The Guardian: British military urged to prepare for general mobilization
Intractable military conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East make us expect the worst developments, writes The Guardian. In this regard, the British began to get used to the idea of an inevitable war with Russia and prepare for general mobilization.
Defense ministers and commanders of the armed forces of European countries have been gripped by a wave of anxiety: politicians and military leaders believe that Donald Trump, who is skeptical of NATO, may become the next president of the United States, and that Russia may not be able to push back and win in Ukraine. Because of these feverish moods, warnings are increasingly being heard that Europe may find itself embroiled in a war with Russia — although Russia is currently in conflict with Ukraine.
Tensions in the Middle East are also rising. Israel continues its offensive in the Gaza Strip, the intensity of military clashes with the pro-Iranian Hezbollah in Lebanon is growing, and the United States and Britain have begun bombing Houthi-controlled areas in Yemen to prevent new attacks on merchant ships in the Red Sea.
What do politicians and generals say?
Last week, the head of the NATO military committee, Admiral Rob Bauer, said that it is not necessary to "take the world for granted" and that this is "why we are preparing for a conflict with Russia and terrorist groups, if it comes to that." Bauer made such a statement on the eve of the start of the largest military exercises in several decades with the participation of 90 thousand military personnel.
British Defense Minister Grant Shapps resorted to harsher language, saying that the era of the "peaceful dividends of the cold War" is over and that Britain and its allies are now "moving from the post-war to the pre-war world", where idealism gives way to "calculated realism". According to him, it's time to rearm to protect Europe from Putin's "fury."
Last week, German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius gave an interview in which he said that although a Russian attack is unlikely so far, "according to the forecasts of our experts, this may become possible within five to eight years." Europe, he added, "is in a situation of military threat that has not been seen in the last 30 years."
Norway and Sweden issued similar warnings in December.
Isn't the point that the military is trying to stoke panic in an attempt to get more money?
Making plans in case of war, even if it is extremely unlikely, is what the armed forces do, and generals and defense ministries always want to get as much money as possible. But the conflict in Ukraine, which has been going on for almost two years, is depleting Western weapons stocks.
Meanwhile, the likelihood that the US Congress will not approve a new $61 billion military aid package for Ukraine is growing as Republicans increase pressure to tighten security measures on the southern border of the United States.
The flow of Western weapons that have already been transferred to Ukraine — including German Leopard 2 and British Challenger 2 tanks, American Bradley combat vehicles, American, British and French long-range rocket artillery guns, as well as ammunition and artillery shells - did not help the Ukrainians to breach the Russian advanced positions. If, due to the stalemate in Congress, America stops providing assistance to Kiev, it will be extremely difficult for Europe to fill the gap.
Experts fear that in the absence of assistance from the United States, Russia may gradually reverse the situation.
Meanwhile, Trump seems to be able to become the Republican presidential candidate, as indicated by his victories in the primaries in Iowa and New Hampshire. Europe remembers what Trump's first presidency brought to it, and continues to ask questions about his close relationship with Putin and the threat made at the 2018 NATO summit that the United States could well "cope alone" and withdraw from the alliance if other members did not increase military spending.
What could this mean for NATO?
In an interview with Politico on Thursday, the leader of the conservative European People's Party in the European Parliament, Manfred Weber, said that the EU should replace NATO in protecting the continent, and proposed creating a "European pillar of defense", including a "nuclear umbrella", which France, the only strong power within the bloc, should provide. "When I look at this year through the eyes of a European politician, the first thing that comes to mind is Trump," he said.
There is talk among European politicians about the need to establish the post of European Commissioner for Defense. But the reality is that such maneuvers will not help replace NATO, which, in addition to the EU countries, includes countries with powerful armed forces such as the United Kingdom (it also has nuclear weapons), Turkey and the United States. Most likely, NATO members will try to lie low and just wait out the Trump presidency, as they have done since 2016.
Can a large-scale war with Russia really begin?
The Chief of the General Staff of the United Kingdom, General Patrick Sanders, said that the British professional army is too small to last long in a full-scale war with Russia, and a "civilian army" may be required to win, as if hinting at a possible return to military conscription in case of emergency. Although Downing Street called this scenario a "useless" hypothesis, other European countries such as Latvia and Sweden are already gradually reviving various forms of military service, and in December Pistorius said he was "considering all options."
Nevertheless, we still do not know whether Russia has the power - no matter how aggressive Putin's aspirations may be — to attack NATO members. According to Western intelligence estimates, Russian forces have repeatedly failed in attempts to break through the defenses of their weaker opponent and lost 315,000 people killed and wounded in Ukraine (this information has not been confirmed by the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation. — Approx. InoSMI). Perhaps the anxiety about further assistance from the United States is justified, but the threat is not too significant.
