Russia's problems in Ukraine don't mean it's unable to attack the West. NATO allies warn its war machine is spun up and as dangerous as ever.
Russia's military has been hammered in its invasion of Ukraine.
But that doesn't mean it wouldn't attack the West, officials and Russia experts warned.
Estonia's ex-foreign minister said Russia was "probably more dangerous than it has ever been."
Russia's military has suffered severe losses in Ukraine, and nearly three years since it launched its full-scale invasion, its soldiers remain locked in a brutal slog. But the West can't rest easy.
Moscow has repeatedly threatened Europe, and Russia is on a war footing, rebuilding and reconstituting its army, manufacturing more weapons, and joining forces with nations hostile to the West.
Gabrielius Landsbergis, who served until late last year as the foreign minister of Lithuania, a European Union and NATO member bordering Russia, noted in an interview with Business Insider that Russia had been investing heavily in its war machine.
The Russians are "not just repairing the tanks from the battlefield, but they're also building ones," he said. "They're building drones" and have had years to test and experiment. They have experienced large-scale combat while the West has focused more on counterterrorism than on preparing for a major war with a near-peer adversary.
"I would probably say that Russia is probably more dangerous than it has ever been," Landsbergis said.
Keir Giles, a senior consulting fellow at Chatham House's Russia and Eurasia Programme, told BI that Russia's struggles in Ukraine didn't preclude the possibility of a Russian attack elsewhere.
Giles said that assuming Russia's setbacks in Ukraine meant it wouldn't launch an attack elsewhere "ignores Russia's habit of convincing itself wrongly that it's capable of doing something and then launching the attack anyway."
Regardless of whether Moscow gets it right or wrong, "the consequences are devastating," he said.
He also noted that heavy troops losses, which Russia sees as cheap assets, had not deterred Russia from continuing its attack on Ukraine.
Many of the professional soldiers whom Russia started this war with are now gone, along with tremendous amounts of equipment.
The UK's minister for the Armed Forces said in December that the UK thought more than 750,000 Russian military personnel had been killed or wounded since it began its full-scale invasion in late February 2022. Russia often relies on expendable forces and decades-old equipment pulled from storage to plug holes in its army.
But Russia's military is far from hollowed out.
Its economy and industry are on a war footing and working overtime to rebuild and rearm, and Russia, as the top US general in Europe said in the fall, has forces, such as strategic aviation assets and submarine forces, that "have been barely touched" by the war. That general, Christopher Cavoli, the commander of US European Command, also said the Russian army had grown.
"The narrative that Russia has depleted is the most dangerous one," Landbergis said. "Honestly, I think that Russia is not just not depleted. I think that it's clearly on the warpath."
He said Russia had "way more personnel than" it had before the war, and while those newer service members have much less training than the soldiers Russia had at the beginning, they are still getting invaluable experience.
George Barros, a warfare expert at the Institute for the Study of War, said Russia "has the readiness and the capability to be able to posture and potentially attack members of NATO's eastern flank," which includes Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia.
Andris Sprūds, Latvia's defense minister, told BI "this war has taught us that even a weakened Russia is still a dangerous Russia."
"Although Russia's efforts are currently focused on the war in Ukraine, this is not the time to relax and let our guard down," he said, adding that "we estimate that Russia will reconstitute its military capacity within the next five years' time; therefore, we must do everything to prepare against a potential attack."
Many European countries are sounding the alarm that Russia may act against them.
Sweden started giving citizens a booklet advising them how to prepare for war, and its defense minister recently warned that while Russia's forces were "tied up in Ukraine," Russia "poses a threat to Sweden, as it does to the rest of NATO," adding: "We cannot rule out a Russian attack on our country."
Poland's foreign minister also said last year that he would not be surprised if Russia attacked his country.
Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, a defense expert and a former commander for the UK's Joint Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear forces, told BI that Russia, after being "hammered" in Ukraine, was most likely not in a position to attack conventionally.
But "the Russian war machine is spun up at the moment," he said, so Russia could be a more serious threat in five to 10 years. He said NATO had "overwhelming power" to meet an attack, but Russia could still cause significant damage.
European officials say Russian attacks have started, reporting hybrid attacks like cyberattacks, arson, assassination efforts, and attacks on infrastructure linked to Russia.
"Putin is already waging attacks in Europe and testing us and pushing the red lines," Margus Tsahkna, the Estonian foreign minister, told BI.
Barros said the Russian hybrid attacks were "acts of war that we decide not to respond to."
If the West does not send a strong signal to Russia to stop, Landsbergis said, Russia will escalate. "With no clear repercussions for the actions, they're incentivized to go even further."
Landsbergis said his country was preparing for a time when Russia would look elsewhere in Europe. Estonia is doing the same and is, Tsahkna explained, now targeting spending 5% of its GDP, proportionately more than the US, on defense because of "real needs."
That share of GDP, now targeted by both Estonia and Lithuania, would be the highest of any NATO ally.
Some European leaders and warfare experts warn the continent is not producing enough ammunition and weaponry to deter or counter Russia, despite increasing production rates. Tsahkna said Europe needed "to invest in our defense industry, our capabilities."
Sprūds, Latvia's defense minister, said that "we have to invest in our defense" by "increasing defense funding, ramping up production, boosting our resilience, and supporting Ukraine as it fights for all of us."
The Baltic states have been on the forefront of the effort. Ultimately, Landsbergis said, "we need to prepare, and the most dangerous times are up ahead."
Read the original article on Business Insider
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Bucharest gay pride march turns 20 as LGBTQ+ Romanians face growing hostility from right-wing groups
BUCHAREST, Romania (AP) — Thousands of LGBTQ+ supporters took to the streets of Romania's capital Saturday for its annual gay pride parade, following a tense election cycle marked by an increase in hate speech against the community. Marchers of all ages walked through Bucharest's streets and down the central Victory Avenue, as many waved colorful flags, blew whistles and held placards that read: 'Be proud, be bold, be you!' Held since 2005, the event marked Bucharest Pride's 20th anniversary. This year's parade comes on the heels of a highly divisive and chaotic election cycle that saw a rise in support for far-right and conservative political figures and parties in the European Union member, one of the bloc's most religious countries. Victor Ciobotaru, executive director of ACCEPT Association, an LGBTQ+ rights group, told The Associated Press that throughout the 2024-2025 election cycle, the organization registered 'a huge increase' in hate crimes against the LGBTQ+ community. 'We had more people complaining about being harassed on the streets or being attacked,' he said. 'This hate speech doesn't remain without effect, we can feel the tension within the society … We are going to continue to fight for our rights, no matter the political climate.' Earlier on Saturday, right-wing groups who advocate for traditional family values and oppose same sex marriage held an anti-LGBT countermarch in the capital, with many waving the country's tricolor national flags and others holding placards depicting religious icons. Ahead of the parade, the ACCEPT association also reported a large 'STOP LGBT' banner that had been draped over an abandoned Bucharest apartment block, which was later removed. 'These types of actions are now more legitimized by the hate discourse which was spread all during these years, during these electoral campaigns,' Ciobotaru added. 'We will not be afraid to go on the streets.' This year marks 24 years since Romania, a country of about 19 million, decriminalized homosexuality. In ILGA-Europe's 2025 Rainbow Map, which assesses the legal and policy landscape for LGBT people across Europe, Romania ranked last among all 27 EU countries, followed by Poland and Bulgaria, the advocacy group found.


UPI
an hour ago
- UPI
Three dead as Ukraine hit with third-straight day of overnight attacks
A Russian missile and drone attack in the Ukrainian city of Kharkiv early Saturday killed at least three people and injured more than 20 others, officials have confirmed. Photo by Sergey Kozlov/EPA-EFE June 7 (UPI) -- A Russian missile and drone attack in the Ukrainian city of Kharkiv early Saturday killed at least three people and injured more than 20 others, officials have confirmed. Mayor Ihor Terekhov called the attacks in the country's second-largest city "pure terror," as Ukraine faced overnight bombardment for the third straight day. At least four people died and more than 50 were injured during overnight missile and drone attacks early Friday morning that marked one of Russia's largest aerial assaults of the year, involving almost 500 drones. President Volodymyr Zelensky said the Friday attacks affected nearly the entire country. Kharkiv faced "at least 40 explosions" during the overnight attacks, Terekhov said on his Telegram social media account. "Kharkiv is currently experiencing the most powerful attack since the start of the full-scale war," Terekhov wrote. "The enemy is striking simultaneously with missiles, (drones) and guided aerial bombs. This is outright terror against peaceful Kharkiv." A 14-year-old girl and a boy under the age of two were among those injured in the latest Russian attacks carried out by over 50 drones and four guided aerial bombs, the Kharkiv regional prosecutor's office. Ukrainian officials said 18 apartment buildings and an additional 13 residential buildings were damaged in the attacks. "The strikes achieved their objectives. All designated targets were destroyed," Russia's Defense Ministry wrote on Telegram. The attacks came as the two countries were set to carry out a prisoner exchange that would see hundreds of soldiers on both sides repatriated, including the bodies of thousands of those killed in the conflict. Russian officials on Saturday said Ukraine "unexpectedly postponed both the acceptance of bodies and the exchange of prisoners of war for an indefinite period," following the latest round of attacks.


Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
It's a really bad time to be an expert in Washington
At the Pentagon, 14 advisory boards have been dismantled, with curt, thank-you-for-your-service notes sent to Democrats and Republicans alike. Some of the boards dealt with obscure matters. But others focused on vital issues, like rethinking the U.S. nuclear arsenal as China's nuclear buildup, Russian President Vladimir Putin's episodic nuclear threats and Trump's ambitious demand for a 'Golden Dome' missile defense system have changed the nature of nuclear strategy. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Also gone: the board of experts who were trying to learn lessons from China's astoundingly successful hack into the country's telecommunications networks -- where, by all accounts, the hackers remain to this day. Then came historians at the State Department and the climate specialists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which employed experts in weather, oceans, climate and biodiversity. Advertisement The National Weather Service lost so many people that the agency had to hire some back. No such luck for researchers relying on the National Science Foundation, where projects are disappearing every month. Advertisement No one killed off the expert advisory board at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as it deliberated whether healthy children should receive the COVID vaccine. They did not have to. While it weighed the pros and cons, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his colleagues announced that they had already made their decision. When the history of these tumultuous past four months is written, it will doubtless focus on the moments when teams from the Department of Government Efficiency shut down the U.S. Agency for International Development, when the president issued tariff threats to much of the world and when he went to war with Harvard. Less noticed, perhaps, may be the devastation of the expert class, which once dominated the city, moving between think tanks and government offices, generating alternative views in its best moments, engaging in groupthink at its worst. Today, the experts are swelling the ranks of Washington's suddenly unemployed. To the MAGA faithful, each one of these disbanded groups is a victory for a trimmer government that follows the president's wishes. To them, the National Security Council was the heart of the so-called deep state, whose members testified against Trump during his first impeachment inquiry. The raft of advisory committees mostly slowed down decision-making, they argued, when they were not undercutting policies they did not like. Worse yet, they were the source of leaks. So if an advisory committee of experts was not needed to help James K. Polk, the 11th president, figure out how to spread the United States to the West Coast, why do we need them to figure out the strategy for adding Greenland and Canada? (The expansionist Polk has been restored to a place of pride in the Oval Office -- his portrait now hangs just below and to the right of Thomas Jefferson's.) Advertisement Part of Trump's problem with experts is their portrayal as neutral arbiters, more interested in the data than presidential spin. That is what has led to the White House this week trying to discredit the Congressional Budget Office, which concluded that, yes, the new tax bill could really add $2.4 trillion to the national debt, no matter the spin. Lacking the authority to fire the budget experts there, the White House turned to casting them as politically biased. And while every new president replaces board members and demands some fealty to the new leader's ideology, what has happened in the past four months seems to some in the federal government more like China's cultural revolution, where the only good ideas are the ones that flow from the leader, and both research reports and intelligence findings should support the president's desires. And when they are not, trouble follows. Just ask the National Intelligence Council, a small subset of intelligence experts -- many drawn from academia -- what happened when it came to the conclusion that the Venezuelan government was not controlling a criminal gang, an argument that Trump had used to justify deportations. The experts were told to 'do some rewriting' so the material could not be used against the president and Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence. After the intelligence findings were left unchanged, the board's leadership resisted and was removed. The whole institution is being moved into Gabbard's organization, where its independent judgments can be better controlled. Advertisement At the Environmental Protection Agency, self-protective action has replaced scientific inquiry. 'We've taken the words 'climate' and 'green energy' off every project document,' one scientist still in the government's employ said recently, refusing to speak on the record for obvious reasons. Veterans of Trump's first term say these changes are a manifestation of the president's bitter memories. 'I think somebody convinced President Trump, based on his experience in his first administration, that his own staff would be the biggest obstructionists,' H.R. McMaster, Trump's second national security adviser, said at a conference on artificial intelligence and national security Wednesday. (Trump's current national security adviser, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, is one of around a half dozen across both terms.) While McMaster, now at Stanford, said he did not object to shrinking the National Security Council staff, he worried that also lost would be the capacity to run 'a deliberative process, which I think would be kind of nice on some of these issues, like tariffs, to clarify what you are trying to achieve.' 'Deliberative process' appears to be exactly what Trump is trying to avoid. And if that means eviscerating the expert class, so be it. It helps explain why the Department of Government Efficiency was given license to wipe out USAID. McMaster is hardly alone in concluding that some of the aid agency's programs had 'drifted.' Many Democrats say they agree, though almost never on the record. But McMaster gave voice to the question raised all over Washington when he asked, 'Should you just crush the entire organization or recognize there is a mission for that organization to advance American interests?' It was crushed, with foreign service officers, child health experts and others locked out of the offices. And that has led to both professional and personal angst. Advertisement 'If you work in the field of maternal and child health, you are in trouble,' said Jessica Harrison Fullerton, a managing director at the Global Development Incubator, a nonprofit that is trying to fill some of the gaps USAID's dismantlement left. 'Not only are you devastated by the impacts on the people you have been serving, but your expertise is now being questioned and your ability to use that expertise is limited because the jobs are gone.' In fact, what many of Washington's experts discovered was that crushing the organizations -- and putting their experts out on the street -- was the point of the exercise. It helped create a frisson of fear, and reinforced the message of who was in control. It has also led to warnings from more traditional Republicans that Trump's demand for loyalty over analysis is creating a trap for himself. 'Groupthink and a blinkered mindset are dangers for any administration,' said Richard Fontaine, the CEO of the Center for a New American Security, which, in the days of bipartisanship, described itself as a bipartisan think tank. 'Pulling from multiple sources in and outside of government to develop solid options for foreign policy decision makers is the way to go.' Well, maybe in the Washington of a previous era. Within a 200-yard radius of USAID, DOGE teams moved into the Wilson Center, a nonpartisan foreign policy think tank that had significant private funding and money from Congress. They shuttered it, from its Cold War archives to the Kennan Institute, one of the country's leading collections of scholars about Russia. At a moment when superpower conflict is back, it was the kind of place that presented alternative views. Advertisement DOGE was unimpressed. Like their USAID colleagues in another part of the Ronald Reagan Building, they were soon stuffing their notes into cartons and discovering their computer access had been shut down. (The Wilson Center also sponsored book writers, including some from The New York Times.) The war on expertise has raised some fundamental questions that may not be answerable until after the Trump administration is over. Will the experts stick around -- after hiding out in the private sector or changing professions -- only to reoccupy the 'swamp'? And more immediately, what damage is being done in what may be the country's defining challenge: the competition with China over artificial intelligence, autonomous weapons, electric vehicles, quantum computing? That is what many in the intelligence agencies worry about, not least because Europe is already openly recruiting disillusioned American scientists, and China's intelligence services are looking for the angry and abandoned. Graham Allison, a Harvard professor who writes often on the U.S.-China technological and military competitions, told an audience at the AI Summit on Wednesday that America is not acting like it understands that 'China has emerged as a full-spectrum competitor.' 'Our secret sauce,' he said, has been the American ability to 'recruit the most talented people in the world. Einstein didn't come from America.' 'The idea that we would be taking action that would undermine that makes no sense to any strategic thinker,' he said. Of course, those strategic thinkers rank among the suspect class of Washington experts. This article originally appeared in