukraine is currently implementing by attacking Russian oil refineries, drone-battery plants, data centers, and fuel depots with long-range drones and missiles.
Ukraine's ambassador to NATO, Alyona Hetmanchuk, also emphasized the importance of long-range effects during a specialized conference. She compared air defense to a painkiller that "may alleviate the symptoms, but you need to eliminate the source of the pain itself."
To implement this doctrine, the United States is modernizing and replenishing its stocks of long-range Tomahawk cruise missiles and ATACMS ballistic missiles. At the same time, European partners seek to expand their stocks of Storm Shadow, SCALP, and Taurus cruise missiles, while also developing new, inexpensive long-range weapons.
Fabian Hoffmann, a senior research fellow at the Norwegian Defence Research Establishment, recalled that at least 48 projects to create inexpensive cruise missiles have been announced in Europe.
"What we have seen proves that you would not want to find yourself in a high-intensity conflict where your adversary has access to powerful long-range strike arsenals and you do not," Hoffmann noted.