MA frenzy of activity is underway in the countryside of Poland, Finland and the Baltic states, more than 1,500 kilometers (900 miles) from London, with bulldozers and miners building field defenses. Anti-tank trenches, tank traps and pillboxes are being built and installed. All of these countries are actively considering the laying of minefields, even the controversial anti-personnel minefields.
Poland is spending at least €2.5bn (£2.1bn) on border defense systems, including a sky shield system similar to Israel’s ‘Iron Dome’ to protect its eastern border from the growing Russian threat. Also includes construction.
In May, at a meeting with European leaders in Warsaw, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said: “We need to create an iron dome against missiles and drones…There is no reason why Europe should not have a missile defense shield.” He acknowledged the following: Work on the project has begun. He added that it takes little imagination to understand that Europe, like Israel, is in a danger zone.
Polish defense projects include AI-powered anti-drone technology to build physical anti-tank obstacles, bunkers, and early threat detection and surveillance systems. This could be the most significant national security investment in the country’s post-war history, establishing Poland as a European defense leader.
Poland currently spends €37bn (£30bn), or 4.7% of gross domestic product (GDP), on total defense spending, and further increases are being discussed. Meanwhile, in response to “hybrid warfare” tactics on several fronts, the Baltic states are investing hundreds of millions of euros to strengthen their defense lines, and NATO members Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania have planned Another major project is planned. It will start in 2025.
In many parts of northern Europe, more than a billion euros are rapidly being spent on building new ammunition factories, especially for the 155mm shells that Ukraine is firing at rates not seen since World War II. It is being healed.
And how is the UK responding to the growing global threat? The country has scrapped £500m worth of military equipment, including ships, drones and helicopters, and will carry out a strategic defense review to decide what to do next.
Secretary of Defense John Healey acknowledged this week that the cuts were being made amid “war in Europe, increased Russian aggression and conflict in the Middle East”, but the Strategic Defense Review (SDR) said the cuts are coming in February 2025. It won’t be reported until late in the year – lucky in our opinion. Some have suggested Whitehall bureaucracy could postpone it until the summer.
Meanwhile, the clock is ticking. Northern European countries, liberal democracies that are highly regarded for their quality of life and quality of services, fear that if Ukraine loses the fight to Russia, Russia will take military action against the Baltic states, Finland, and even Russia. We agree that it can occur. Poland.
Open image in gallery
Most experts agree that that timeline is within three to five years. From a defense planning perspective, that’s essentially tomorrow. Even at maximum speed, it takes 28 to 30 months to order and deliver a fighter jet, 18 to 24 months for a tank, and 30 months for a frigate.
In addition to immediate actions, Western Europe is also increasing its defense budget. France’s defense spending has been increasing for eight years and is expected to exceed that of the UK in real terms by 2027. The Netherlands reversed decades of defense spending cuts two years ago and plans to double its budget within five years. Sweden, Norway and Denmark have also increased their defense spending, with many increasing by double digits year-on-year.
Europe’s defensive giants have also woken up. Germany, which was one of the first countries to drastically cut its defense spending after the Cold War, has increased its military budget by two-thirds since Russia invaded Crimea in 2014.
Importantly, the 2022 invasion of Ukraine triggered a Zeitenwende (“tipping point”), with Prime Minister Olaf Scholz pledging an immediate investment of 100 billion euros to address shortages of munitions and equipment. .
Since then, Berlin has spent between 30 billion and 40 billion euros on U.S.-supplied F-35A fighter jets and other systems, and more than 60 billion euros on ammunition and missiles from February 2022 onwards.
Returning to Eastern Europe, for these countries defense is not seen as a ‘nice to have’ but as an absolute necessity. Defense spending in these countries has doubled or even tripled in the past five years. So why does the UK now look like a laggard rather than a leader in Europe?
Open image in gallery
The main reason for this is what I call the “1,700km duvet”. To reach Britain, Russia would first have to pass through the Baltic states and Finland, cross the Baltic Sea, engage Germany, Sweden, Denmark and Norway, and then sail through the North Sea.
Asked about the threat of a missile attack on the UK, former Defense Secretary Grant Shapps casually said that the NATO ally located between Britain and Russia would respond to such a threat, and himself said: “1,700 kilograms of duvets. ” indicated that he believed it. Britain continues to stand by.
But threats are creeping up. This week, an incident involving a damaged undersea internet cable in the Baltic Sea raised concerns of Russian sabotage. In Europe, Russia is believed to be planning to install incendiary devices on cargo planes and test their safety systems, and Western intelligence officials suspect Russia was behind fires at transport hubs in the UK and Germany this summer. I suspect that there are.
Many people think it’s only a matter of time before wind farm cables mysteriously snap and the UK suffers a power shortage, or that the internet is at risk because the communications backbone goes down. are.
Open image in gallery
In effect, Britain is vulnerable to many forms of modern attack. Chief of the Defense Staff, Admiral Tony Radakin, acknowledged as much at a recent conference in Berlin, stressing the need to follow the example of the Nordic and Baltic states in strengthening both defense and civilian war preparedness.
Despite its bold rhetoric, the Royal Navy cannot deploy a carrier group without relying on US and allied ships and aircraft. The Army is unable to fully form a 15,000-man division from its 70,000-man strength and lacks ammunition to fight for more than a month. The Royal Air Force has only about 20 combat-ready Typhoons out of a fleet of over 100 ships.
The Secretary of Defense is right to emphasize that it is important to improve spending, not just increase spending. However, funds are important. If a NATO member state were to invoke Article 5, which requires the right of collective self-defense (a situation that many Nordic-Baltic experts believe could occur within five years), the UK would be forced to do so due to economic constraints. We cannot afford to delay our response.
The NATO principle that ‘an attack on one is an attack on all’ requires the UK to march to the sound of the guns, but compared to our European neighbours, we are less prepared to respond to this situation. woefully unprepared.
Francis Tusa is the editor of Defense Analysis
