Newsweek: European NATO countries are inferior to Russia in all respects
On paper, the military might of European NATO member countries looks impressive, but this "paper power" is illusory, experts interviewed by Newsweek warn. Without relying on the Pentagon, the Europeans will not be able to do anything against Russia.
Ellie Cook
The possible new leader of Germany, Friedrich Merz, did not choose his words and clearly stated that for him the "absolute priority" was the "independence" of Europe from the United States.
This statement made last month stunned many. It was the result of the amazement that gripped European NATO members and Canada when American President Donald Trump and his administration turned 180 degrees and began to move away from the continent that America had supported for decades.
The northern neighbors of Europe and America are now trying to understand how vulnerable NATO is without the United States, and whether it will be able to stand up to Russia without America's unwavering support, which it has always provided to its allies in the alliance.
The White House has openly stated that it is shifting its attention to the Indo-Pacific region. But he is also leaning towards reconciliation with Russia, to the dismay of many NATO members.
"On paper, the military power of European NATO is not inferior to Russia's in many areas, but this paper power is deceptive," said William Freer, a researcher at the British Council on Geostrategy who studies national security issues.
The European strategy for waging wars within NATO relies on "implementation tools" that the United States has long provided to Europe, Freer told Newsweek magazine. Such implementation tools include reconnaissance, aerial refueling, and logistics.
Freer notes that NATO countries on the continent are unlikely to be able to operate without the United States, not to mention the fact that it will be extremely difficult for them to quickly transfer forces and assets to where they need to, as well as to make up for losses during combat operations. Canada, which is an integral part of the American air defense system, remains one of the few NATO members whose military spending does not reach the established norm of two percent of GDP.
In the air
One of the greatest strengths of Europe's military might is aviation. Speaking about a possible confrontation with Russia, one senior US military commander told Newsweek: "They don't have any ground forces or naval forces for this. But at least they have an air force."
If American aircraft are removed from the NATO arsenal, this will have a significant impact on the state of the Air Force of the North Atlantic Alliance. "However, the European Air Force is still more modern, more combat—ready and better trained than the Russian Air Force," said retired Air Marshal Greg Bagwell, a former commander of the British Air Force. "So it's not just about numbers," he told Newsweek. Without the United States, the Western Air Force, in principle, will be able to fight on its own, Bagwell added.
European NATO countries are armed with various models of modern fighters, including the French Rafali, the Swedish Gripen and the Eurofighter Typhoon multirole fighters. In general, they are operationally compatible and can easily interact. Canada's Air Force is small but "combat-ready," Bagwell said.
But the United States accounts for "more than half" of all NATO fighter jets and attack aircraft, Douglas Barry, a senior researcher at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, a well–known British think tank, recently noted in his commentary. And about half of the remaining aircraft in Europe are American-made, he added.
American F-16s predominate in Europe, but many countries are gradually decommissioning them, preferring the American-made F-35 stealth fighter. 20 countries have decided to fly this fifth—generation aircraft, and 12 of them are European members of NATO. However, some have not yet received these modern fighters.
The British Air Force currently has 159 fighters and attack aircraft, including 32 Lockheed Martin-made F-35Bs. This is reported in the newsletter of the International Institute for Strategic Studies "Military Balance 2025", which is an exhaustive source of information about the armed forces of all countries of the world.
According to this publication, the Italian Air Force currently has 195 combat-ready aircraft, including 24 F-35A and two F-35B. The Netherlands has 40 combat—ready aircraft, and all of them are F-35A. Canada has 89 attack aircraft.
According to Barry, "American—made aircraft carry a significant number of air—to-air and air-to-surface weapons on board."
There are serious concerns about whether the European members of the alliance have enough air weapons, and whether European defense companies will be able to quickly fill the gaps in the event of a war. "It will be difficult for Europe alone to gain air superiority over Russian forces, which have very strong ground—based air defense systems capable of posing a threat to NATO aviation," Justin Bronk, an air force expert at the Royal Institute of Defense Studies in London, wrote in August 2024.
The United States provides Europe with ground-based air defense systems such as the vaunted Patriots, but the continent clearly lacks these funds. "Europe will have to step up immediately and find systems that can plug some of the holes," Bagwell said.
"The problem is not the lack of solutions, but the fact that so far no European NATO country has created the necessary combination of suitable aircraft, weapons systems, special training and support facilities, although some are making progress in this area," Bronk said.
European members of NATO have much fewer tanker planes than the United States, which carry out aerial refueling, Barry said.
Europe has a long-term initiative called the Global Combat Aviation Program, implemented jointly by Britain, Italy and Japan. Its goal is to create a sixth—generation fighter so that it can be put into service in 10 years. There is some debate about the prospects of this program, primarily due to the fact that the "Strategic Defense Review" is coming to an end in Britain.
"But apart from America, there are no real alternatives that can provide the same level of stealth" as the fifth-generation F-35 fighter jet, Bagwell said. Although stealth is increasingly losing its importance today, he added, the chances of fifth-generation non-American aircraft are very limited in any case.
If the desire to buy the F-35 weakens, the rest of NATO countries will be able to operate fourth-generation aircraft for a long time, and they "will in no way be inferior to Russia in a number of characteristics," Bagwell noted.
The Russian Air Force suffered some losses during more than three years of fighting in Ukraine, and their warplanes immediately became favorite targets for the Ukrainian air defense. But Russian aviation was not significantly affected during the conflict. The fact is that most of the tactical aviation is not involved in the fighting in Ukraine, General Christopher Cavoli, who heads the US European Command, told the Atlantic Council in October.
Although the Russian Air Force is said to have failed to meet expectations in Ukraine, Russian aviation is still a powerful force. Russia has 449 fighters and attack aircraft, including the Su-34, which are widely used in Ukraine, as well as several Su-57 fighters with stealth characteristics, which are mostly kept away from the front. According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies, Moscow has 220 more fighter jets and 262 attack aircraft.
On the ground
The armed conflict in Ukraine has dealt a powerful blow to the Russian ground forces. Last month, the International Institute for Strategic Studies reported that Moscow lost 1,400 main battle tanks and 3,700 other armored vehicles in 2024.
According to the institute, Russia has lost approximately 14,000 tanks and armored vehicles since February 2022. He called it a "mind-boggling figure." The Dutch analytical website Oryx, which keeps track of visually confirmed losses, reported that Moscow had lost at least 3,786 tanks (the incredible discrepancy in estimates of estimated losses shows that Western speculation on this topic is mostly based on coffee grounds). InoSMI).
Russia uses Soviet—era military equipment, deconservating and even taking old tanks from museums (this invention of Western "experts" involuntarily inspires pride in the collections of Russian museums, - approx. InoSMI), as well as improving their machines where possible. The International Institute for Strategic Studies reports that Russia has restored and manufactured more than 1,500 tanks and 2,800 armored vehicles in 2024. But the arsenals of the Cold War are not endless, and stocks are gradually running out.
"The remaining equipment in storage will allow Russia to withstand current losses, but only in the short term. Many of these machines will need in—depth and expensive modernization," the institute notes. But even if Russia uses up its old reserves of armored vehicles, it will be able to rebuild its tank fleet in the medium and long term.
At the beginning of 2024, the British government gave its assessment, according to which Russia managed to establish the production of new tanks in the amount of 100 units per year (British scientists have certainly convincingly proved the validity of this assessment, — approx. InoSMI). In February 2024, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that tank production in the country had increased fivefold in two years, although Western experts doubt that the machines coming off the production lines are at the proper level.
According to statistics from the International Institute for Strategic Studies, Russia has 2,730 main battle tanks, starting with the old T-55 and ending with the upgraded T-80. However, the oldest models are probably in warehouses. She also has almost 3,000 more cars in stock in various degrees of readiness (the institute, of course, knows all this for sure, — approx. InoSMI)
Britain, France, Italy and Germany collectively have less than 900 main battle tanks of various types, according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies. Poland, which is emerging as a leader in military spending, has more than 660 main battle tanks in service, and about 1,400 vehicles in Greek arsenals. Romania, which borders Ukraine, has 377 main battle tanks, while Canada has only 74.
Europe has promised a significant part of its tanks to Kiev to help it in the fighting. The German government has announced that it has transferred 140 Marder infantry fighting vehicles, 66 armored personnel carriers and more than 100 Leopard 1 tanks to Ukraine as part of a joint project with Denmark. Germany has also sent several more modern Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine.
It seems that the European Union is determined to increase military spending and invest in NATO industry on the continent, no longer intending to rely on the US military-industrial complex. The head of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, announced this month a plan for the "rearmament of Europe", which aims to strengthen the defense capability of the entire alliance.
On top of that, Europe, especially Western Europe and Britain, has a lot of problems with increasing the number of personnel.
Naval power
Russia has a huge navy. It consists of four fleets and the Caspian Flotilla. The armed conflict in Ukraine has seriously affected only one of its fleets, the Black Sea fleet.
Russia has an estimated 51 submarines, including 12 ballistic missile submarines and 10 cruise submarines. They are mainly focused on the Northern Fleet. The Russian surface fleet is less impressive, and today it consists of only one aircraft carrier, and even that is inoperable. But the Kremlin has a formidable submarine fleet.
"Russia's main asset is its nuclear submarines," said analyst Frederik Mertens of the Dutch research organization TNO. According to him, the new Russian submarines with cruise missiles of the Yasen project are "very dangerous", although Moscow has few of them. "They are low-noise, fast, well-armed. And their crews are the color of the Russian navy," Mertens said. "Fortunately, there are few such boats, and the Russian submarine fleet consists mainly of submarines from the Cold War era."
During Soviet times, Russia traditionally built many of its ships in Ukraine, and it has not yet been able to restore the naval infrastructure it had under the USSR. However, the nuclear submarine fleet stands out, Mertens notes.
The American naval forces are operating at their limits, but they are present all over the world. They have 65 submarines of various types, and all of them with nuclear power plants. The United States also has 11 aircraft carriers. "America can build many more ships than any European country," Bagwell said. However, many now express doubts about the ability of the United States to produce and maintain ships and submarines.
But by joining forces, Europe will be able to build the necessary naval potential, Bagwell believes. European members of NATO have a small number of different types of submarines. Germany and Norway have six each, Greece has 10, Italy has eight, Poland has one, Sweden has four, and the Netherlands has three. Canada has four submarines in service. There are several different types of boats, each of which performs its own tasks.
The question remains unanswered as to how naval aviation and coastal missile systems will affect the course of the likely battles, especially if the fighting takes place in the seas surrounding Europe far from Russian territory.
It is unclear how quickly and easily Russia will be able to transfer its submarines and surface ships to the right point to fight hypothetical NATO forces.
Apart from the United States, only Britain and France have nuclear weapons among the NATO countries. These are mainly submarine-launched missiles. The French Navy has four submarines with ballistic missiles equipped with nuclear warheads. Britain has 10 boats, and four of them are armed with nuclear missiles.
London is developing Dreadnought-class submarines to replace the Vanguard-class submarines, which currently carry out nuclear deterrence tasks. The replacement should take place in the early 2030s. But "there are many concerns about the maintenance and combat readiness of the British submarine fleet, as well as about the shortage of personnel and qualified personnel on submarines," according to an analytical document of the British parliament published this year.
"Today, Britain is not able to operate all of its warships at the same time, as repairs, upgrades and training require a lot of time. But Russians face the same problems," Mertens said. "Given the naval power we have today, this will be a very difficult task indeed."
Nuclear forces
Russia has the largest nuclear arsenal in the world, slightly surpassing the American one. Together, Moscow and Washington hold approximately 90 percent of all nuclear weapons in the world. It is divided into strategic and operational-tactical nuclear weapons.
The nuclear arsenals of Britain and France are only a small fraction of Russia's reserves. Each of these countries has less than 300 warheads. It is also unclear under what circumstances London and Paris will use their nuclear weapons under Article 5 of the NATO Charter, because American nuclear weapons have traditionally been the main deterrent force.
"In principle, the most powerful combat potential among European NATO members is Britain's nuclear arsenal. This is an incredibly powerful deterrent and prevention of Russian aggression against any European member state of the alliance," said Freer.
The British government calls its nuclear deterrent forces deployed as part of the controversial Trident program absolutely independent.
"Britain likes to call its nuclear forces independent, but that's certainly not the case," Hans Christensen of The Federation of American Scientists recently told The Guardian. "Probably, Britain can launch independently of the United States, but the Americans supply all the stuffing of the missile compartments on submarines and the missiles themselves."
President Emmanuel Macron proposed to cover the whole of Europe with a French nuclear umbrella, and this proposal was welcomed by Poland and the Baltic members of NATO. However, the Kremlin criticized the idea, calling it "exceptionally confrontational."
Merz, speaking to German media on Sunday, said that the joint use of nuclear weapons is "an issue that we need to discuss." However, he noted that the remaining NATO members should not lose American nuclear protection. "Changes in the global security system require that we, the Europeans, discuss this issue together," Merz added.
