logo
Europe braces for 'most extreme' military scenario as Trump-Putin 2.0 begins

Europe braces for 'most extreme' military scenario as Trump-Putin 2.0 begins

Yahoo26-01-2025

LONDON — All over Europe, there are signs of a continent steeling itself for the unthinkable.
Lithuania plans to lay mines on its bridges to Russia, ready to detonate should Kremlin tanks try to cross. In the nearby Baltic Sea, NATO ships are hunting Russia's so-called 'Shadow Fleet' accused of cutting undersea communications cables. And in Europe's skies there are plans to construct a vast missile defense system, similar to Israel's 'Iron Dome' but with the explicit purpose of shooting down rockets launched by Moscow.
European governments and citizens worry that an emboldened Kremlin may turn his armies their way after Ukraine. There is also widespread nervousness that the new president — an isolationist — has suggested he may not defend America's historical NATO allies if they are attacked by Russia.
While President Donald Trump this week criticized Vladimir Putin, Trump has showed few signs of a meaningful shifting from that position. On Thursday, he said in an interview with Fox News that 'Zelenskyy was fighting a much bigger entity,' and that 'he shouldn't have done that, because we could have made a deal.'
He said little new about NATO or Europe, only reiterating his latest demand for European allies to pay 5% of their GDP toward defense — more than twice the NATO recommendation — and lamenting how much more Washington has spent than Brussels supporting Ukraine's defense.
'NATO has to pay more,' Trump said. 'It's ridiculous because it affects them a lot more. We have an ocean in between.'
The stakes couldn't be higher. European officials have repeatedly stated that Putin is preparing for a war with the West. For many this is already happening, with think tank analysts, governments and NATO itself accusing Moscow of 'hybrid warfare' attacks — from election interference to trying to crash airliners with firebombs.
'The Europeans are taking this very seriously,' said retired Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges, the former commander of the U.S. Army in Europe between 2014 and late 2017.
In particular, countries in Eastern Europe nearer the Russian border 'know that this is for real, because they live there,' Hodges added. 'It's only those people who live in Western Europe or the U.S., far away from the Bear, who say: 'Come on, this is not going to happen.''
The core tenet of NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, is that allies will defend any fellow member under attack. The only time this 'Article 5' promise has been triggered was after 9/11, when Europe helped the United States patrol its skies in an act of solidarity. The main message of that stipulation is that if a country attacks Europe, it will also be at war with Washington, and its intended audience is Russia.
But Trump has repeatedly suggested he would ignore Europe's distress call.
Plenty of those in Europe's corridors of power agree that a complacent continent has for too long relied on Washington's protection. French President Emmanuel Macron, a longtime proponent of European self-reliance, said Monday that Trump's second term should serve as a "wake-up call" for the continent.
In comments made at a defense conference on Wednesday, the EU's foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas agreed with Trump's assessment of European spending, saying that 'Russia poses an existential threat to our security today, tomorrow and for as long as we underinvest in our defense.'
Many of these critics remain nonetheless alarmed.
'While every president has complained that European countries don't do enough, there never was a question about American commitment,' said Hodges. 'This causes a lot of anxiety.'
In the short term, Trump and key members of his incoming administration have vowed to quickly end Russia's war in Ukraine, likely impossible without huge territorial concessions from Kyiv. Effectively giving Russia a win would be a signal to the Kremlin that aggression is rewarded and the West has no appetite to intervene, critics say.
'Russia is preparing for a war with the West,' German foreign intelligence chief Bruno Kahl said in a November speech.
For years experts and government officials have accused Moscow of spreading disinformation, launching cyber attacks and using any other means necessary to meddle in the elections of democratic countries.
Though Moscow denies it. Western officials and experts are near united in agreeing that this campaign only seems to be expanding.
Last month, Finnish authorities seized an oil tanker they suspected of having severed undersea power and internet cables. That was among a spate of incidents that prompted NATO to launch operation 'Baltic Sentry,' stepping up maritime patrols.
Meanwhile, Western officials said Russia was responsible for sending two incendiary devices to DHL logistics hubs in Germany and the United Kingdom in July as part of a wider sabotage campaign to possibly start fires aboard North America-bound aircraft.
In response, Europe has reversed decades of military underfunding, with most of its big powers now hitting the NATO guideline of 2% of GDP spent on defense. Spending started to increase in 2014 after Russia annexed Crimea, although Trump is widely credited for accelerating it.
On Wednesday, the European Union's defense commissioner Andrius Kubilius announced that Lithuania intends to spend between 5% and 6% of its GDP on defense in the coming years.
Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in Feb. 2022 has focused minds further.
In March, the European Union allocated 500 million euros (around $515 million) to double shell ammunition production to 2 million units per year. And 22 countries have now joined the European Sky Shield Initiative, a continent-wide missile defense system designed to protect against Russian attacks.
'Europe must be prepared for the most extreme military contingencies,' a spokesperson for the bloc told NBC News in an email when asked whether the continent was preparing for a worst case scenario of war with Russia. 'Put simply: to prevent war we need to spend more. If we wait more, it'll cost us more.'
Asked if that change was prompted by Trump's suggestion he may not defend Europe as well as Putin, the spokesperson referred only to the Russian president, whose war in Ukraine they said 'challenges the international rules-based order itself.'
For its part, Ukraine's reaction to the reelection and inauguration of President Trump has been assiduously diplomatic. On Inauguration Day, the country's president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in a post on X that Trump "is always decisive" and said his second term was an opportunity to "achieve a long-term and just peace."
Whatever the impetus, 'the mindset has changed big time,' said Vytis Jurkonis, who leads the Lithuanian office of Freedom House, an international pro-democracy group.
'We need to make it very clear to the Kremlin that any attack against a NATO member is going to cost and have consequences,' said Jurkonis, who also teaches politics at Lithuania's Vilnius University.
The Baltic countries of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia are particularly vulnerable, perched on a small peninsula between mainland Russia, the heavily militarized Russian exclave of Kaliningrad and the Baltic Sea.
For decades occupied by the Soviet Union, these now-Westernized states are only now constructing 'the Baltic Defense Line,' a frontier hundreds of miles long dotted with anti-tank trenches and pillboxes. Lithuania has already purchased warehouses full of 'dragons' teeth' — concrete pyramids designed to stop tanks — and plans to mine its bridges to the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad, its defense ministry told NBC News.
Lithuania recently said it would raise defense spending to 5% of GDP, the highest in NATO and far more, proportionally, than Washington's 3.4%. That's still lower than Russia, with the Kremlin effectively reordering its economy along a war footing and committing at least 6.2% of its inflation-hit finances to its military.
In western Scandinavia, meanwhile, Norway has updated its emergency preparedness booklet that it hands out to all citizens, telling them how much water, food and other supplies to stockpile in case of 'acts of war.' The 20-page document has historically focused on extreme weather and accidents, but its most recent version notes that 'we live in an increasingly turbulent world' and warns people that 'in the event of an act of war, you may be notified that you should seek shelter.
Meanwhile, Swedish church authorities — on guidance from Sweden's armed forces — have begun looking for extra cemetery space should such a conflict reach their shores. And Germany committed around 100 million euros to reinstate public sirens that were removed when the Iron Curtain fell.
And yet there are plenty of observers who believe that Europe is not doing nearly enough.
Western European countries such as Germany, France and the United Kingdom have only committed 'small percentage uplifts to defense budgets, which is nothing like the transformative investment' in Eastern Europe, said Keir Giles, a leading defense analyst at London's Chatham House think tank.
For Giles, author of 'Who Will Defend Europe? An Awakened Russia and a Sleeping Continent,' the problem is that 'countries further away are still pretending that war is something that happens to other people.'
What's more, efforts are further complicated by the political situation. Europe's mainstream parties are being challenged by populists, who often mix their vehement opposition to immigration with a softer — and sometimes even friendly — stance toward Russia.
That's a problem for those who argue Russia's war on Europe has already begun.
'Anybody who isn't worried hasn't been paying attention,' said Giles.
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Tensions Grow Between Iran and the U.N. Nuclear Watchdog
Tensions Grow Between Iran and the U.N. Nuclear Watchdog

New York Times

time8 minutes ago

  • New York Times

Tensions Grow Between Iran and the U.N. Nuclear Watchdog

The United Nations' nuclear watchdog was regularly inspecting Iranian nuclear sites until Israel began its bombing campaign on June 13. The war that followed shut the agency's inspectors out of them. Now the watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, is trying to get back in — just when Iran may be moving to kick it out entirely. Amid simmering tensions with the agency, which some Iranian officials accuse of helping Israel justify its attacks, Iran's hardliner-dominated parliament voted on Wednesday to 'suspend' cooperation with the agency and bar its inspectors from the country, according to state news media. Though the move was so far no more than symbolic — the legislation would need approval from a higher Iranian authority before taking effect — its passage is another show of defiance from Iran. While it may perhaps a signal that Iran will renew its nuclear ambitions despite the U.S. and Israeli strikes on its facilities, the vote could simply be a tactic to gain leverage in any new negotiations with the Trump administration over its nuclear program. One of the I.A.E.A.'s main purposes is to monitor nuclear activity in Iran and other countries, including all those who have signed on to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. The goal is to keep them from building nuclear weapons. Iran is a party to the treaty, while Israel is not. The I.A.E.A. still has some oversight in Israel, which has not confirmed or denied having nuclear weapons, but is widely believed to have them. Under its agreement with Iran, the I.A.E.A. is supposed to inspect the nuclear facilities Iran has publicly declared, including those at Natanz and Fordo that the United States bombed over the weekend. Israeli officials say there may be other, secret nuclear sites that Iran has not told the watchdog about. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

Trump slams intel report, hits Spain at NATO summit
Trump slams intel report, hits Spain at NATO summit

The Hill

time12 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Trump slams intel report, hits Spain at NATO summit

Thank you for signing up! Subscribe to more newsletters here Happy Wednesday! It's another hot day in D.C., so stay hydrated and don't forget your sunscreen!: In today's issue: The White House has spent today disputing several news outlets' reporting that the U.S. strikes against Iran did not decimate the country's nuclear program. If you missed the reporting: CNN, The New York Times and NBC News all cited an internal preliminary classified report that determined Saturday's bombing only set Iran's nuclear program back by a few months, challenging President Trump's assessment that the strikes set the country back years or destroyed it entirely. 💡 Why this matters: Carrying out the strike against Iran was a sophisticated maneuver in foreign policy. Even if the initial report is correct in that it pushed back Iran's nuclear program by just a few months, that's still a win for the White House. But Trump has set the bar incredibly high by suggesting the U.S. strikes decimated Iran's nuclear materials, setting Tehran back by decades. Trump closed out the NATO summit this morning with a wide-ranging press conference but spent much of it pushing back on the reporting. He even equated the Iran strikes to WWII: Trump compared the U.S. strikes on Iran's nuclear sites to dropping atomic bombs in Japan near the end of World War II. 'It was so devastating. Actually, if you look at Hiroshima or if you look at Nagasaki, you know, that ended a war, too,' Trump said. 'This ended a war in a different way, but it was so devastating.' ^ Keep in mind that roughly 200,000 people were killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. He also dismissed the report's assessment that Iran moved its nuclear materials before the strike: 'If you knew about that material, it's very hard and very dangerous to move,' Trump said. Earlier this morning, Trump bashed the news outlets as 'scum.' From Trump: 'This was an unbelievable hit by genius pilots and genius people in the military, and they're not being given credit for it because we have scum that's in this room. And not all of you are … CNN is scum. MSDNC is scum. The New York Times is scum. They're bad people. They're sick,' Trump said. 'And what they've done is they're trying to make this unbelievable victory into something less.' 📹 Watch Trump vent about the reporting His team publicly backed him up: The president's national security team strongly disagreed with the reporting on the initial internal assessment. ➤ Vice President Vance posted a scathing critique of American media, arguing it is 'full of the least curious, least insightful people in our country.' 🔎 Read Vance's criticism ➤ Secretary of State Marco Rubio argued to Politico that Iran is now 'much further away from a nuclear weapon.' ➤ Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth says there is an investigation into how the report was leaked. During Trump's NATO news conference, Hegseth stepped up to the microphone and accused the media of trying 'to find a way to spin it for their own political reasons to try to hurt President Trump or our country.' ^ Oh, by the way. Trump referred to Hegseth as 'Secretary of War,' noting the position used to be called that. 'We feel like warriors,' Trump said. 📹 Watch For what it's worth: An Iran Foreign Ministry spokesperson says that Saturday's bombing 'badly damaged' its nuclear installations. Keep in mind: The report's conclusion could easily change — it is an early assessment, after all. Without any inspections on the ground, it's hard to know how successful the strikes were. Here's a helpful Brookings Institution explainer on measuring the strike's success. President Trump wrapped the NATO summit with a press conference. While that Iran report was on the top of his mind, he had plenty of other matters to discuss. 🗨️ Follow today's live blog ➤ TIDBIT — UH, NO COMMENT: NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte referred to Trump as 'Daddy' this morning after the president used harsh language to bash Israel and Iran for continuing strikes despite a fragile ceasefire agreement. 📹 Watch— it's around the one-minute mark. Cuomo bested in NYC primary: Former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) conceded to 33-year old New York State Assembly member Zohran Mamdani (D) on Tuesday night in the city's mayoral primary, delivering an absolute stunner. Nearly every poll consistently showed Cuomo in the lead, despite Mamdani closing the gap in several surveys. Cuomo also had a stacked list of Democratic endorsements, including former President Clinton and former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg. Meanwhile, Mamdani landed a few high-profile progressive endorsements — like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) — but was still considered an underdog against the New York powerhouse. Votes are still being tallied, but Cuomo didn't wait to concede, telling supporters 'tonight was Assemblyman Mamdani's night.' Why this matters: Democrats have struggled to find their footing while trying to repair their damaged image after the 2024 elections. Mamdani is a democratic socialist and ran as an anti-establishment Democrat. He called for free buses, free childcare, a rent freeze and tax increase on wealthy taxpayers. What to know about Mamdani His win is notable because progressives have had some big losses over the last year, including several high-profile progressives, like former Reps. Cory Bush (D-Mo.) and Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.) losing their primaries. 📝Five takeaways Related, via The New York Times: 'Why Ranked-Choice Voting Could Have a Pivotal Effect on the Mayor's Race' ➤ TIDBITS: 📹 Wow: Watch Former New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio (D) react to Cuomo's loss. He railed on Cuomo. 📹 Watch the clip There was an ~outlier~ poll predicting this outcome: The Economist's Mike Bird posted a screenshot of 'the single best poll for Zohran in the run-up to the election, discounted as a wild outlier at the time, undershot his actual first-round percentage of the vote by about eight percentage points.' The House and Senate are in. President Trump has left the Netherlands. (All times EST) This afternoon: Trump leaves the Netherlands and returns to Washington. 4:15 p.m.: Two Senate votes. 📆Today's agenda 4:15 p.m.: First and last House votes. 📆Today's agenda 🍓 Celebrate: Today is National Strawberry Parfait Day. 🥤 Tbh, the Dubai chocolate craze is not overhyped: Shake Shack is leaning into the craze over the combination of pistachio, toasted kataifi shredded phyllo and chocolate. It has created a shake with those flavors. 🎸 I would simply faint: Taylor Swift made a surprise appearance at a charity concert in Nashville. 📹 Watch Because you made it this far: If you aren't craving a mozzarella stick already, this record-breaking cheese pull will surely change that.

Fed's Powell repeats warning about tariffs as some GOP senators accuse him of bias
Fed's Powell repeats warning about tariffs as some GOP senators accuse him of bias

The Hill

time12 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Fed's Powell repeats warning about tariffs as some GOP senators accuse him of bias

WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell said Wednesday that President Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs will likely push up inflation in the coming months, even as some Republican senators suggested the chair was biased against the duties. On the second day of his twice-yearly testimony before the House and Senate, Powell said that consumers will likely have to shoulder some of the cost of the import taxes. Most Fed officials support cutting rates this year, Powell added, but the central bank wants to take time to see how inflation changes in the months ahead. 'There will be some inflation from tariffs coming,' Powell said under questioning from members of the Senate Banking Committee. 'Not yet, but over the course of the coming months.' Powell noted that the duties would likely cost hundreds of billions of dollars annually, and 'some of that is going to fall on the consumer. We're just kind of waiting to see more data on that.' Some GOP senators criticized Powell, however, for characterizing tariffs as a potential driver of inflation. Sen. Pete Ricketts, a Republican from Nebraska, argued that the duties could simply act as a one-time increase in prices that wouldn't fuel inflation. And Sen. Bernie Moreno, a Republican from Ohio, echoed some of Trump's complaints about Powell's reluctance to cut rates and accused Powell of political bias. 'You should consider whether you are looking at this through a fiscal lens or a political lens because you just don't like tariffs,' Moreno said. Powell didn't respond. But the Fed chair reiterated that most central bank officials do support cutting the Fed's key rate this year. And Powell added that it is possible that tariffs won't increase inflation by very much. Trump has sharply criticized Powell for not reducing borrowing costs, calling him a 'numbskull' and a 'fool.' Trump has pushed for rate cuts in order to reduce the interest costs the federal government pays on its debt. Yet some Fed officials have pushed back against that view, saying that it's not their job to lower the government's borrowing costs. So far, inflation has steadily cooled this year despite widespread concerns among economists about the impact of tariffs. The consumer price index ticked up just 0.1% from April to May, the government said last week, a sign that price pressures are muted. Compared with a year ago, consumer prices rose 2.4% in May, up from a yearly increase of 2.3% in April. Yet most economists on Wall Street expect that Trump's tariffs will lift inflation this year, to about 3% to 3.5% by the end of this year.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store