The United States and Germany reached an agreement during the NATO summit in July that would allow the US to begin what it referred to as “episodic operations” of weapons in 2026.
This will include SM-6 ballistic weapons, Tomahawk cruise missiles, and a brand-new era of fast systems that are currently being developed. The agreement’s major requirement is that none of these weapons will have nuclear missiles.
Russia responded by praising the idea and making it clear that it would think about deploying atomic weapons to locations within Western Europe’s reach.
Russia’s military has been training to target locations across Europe as far-flung as the western coast of France and Barrow-in-Furness in the UK, according to the Financial Times, which has obtained a hole of categorized Russian military domuments.
It’s an indication of how martial tensions have been rising, even before the February 2022 conquest of Ukraine.
Washington made the announcement of its contract with Germany on July 10. Exercises of these advanced features will show the United States ‘ commitment to NATO and its efforts to Western integrated deterrence, according to the statement.
It sends a clear message to both Russia and NATO supporters that the alliance is significantly enhancing its fierce regular army arsenal in response to what it sees as growing Russian war.
Russia’s security strategy depends on using large ballistic and cruise missile attacks to stop NATO troops from coming within range of its forces, according to recent NATO military theory. This concept is known as anti-access/area-denial ( A2/AD ) and dates back to the early days of the Cold War, although the idea has been refined over the years.
The Army Tactical Missile System ( ATACMS ), which has the longest range missiles it has deployed in Europe, is currently ineffective in overcoming Russia’s A2/AD defenses. These are already in use in Ukraine. They have a maximum range of 300 meters, which would be inefficient in an all-out conflict with Russia.
Consequently, NATO’s military planners agree on the need to build offensive long-range hit systems in Europe. There are a variety of arms at NATO with a 3, 000 km range.
They can be used to hit high-value target deeply inside Russia, both offensively and defensively. The newest generation of hypersonic missile groups can then deliver their cargo at five days the speed of sound.
The BGM-109A Tomahawk Land Attack Missile has previously carried a nuclear bomb, whereas most other NATO tool types are configured to have regular weapons. Another missiles may undoubtedly be modified to accomplish the same thing.
NATO currently lacks ground-based weapon networks in Europe that are capable of effectively deterring Russian offensive actions against a NATO member in Europe. Additionally, NATO cannot be prevented from entering dramatic range by Russia’s A2/AD systems, which is why the strategy to station weapons systems with much longer hit range.
The concept is that NATO’s enhanced capacity to store any violent Russian move did, in itself, work as a deterrent.
Spiraling hands competition
Consistently, Vladimir Putin reacted by conjuring up a renewed “missile issue”. He warned that Russia would act similarly if the US launched missiles into Germany that could affect Russian target “in about ten hours.” He went even further, saying that Russia would have to “take picture measures to deploy” because NATO arms “in the future may be equipped with radioactive missiles.”
The 1987 INF treaty, signed between then US president Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, banned missiles, nuclear and conventional, with ranges of between 500km and 5, 500km. Donald Trump pulled the US out of the treaty in 2019, citing evidence of Russian non-compliance. Putin denied that Russia had used nuclear weapons, but Putin said that it would no longer be subject to the obligations of the treaty.
A newly aggressive Russia and a more divided Western alliance are now at odds with one another in Europe as a result. There is a significant disparity in medium-range weapons at the moment that favors Russia.
Russian aggression has sparked the attention of European governments on the imbalance in strategic strike capabilities in Europe, despite some strong opposition, especially from inside Germany, where the ruling SPD party chairman Rolf Mützenich claimed the decision posed a serious risk of arms escalation.
Initially, the focus was on enhancing defensive capabilities. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz made the proposal for the European Sky Shield Initiative ( ESSI) in 2022 and ten NATO allies signed it in October 2023.
A joint venture for ESSI involves the purchase of integrated air-defense systems that can be operated simultaneously. Since then, the initiative has expanded to 21 nations, including the traditionally neutral Switzerland.
But at the July NATO summit, France, Germany, Italy and Poland went further, signing the European Long-Range Strike Approach ( ELSA ). This aims to enable the development, production and supply of European long-range strike capabilities to complement the US-German agreement.
Given the overall increases in NATO member defense budgets, the NATO summit in July demonstrated how significantly Russia’s recent aggression in Ukraine and its transition to a war economy have completely altered NATO’s focus.
According to the influential US think tank, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the alliance’s motto needs to change. It currently reads, in Latin:” Animus in consulendo liber” ( in discussion a free mind ). More apt, says the CSIS, would be the phrase:” Si vis pacem, para bellum” ( If you want peace, prepare for war ).
Although there is currently widespread agreement that NATO needs to place the forces to prevent war, it is hoped that this will serve as the catalyst for a more constructive relationship with Russia in the future.
Christoph Bluth is Professor of International Relations and Security, University of Bradford
The Conversation has republished this article under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.