Why spend more on defense in Western Europe?

Hello,

In this video, I discuss the topic of why it is necessary for Western European countries to increase defense spending and what can happen if they don't. I was prompted to make this video because of Mark Rutte's comments that if we don't spend more money on defense, then we better learn Russian. I think it is counterproductive to imply that Western European countries could face Russian occupation when that is clearly not the case. However, there are some very important other threats that we need to focus on.

Watch the video on the website or read the transcript below.

Best,
Anders

Transcript:

There is a talking point that I've seen quite a bit lately that I think is problematic, and it's the idea that if Western European countries don't spend more on defense, then we better start learning Russian. It's something that NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has said, and I've also seen Kaja Kallas saying it. She's the EU high representative for foreign affairs and security policy.

The reason why this talking point is problematic is that it gives a wrong impression about what it is that the threat is against Western Europe, and it can be counterproductive because it's actually quite ridiculous if you take it literally. So, I think there is an important discussion to be had about what it is that the threat is against Western European countries and why it is relevant to talk about increasing defense spending. So, let's talk about it.

Right now, there is a discussion about the need to increase defense spending in Europe and about how much the new spending requirements in NATO should be. That is an important discussion. But before you can discuss that, it's necessary to have a clear picture of what the threat is and what could potentially happen if you don't spend more on defense.

This is where Mark Rutte then came up with his talking point that if we don't spend more money on defense, then we better start learning Russian. It caught a lot of attention when he said it a couple of weeks ago at a session at Chatham House, which is a think tank in the United Kingdom. But he has said it before on other occasions. So it's a talking point that he likes. I'm just going to play the clip here so you can hear for yourself what Mark Rutte said at Chatham House.

Journalist:
Do you think this Wednesday we should see the Chancellor raise taxes in order to cover the defense spending that you think is required?

Mark Rutte:
Well, it's not up to me to decide, of course, how countries pay the bill. I mean, what I know is that if we want to keep our societies safe, and… Look, if you do not do this, if you would not go to the 5%, including the 3.5% core defense spending, you could still have the National Health Service, or in other countries, their health systems, the pension system, etc. But you'd better learn to speak Russian. I mean, that's the consequence.

So that is the Secretary General of NATO saying that we need to start learning Russian if we don't prepare sufficiently to defend against the Russians. And this idea was picked up by Kaja Kallas, who has also said it. And in fairness, Kallas is from Estonia, and if you are Estonian, then that might actually indeed be the case, because Estonia is a frontline state and Russian occupation is a threat that needs to be taken seriously.

But to imply that there would be a Russian occupation in the United Kingdom that would require the Brits to learn to speak Russian is frankly quite ridiculous. When the Secretary General of NATO says that, it gives the impression that maybe he doesn't actually know what the real threat is against Britain, and it seems that he's unable to explain in clear and understandable terms why it's necessary for the Brits to spend more money on defense and what could potentially happen if they don't.

So that's what I want to address in this video. I want to explain what the threat is from Russia against Western European countries. And just because these countries are not facing Russian occupation, it's actually pretty bad anyways.

I want to mention three things. The first one is perhaps the most abstract, but it's important. There is a threat of us losing the European community that we've grown up with, that we like, that is the foundation of our societies and our way of life.

There is a risk that NATO could collapse and potentially also the European Union. This is what's at stake and it's difficult to really wrap one's head around what a world without all those institutions would look like.

I've made a video before about what a war between NATO and Russia would look like and why the image that most people have is wrong. They imagine this massive war where the entirety of Russia goes up against the entirety of NATO in a huge clash where the strongest one will come out on top. But in reality, what we are facing is a different kind of war. It would be a much more limited type of conflict where Russia would try to break up the alliance by exploiting NATO's greatest weakness, which is alliance cohesion. It's the willingness to actually stand together when necessary.

The purpose of a Russian attack would not be to engage in a large war with all of NATO, but it would be to persuade the majority of NATO countries to not fight. It looks quite clear right now that Europe cannot count on the United States in a conflict with Russia. We can perhaps hope that the United States will be there if we need it, but we cannot count on it because nothing indicates that Donald Trump has any particular affection for Europe or that he sees any strategic interest in the United States being part of a strong NATO.

So it's up to the European countries to ensure alliance cohesion and to demonstrate that they have this willingness to fight for each other. If they don't have that, then NATO is worthless.

That means that the European countries have to be prepared to go to war without counting on support from the United States. This is a mental shift that we need to make in Western Europe. Instead of considering NATO to be our security guarantee, our assurance that the Americans will be there to help us if we get into trouble, we have to start seeing NATO as our obligation to go and fight for the frontline states in Eastern Europe.

If it turns out when push comes to shove that the Western European countries are not ready to honor their NATO commitments, then this is something that could potentially cause the entire European community to start unraveling. The distrust between the countries will be enormous. It's very hard to see how there could be any kind of business as usual between these countries anymore. The ways our economies have worked, the ways our societies have worked together, the ways we have created security, all that might change as a result of Russian aggression if the Western European countries are not willing to fight.

So that's the first threat that Western European countries are facing: there is a threat against our societies, our European model of cooperation, and our way of life. If we don't invest more in defense spending now, then we risk losing that. We might be moving from an age where European countries are working together to a new age in European politics where it's everyone for themselves.

The second threat against Western European countries is that a war with Russia can lead to massive casualties. I recently made a video about drone technology and how it revolutionizes warfare and that we're ending up in a place where suddenly attritional warfare is back.

For many years, there has been this idea that through sophisticated, expensive technology, we can reduce human casualties in warfare and we can dominate the battlefield through technology. But the very static situation in the war in Ukraine right now is, to a large extent, the result of technological developments that suddenly pull in the opposite direction.

It means that we, again, have to take attrition into account in our defense planning, and we need to be prepared for the fact that the side that is ultimately going to win is the side that can continue taking casualties the longest.

So that is the second threat that Western European countries are facing. Even though the war is not about our own territory, we might still lose a lot of people in that war. Because we have to send soldiers to the front line and even though they are taking heavy casualties, we have to keep sending more and more and more to replace those losses.

The third threat is military coercion. Russia will try to put pressure on Western European countries to persuade us not to fight or to stop the war if we decide to fight in the first place. In the beginning, that will probably be information operations and they will try to make arguments about how we should give peace a chance and all those things. But if that doesn't work, then absolutely they will target us militarily to create that pressure.

If we want an idea about what that looks like, then all we have to do is to look at the parts of Ukraine that are not directly part of the frontline. The type of pressure that Russia is putting on those parts of Ukraine, on Kyiv, on Lviv, or other cities, that's the kind of pressure that they will be putting on Western Europe in case of a war. It would involve strikes on military facilities, production facilities, and also strikes on civilian areas to create that pressure to end the war on Russia's terms.

Our societies need to have the strength to withstand such pressure and to not give coercion about not helping NATO countries that have been attacked by Russia. This includes also nuclear coercion because Russia will clearly also try to create fear about nuclear war in order to persuade the Western Europeans that it's not worth engaging in this war.

So these are the three threats that I would point to that are facing Western Europe when it comes to the prospect of war with Russia and why it's necessary to invest more in defense. It's the threat against our way of life and the European international order that's been very good for our countries. It's the threat that we could face a war where we would take massive casualties. And it's the need to have the strength to resist military coercion.

I think it's these types of issues that should be the focus instead of silly talking points about having to learn the Russian language because that clearly isn't actually the threat Western European countries are facing, and it distracts from the very real threats that are actually there.

And don't get me wrong, I think there are many other good reasons to learn Russian. I speak Russian myself. I find it useful for many things. But we need to be careful about how we explain the need for increased defense spending and not give the impression that it's about preventing Russian occupation or something like that in countries where the real threats are something else.

Okay, I will end it here. If you found the video helpful or informative, then please give it a like and also remember to subscribe to the channel and click the bell icon to get notifications when I upload new videos. If you want to support the channel, you can subscribe to my newsletter and get access to some bonus videos on www.logicofwar.com. Thank you very much for watching and I will see you again next time.