According to the statement, such a situation could put the US president in a difficult position – either to accept Russia’s victories or to consider the use of nuclear weapons. This would mean a strategic dilemma that the United States would have created itself.
Read more Such a simple BMW accident has never happened before: was driving straight, calmly, but crashed
The author warns that the decreasing US military presence in Europe in recent months poses a danger. This week, the Pentagon informed NATO about plans to reduce the forces that Washington could quickly deploy to Europe in case of a crisis, for example, if Russia attacked Alliance territory.
C. Wallander believes this weakens the deterrence system built over decades and reduces stability in Europe.
“The Trump administration’s approach encourages Russia to test NATO’s advantage in escalation. The reduction of American forces weakens this advantage and reduces the deterrent effect. In the long run, this could put the US president in an unpleasant choice – to withdraw or risk a nuclear conflict,” she writes.
Why the US commitment to defend Europe is important
The author explains that nuclear weapons are the highest level of conflict escalation, but at lower levels, precise long-range strikes play an important role.
That is why, according to her, the US must maintain military forces in Europe. According to C. Wallander, Moscow fears most the Americans’ ability to carry out highly precise strikes over long distances from air, land, and sea.
Russia must be convinced that such strikes would be delivered immediately at the start of a war with NATO, without waiting for European countries to try to repel the attack alone.
Read more The volleyball team crushed Luxembourg and came one step closer to the goal
According to the author, US military operations in Serbia, Afghanistan, and Iraq demonstrated the American military’s ability to dominate the battlefield. This is one of the most important factors deterring Russia from conflict with NATO.
Russia is still preparing for a possible conflict with NATO
C. Wallander also notes that after the 2014 annexation of Crimea, Western analysts considered a scenario in which Russia might try to destabilize the Baltic states and use that as a pretext for intervention.
However, she says, the Russian military already understood then that US global logistics and military response capabilities would likely doom such a plan to failure.
The author believes that even today Russia avoids conflict with NATO not due to lack of capabilities but because of possible US reaction.
She notes that some of Russia’s most advanced forces – air forces, missile systems, cruise, ballistic, and hypersonic missiles – have not yet been fully used in the war against Ukraine and remain in reserve for a possible confrontation with NATO.
However, Russia’s confidence is growing because the reduction of American forces in Europe sends a signal of less US involvement in the continent’s defense.
Read more Ukrainian drones increasingly target Russian military logistics routes
