Why the West should never let its guard down against Russia

TALLINN, Estonia — At a recent Group of Seven summit in Hiroshima, leaders of the world’s major industrial democracies and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy vowed to work together against the threat posed by Russian aggression. As this year’s G7 chair, Japan played a key role in securing a united voice on the issue.

But some pundits and policymakers in Europe are already talking about the postwar period. Many believe that Russian President Vladimir Putin will never give up his ambitions in Ukraine. Even if he fails to achieve his goal this time, Russia will be threatening the region for many years, a situation that would have a major impact on security in Asia.

Among the countries most critical of Russia are the three Baltic states — Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. The Baltic nations, often ruled by their powerful neighbor, were effectively integrated with the Soviet Union for about half a century until they regained independence in 1991.

Having learned their bitter lessons, the Baltic states long warned of Putin’s expansionist designs. But the world did not pay sufficient heed until the warning became a reality on Feb. 24, 2022, when Russia invaded Ukraine. The world needs to take their views more seriously now.

Latvian Prime Minister Krisjanis Karins is particularly pessimistic about Europe’s peace prospects. “If we want to have permanent peace in Europe, we would need a profound defeat of Russia, which would entail internal changes something akin to post-1945 Germany,” Karins told Nikkei in mid-May.

“What we are heading toward now is a defeat of Russia in Ukraine, liberating the territories of Ukraine militarily,” Karins said. “But that will mean that for the foreseeable future — and that could be a long future — we will have to have a policy of containment and deterrence because until Russia feels a profound internal defeat, it will be a potential threat.”

Karins basically argued that simply driving Russian forces out of Ukraine would not bring peace, as Putin would try to invade again once Russia regains its military power.

Ukrainian soldiers fire artillery near Bakhmut, a city in the Donetsk region of Ukraine, during battles against Russian forces on May 15.   © AP

Kusti Salm, Estonia’s permanent secretary of defense, is more specific about possible Russian moves and their threat. “In terms of personnel, Russia is mobilizing and training reservists and could return to preinvasion levels within two years,” said Salm. “In terms of equipment, Russia is sure to use the humiliation as energy to reinvest and improve its military capabilities.”

“Whether it takes three, five or seven years to recover, Russia will become a more imperialistic state. And in the medium to long term, the security environment for neighboring countries will get worse, not better,” Salm added.

Their predictions may seem overly pessimistic, but similar views were heard among Western policymakers attending the Lennart Meri Conference, a three-day international security conference held in Tallinn, Estonia’s capital, through May 14.

One participant said Putin firmly believes that Ukraine belongs to the Russian bloc and will continue his aggression there, resorting to hybrid warfare including cyberattacks, an information offensive and sabotage. Many participants voiced similar views.

Last year, the world was stunned to see Russia launch a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Though U.S. intelligence warned of an invasion looming, the world never thought it would actually happen. If a lesson is to be learned from that experience, it would be that any meaningful debate on peace prospects should be based on pessimism, not optimism, when Russia is involved.

For now, at least three things should be done promptly, according to military and government officials in the U.S. and Europe. The first is to ramp up military support for Ukraine to help oust Russian forces from occupied land. Russia’s defeat must be so definitive that it would leave no room for Putin to claim victory. Otherwise, it could send a wrong message to other authoritarian regimes eager to change the status quo by force.

Second, sanctions against Moscow need to be strengthened to prevent Russia from restoring its military quickly. Russia, however, is a leading military power with more than 5,000 nuclear warheads. Economic sanctions alone will not deter Moscow from further aggression.

Last, it is crucial for NATO to become more agile and maintain its overwhelming military superiority over the long term, although this requires more effort from the European side. Regardless of whether Ukraine can join NATO, the military alliance will have to find a way to ensure Ukraine’s security.

A banner critical of Russian President Vladimir Putin hangs from a medieval castle facing Russia in Narva, Estonia on May 9.   © Reuters

All these urgent moves mean that a semi-state of war will continue in Europe at least for the foreseeable future. Even Putin’s eventual departure from power will not change the situation. Russia experts in the U.S. and Europe point out that expansionism has been part of the country’s national character since the prerevolutionary era of czars and will not go away with leadership changes.

This situation will also impact the Indo-Pacific region. During the Cold War, U.S. policy had kept the military prepared to deal with two major conflicts simultaneously. But former U.S. President Barack Obama abandoned this policy when his administration adopted a new defense strategy in January 2012.

If war erupts in Europe and Asia at the same time, allies in the two regions may have to compete for U.S. military support. To prevent such a scenario, European and Asian allies — namely, Japan, South Korea and Australia — need to bolster their own defense capabilities.

Gen. Martin Herem, commander of the Estonian Defense Forces, told Nikkei that there is still time for the West to prepare for the worst, but time is running out.

“I would say we have time today. [But each] decision we make today becomes practical in two or three years. … So if you say that the threat is coming in the three years, today is the last time to [do something],” said Herem.

The commander stressed that the fate of a country depends on how quickly it can make decisions in times of crisis — an admonition that should ring true for every country.