War in Ukraine: “NATO is doing everything to avoid a Russian attack against its members”

The invasion of Ukraine by Russia creates a global electroshock: Europe finds itself with a war on its borders and NATO mobilizes to help the Ukrainian government without involving its soldiers. On Sunday, Vladimir Putin said he was alerting Russia’s “deterrent force”, that is to say its nuclear arsenal.

Amélie Zima, researcher in international relations at the Center Thucydide of the University Panthéon-Assas Paris II and author of NATO“Que sais-je” (PUF, 2021), delivers his analysis of these first days of war in Ukraine and the consequences for the Atlantic Alliance.

THE EXPRESS: After four days of war, is it possible to assess the level of resistance of the Ukrainian army to the Russian invasion?

Amelie Zima: The Russians were counting on a blitzkrieg, but there is quite strong resistance from the Ukrainian army. NATO advisers have helped to reform this Ukrainian army, within the framework of partnership agreements between the two parties, particularly by improving supervision and the level of training.

This army is currently in a position to repel an offensive which is being carried out from Belarus, from Russia and the Black Sea, that is to say in the North, East and South of Ukraine. . According to the figures reported by the Ukrainian authorities and news agencies, the losses inflicted on the Russian army seem quite substantial and the Russians probably did not expect such resistance. This is the reason why false information is multiplying, such as that indicating that President Zelensky would have asked to lay down their arms and surrender. A war of brainwashing is being played out to destroy this army on the psychological level, but for the moment it does not work at all: the Ukrainians remain disciplined and respond to aggression.

How important is this psychological and information battle in this war?

Indeed, we are in a context of war with propaganda on both sides. Via social networks, there is an image battle with the creation of icons and heroes. It would seem that the Ukrainians are more effective in this battle of communication. But all information must be verified.

This is particularly the case for the number of deaths. We are unable to get official figures on the deaths on the Russian side. The Ukrainian Ministry of Defense communicated the figure of 3,500 Russian dead at the end of the third day of combat. Some, like the British Ministry of Defence, claim that the Russian army would move around with mobile crematoriums and burn the bodies of dead soldiers to mask the real number of casualties in its ranks. According to the figures announced, there would have been much fewer military losses on the Ukrainian side in these first days of combat.

How can NATO member countries react to Vladimir Putin’s threat to use the Russian “deterrent force”, the nuclear weapon?

Several NATO member countries have nuclear weapons: the United States, France and Great Britain. Following the threat from the Russian President, French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian also recalled that NATO is a nuclear alliance.

According to NATO’s nuclear policy, it undertakes to work for non-proliferation and to create the conditions for a world without atomic weapons, but it affirms that it will remain a nuclear alliance as long as these weapons exist. The objective of the atomic weapon is to reinforce deterrence, prevent coercive actions and deter aggression. If only three countries have the weapon, the nuclear umbrella covers the entire territory of the Member States.

NATO has announced the sending of troops to Eastern Europe and arms to Ukraine, including air defense systems. Can they change the course of the war?

Many NATO member countries had sent defensive equipment before the war started. Since the start of the conflict, announcements of sending have multiplied from many countries such as Great Britain, the Czech Republic, Poland, the Netherlands and Estonia. These are ammunition, missiles, protective or demining equipment, but also humanitarian aid. France is releasing 300 million euros to help the Ukrainians and the United States has announced a new envelope of 350 million dollars… A great mobilization is therefore taking place on the part of the member countries of NATO.

In recent days, US officials have been repeating that Russia may not stop at Ukraine’s borders and attack other territories. Do you think this assumption realistic? Likely?

NATO had few illusions and announced in January that a war was highly probable in Ukraine. However, it remains difficult to say whether the Russians will go to Finland, the Baltic countries, Romania or Poland even though Vladimir Putin is pursuing a policy that attacks the sovereignty and territorial integrity of his neighbors… NATO is doing everything to avoid this scenario by strengthening its presence on the eastern flank.

Several member countries will participate in this reinforcement and France is playing a leading role here since the Minister for the Armed Forces Florence Parly announced at the end of January the dispatch of more than 300 soldiers to Romania. The objective of this new deployment is to strengthen the deterrent posture of NATO, already present with battalions of around 1,000 soldiers each in Poland and in the Baltic States. This remains within the framework of international agreements on the stationing and movement of troops, unlike Russia which is in breach of all its commitments concerning European security.

But fighting can take place because NATO member countries are on the front line of the conflict, such as Poland. Thus the Ukrainian city of Lviv, where the bombings took place, is in the immediate vicinity of the eastern border of Poland. Several neighboring countries, such as Poland and Romania, also have to deal with the influx of refugees. Since the start of the conflict, nearly 150,000 Ukrainians have arrived in Poland.

On Friday, Russia threatened Sweden and Finland with military consequences if they chose to join NATO. How worrying is that?

Threatening Sweden and Finland is tantamount to threatening member countries of the European Union. However, there is also a guarantee of collective security in the EU, article 42-7: if these two countries found themselves under the fire of a Russian attack, it would be up to the EU to activate this article and to intervene.

Sweden and Finland are already extremely close NATO partners. The question of their membership, especially of Finland, was raised this winter but the populations are not very favorable to it even if the Russian intervention increases public opinion’s support for this possibility. These two countries participate in NATO military exercises, their armies are interoperable with NATO since they work on the same norms and standards and they have a logistical agreement that allows troops from member countries to pass through their territory. Both countries also participate in the military aid sent to Ukraine.

In what military situation is Europe? Does our security depend entirely on the United States?

All European countries are not at the same level and the level of equipment is very disparate. If NATO has set up an air police mission over the Baltic States, in which France, Poland, Spain and even Denmark are taking part, it is because the Baltic States have not of aviation. The idea is to have solidarity between members and help those who are weaker.

An extremely important army in Europe is the British army. Moreover, Britain has a seat on the UN Security Council and nuclear weapons. This is why Brexit has been seen as a weakening of the EU’s military effectiveness, even though the UK is obviously still part of NATO.

Germany announced on Sunday an investment of 100 billion euros to upgrade its army. Are we at a historic turning point?

Chancellor Scholz has effectively announced an envelope of 100 billion euros for defense but also an objective of devoting more than 2% of GDP to defense by 2024, which shows a desire for long-term investment. It is therefore effectively a radical change in German security policy, a “new era” in the words of the Chancellor. While the illegal annexation of Crimea had not provoked a reaction of this type, the invasion of Ukraine caused a real shock, the head of the army even declaring that the army was “at dry”. In another register, after having long refused this possibility, Germany has undertaken to supply arms to Ukraine and will strengthen its action within NATO by increasing its participation in the deterrent force present in Lithuania. .

Were NATO and Russia doomed to conflict?

NATO’s cooperation with Russia has existed since the 1990s: the NATO-Russia founding act was signed in 1997, from which emerged the NATO-Russia Council created in 2002. Within this framework, NATO and Russia carried out exercises and carried out joint peacekeeping missions. The enlargements of NATO to Central and Eastern Europe, then to the Baltic countries, were done in a fairly flexible manner. The degradations took place gradually, with first the Russian intervention in Georgia in 2008, then 2014 with Crimea and Donbass, and now the invasion of Ukraine.

NATO has therefore not sought to exclude Russia from the European security architecture, but rather to integrate it as a nuclear power, with this unique structure that is the NATO-Russia Council created to regulate this relationship . However many false information circulate these last days on the role of NATO but this one is used as pretext with this war. The Alliance has never considered Ukraine’s membership. Kyiv was not included in the NATO pre-membership plan, which therefore makes this eventuality impossible in the short or medium term.

Emmanuel Macron announced that this war in Ukraine would be long. Do you share his analysis?

It’s hard to say. The resistance is stronger than the Russians expected. There could be guerrilla warfare or urban warfare that would be extremely violent, primarily affecting civilians. In addition, since 2015, Ukraine had set up a territorial defense, which means that civilians are trained militarily and general mobilization has been decreed for all men up to 60 years old. There could also be resistance from the population because the Ukrainian authorities also encourage the manufacture of molotov cocktails, distribute Kalashnikovs…

The duration of the war will also depend on the morale of the troops: if the Russians expected a quick war but in fact Ukraine holds out longer than expected, will there not be a phenomenon of demoralization? If there are more deaths on the Russian side, will there be an amplification of demonstrations in Russia? Or the use of more extreme solutions such as the activation of nuclear force? There have already been demonstrations in several large Russian cities and “no to war” tags have been painted in several symbolic places such as on the walls of the Duma… The internal protest in Russia will also be an important factor in the duration of this war.