Europe's Zombie Armies

NATO the Incapable

Edward Luttwak in today’s British Daily Telegraph argues, essentially, that the war in Ukraine is unwinnable for Europe. Even if Europe was a good-faith actor, which on the matter of Ukraine, at least it certainly is not, (remember Minsk), it is incapable of upholding its treaty commitments to NATO either politically or militarily.

He notes, first, the wide gap between the USA’s 3.5% of GDP commitment to NATO and the less-than-2% European average (it should be at least 2%), a disparity that a Trump administration would likely insist be repaired for the USA to consider propping up NATO any longer. And this at a time when NATO defense spending peaked by 8.3% in 2023. To 2022, NATO members were spending about twice the proportion of their GDP on their welfare states than on defence (which, frankly, is just as it should be, given the utter futility and lack of necessity for a confrontation with Russia over Ukraine).

However military spending in itself is not a good measure of each country’s actual contribution. Europe is incapable, first of all, of producing weapons to affordable scale, and the sheer diversity of different types of weapons across Europe contributes to needless complexity, confusion and much higher prices.

A major reason for this is the almost universal practice, Luttwak argues, of purchasing weapons from local manufacturers regardless of their merits or their unit costs. NATO is essentially, I would add, a device for diverting taxpayer money to subsidization of the owners of the domestic armaments industry under the supposedly vote-attracting pretext of providing employment and regional development. He gives as an example Italian Beretta’s new NARP rifle, which is not as modern as some of its non-Italian competitors and a good deal more expensive. Luttwak does not address the issue of the military standards that are required for NATO membership, which force expenditure that might not otherwise be committed, nor the flow of funds to US-based armaments industries. Other examples include France’s Dassault monopoly over all French combat aircraft, which comes at a very high unit price, and warships made in very small numbers in every European country that has a navy of any size. Poland, with an army of 42,000 soldiers in 2022, and whose opponent lies overland to the east, is spending money on shipyards to become a “Baltic Sea Power.” Contracts are not going to the cheapest available suppliers but to those whom it can be argued will support local industry.

While Europe’s militaries may look smart, none have actual combat experience, least of all against Russian forces. European defense ministers have told Luttwak that none of them could supply boots on the ground in Ukraine. To do so is to invite electoral defeat if not revolution from within the ranks of major political parties. In at least one major European country of which Luttwak writes, most soldiers, in a “post-heroic” culture, would apparently refuse to fight. Europe is unwilling generally to recognize “the reality of the return of war to the continent.”

As for the US, a country that spends several times as much on defense in real terms as Russia (which spends 6.8% of its GDP), now approaching $900 billion, yet it is significantly behind the US in nuclear, drone and electronic warfare technology and a lot of its hardware including F-35s down to Bradley fighting vehicles is crap on the battlefield. Why? Because of extreme lack of accountability, corruption and waste.

In France, Macron Le Grand (or could it be Macron Le Grand Pervert?), should heed this logic that has been communicated to him by his own army. More relevantly he should recall the common wisdom shared once between Western Leaders like Bill Burns, Angela Merkel, Bill Clinton and others to the effect that to push NATO to Russia’s borders would be a divisive measure likely to lead to armed conflict. When did that wisdom change, and who changed it, and why? Well it never really changed, since Western leaders have mostly preferred to demonize Russia (sometimes for pilfering domestic reasons as in the case of Hillary Clinton’s RussiaGate hoax) rather than make friends with Russia or simply to allow Russia to prosper on the grounds that a strong Russia would be more likely to counter balance a strong China. This last was the wisdom of Donald Trump in 2016 but the RussiaGate hoax forced him into a resolutely anti Russian stance.

Battlefields

Dima of the Military Summary channel reports that the Ukrainian army continues to attack the city of Belgorod with multiple rocket launch systems, possibly the Czech Republic’s Vampire MRLS. Also, several Russian oil refineries have been struck by Ukrainian drones in the past few days. This would likely impact oil prices in Russia.

The Czech premier has recently stated that NATO should not have red lines in its conflict with Russia in the matter of striking Russian assets in Russia. Putin has responded that Russia will have no red lines against foreign mercenaries. Ukraine has managed to inflict significant damage in Belgorod.

On the Russian side, in the past week, according to the Russian MOD, Russia has destroyed 3 Ukrainian Patriot systems, several Czech Vampire MLRS systems, 10 foreign-built artillery systems, and warehouses of fuel and ammunition. A Russian missile attack has eliminated 300 members of the neo-Nazi Kraken brigade. Two Czech Vampire systems were destroyed by Russian Iskandr missiles near Verkhnia Pysarivka.

In Belgorod region there had been no significant attcks for much of the day, but Ukraine warned that it would resume attacks by the evening. 15 Vampire missiles were in fact fired down by Russian air defense.

The Ukrainian aim is to upset the Russian presidential election; or Ukraine is still trying to seize nuclear weapons, or it simply wants to expose Russian air defense positions. Ukraine may also hope to benefit from the Pentagon’s emergency funding of $300m to include ATACMS (100 mile range) and HIMARS launchers and missiles, Stinger MANPADS, anti-tank weapons, air defense ammunition and 155mm shells, all of which may be put to work tomorrow, March 17, the final day of the Russian presidential election. In the wake of Ukraine’s recent drone attacks across Russia, which will have exposed many Russian air defense locations, Russia will need to change many of these.

Elsewhere, near Bakhmut, Russian bombing of Chasiv Yar continues and Russia is close to the point of starting its ground operation on Chasiv Yar. Russia will likely attack along the railway from a north-eastern direction - it is usually easier to attack along a railway than over open fields. A significant Russian concentration of force advancing on Klishchiivka from Ivanivske met with a Ukrainian counterattack, whose outcome is uncertain.

In the Avdievka area, Russian forces hold territory to the east of Berdychi and are digging in deeper. Russia controls most of the territory between Berdychi and Stepove and Orlivka. Russia controls Tonenke to the south and controls most of the territory between Orlivka and Tonenke. Overall, there is significant Russian progress towards the West in this area.

Russia controls much of the territory to the immediate south of Tonenke and Sieverne. North of Bertdychi, Russia controls most of the territory between Krasnohorivka and Novokalynove. Russia continues to advance up the railway to Ocheretyne (although in truth this has been ongoing for at least a couple of months now), although Russia may also attack Ocheretyne from Novokalynove to the east (once this is taken). Russia is storming and has control over Nevelske.

Russia has improved its position in Novomykhailivka. Ukraine has almost completely left the eastern part of the settlement and Russia is bombing the central part.

Russia is subjecting the Vremevka Ledge to heavy bombing at Urozhaine and Staromaiorske. In the Robotyne salient, Russia is directly attacking the Ukrainian stronghold north of Verbove. Russia controls the southern half of Robotyne.

Odessa Attack and a Hard Day Ahead

A major Russian attack on March 15 on a meeting of the command staff of Ukrainian security, special and paramilitary froces near Odessa killed many of those in attendance including foreign partners, and these included a large number - perhaps 60 - NATO officers (German, French, Britain, Romanian, Poles, Georgians). A further attack during the subsequent evacuation killed some of the survivors as well as evacuation personnel. We may speculate that this meeting was connected in some way with the plan of Ukrainian intelligence chief Bodanov to launch an assault of some kind on Crimea.

In addition to expressing a general anxiety about Ukrainian attacks tomorrow, March 17th, Dima also speculates that a meeting between Putin and Lukashenko of Belarus may augur preparations for some kind of attack - whether an initiative or a retaliation, we do not know - in the northern borderlands that could be the beginning of a war.