In 2017, Russia conducted a series of military exercises known as Zapad, or “exercise West”.
With their roots in the Soviet Union, Zapad military exercises have traditionally been
shows of force, meant to let NATO know that Russia was willing and ready to fight.
Despite assurances that Russia's 2017 Zapad exercises were nothing more than preparations
for counter-terror operations, an exercise that was supposed to feature only 10,000 personnel
turned into a 100,000 strong mock-invasion of eastern Europe with one clear message:
Russia's military might is back.
Today, we look into a very scary scenario, in this episode of The Infographics Show,
Can Russia really invade Europe?
After the fall of the Soviet Union, Russia's military severely atrophied, and despite remaining
a sizable force its readiness and capabilities were all but defunct.
The next two decades saw little improvement, culminating in the 2008 Georgian-Russian war
where Russia, whom dwarfed Georgian forces, found itself struggling to achieve its strategic
objectives.
After such an embarrassing performance, Vladimir Putin vowed to improve the readiness and capabilities
of the Russian military, culminating in a ten-year modernization push that has yielded
huge results.
While still mostly a conscript army, Russia's military is seeing a huge expansion in the
size of its volunteer forces- an important development given the drastically better performance
and morale of an all-volunteer military force such as the US' versus a conscripted force.
New battle tanks and fighter aircraft have also dramatically improved its capabilities
both on the air and on the ground, and while its fleets remain a glaring weakness, they
would ultimately have limited use in a European war.
Russia has also dramatically improved its logistical capabilities, something that it
has historically struggled with even under the former Soviet Union.
Heavy road transport units for ferrying armor to the front lines via road networks has reduced
Russia's reliance on rail transport to get its tanks to the front lines, with rail lines
being a natural first target for NATO bombardment.
Russia has also doubled down on the one area it has traditionally outperformed NATO in,
ground-based anti-air platforms.
The introduction of the S-400 and the future deployment of the S-500 anti-air defense system
has given NATO war planners serious concerns, and with a range of up to 250 miles (400 kilometers),
a single battery of S-400 units can threaten large swathes of a European battlefield.
Russia has also invested heavily into modernizing its non-strategic nuclear forces, outpacing
even the US in this arena.
Russia's investments in improved logistics, deadly air defense units, and an upgraded
nuclear missile force have clearly signaled its intentions to Russia observers, and the
Zapad 2017 military exercises only confirmed their worst fears: Russia is preparing for
and quite possibly fully ready for a military invasion of eastern Europe.
So, could it actually do so?
NATO maintains an active-duty force of about 2,000,000 personnel versus Russia's 1,000,000.
NATO also maintains an air force of 13,000 fighter, strike and bomber aircraft, versus
Russia's 3,914.
It is on the ground however where Russia has the biggest advantage, with over 20,000 tanks
versus NATO's 10,000.
Yet Russia's official figure has to be taken with a huge grain of salt, as Russia still
counts many thousands of decommissioned Soviet-era tanks in its official figures.
Not only would these tanks take weeks to re-commission and get ready for combat, but they would be
wholly outclassed and outgunned by NATO's overwhelmingly modern tank forces.
Despite NATO's technologically superior and more numerous forces though, the military
alliance has two glaring Achilles heels that Russia is poised to exploit.
The first is that the bulk of NATO's capabilities rest with the United States, which does maintain
a readiness doctrine of being able to fight and win two high-intensity wars at the same
time- yet who's forces are geographically distant from Europe, with the bulk of American
firepower stationed across the Atlantic.
In case of war against Russia, the US' forces in Europe would fight in a defensive posture,
awaiting the arrival of supplemental forces from the American homeland which could take
weeks.
NATO's second Achilles heel is the lackluster commitment from its European member states
to the military portion of the alliance.
Out of the 29 member states, only 8 have hit the 2% of GDP investment in their militaries,
creating an imbalance of commitment across the alliance.
While various factors contribute to this lackluster commitment to their own defense, many watchdogs
argue that NATO members have become too comfortable living under a global American security blanket-
a position that has become very popular with American president Donald Trump.
Not only is the lack of appropriate funding weakening NATO as a whole, but the political
schisms it has created have only been compounded by President Trump's actions and statements,
throwing into serious question American commitment to NATO's Article 5- an attack on one is an
attack on the whole.
While the American people overwhelmingly support the defense of their European allies in the
case of war, should the worst come to pass it will ultimately be up to the American president
how he responds.
This uncertainty within the alliance- first in its history- has been capitalized on by
Russia, as evidenced by the true scope of its Zapad 2017 exercises.
Originally stated to be nothing more than a 10,000 strong counter-terrorism set of fast-response
exercises, the affair quickly grew to include over 100,000 personnel, sea, land and air
fire support platforms, and hordes of Russian armor.
To military observers the scope of the exercises and even their execution were crystal clear:
Russia was practicing a full-scale invasion of the Baltic states.
After the Russian invasion of the Ukraine in 2014, NATO bolstered its forces in its
member states of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland, deploying four multinational battalion-sized
battle groups on a permanent rotational basis.
As NATO's most vulnerable states, the four countries have long feared what they have
seen as rising Russian aggression, and know that in the case of war they will be the first
to fight.
That is because in the case of war, Russia will immediately conduct an all out offensive
across Belarus into Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, while cutting off Poland and thus continental
Europe from its allies by striking out over the Suwalki Gap- a 60 mile stretch of NATO
territory that connects the Russian military stronghold of Kaliningrad with Belarus.
By putting pressure on Poland and launching long-range air and missile strikes against
NATO facilities in Germany, Russia would delay any response to its invasions of Estonia,
Latvia and Lithuania.
Unfortunately for the three, the flat plains of Eastern Europe would make defensive operations
incredibly difficult, especially against large masses of Russian tanks- it was these same
flat plains that saw some of World War II's largest tank battles, and will see them again
should Russia launch World War III.
Cut off from NATO support, the three Baltic nations would not hold long against Russia.
Yet within a matter of weeks US forces would arrive en masse and NATO would be poised for
a devastating counter-attack that Russia could not hope to stop.
This is where Russia would enact the second part of its European strategy: nuclear brinkmanship.
Having already threatened the capitals of several Baltic states with nuclear attacks
in the case of war in the early 2010s, President Putin has been carefully cultivating the perception
of a strong willingness to use nuclear weapons.
Whether real or not, any NATO response would have to take into account the possibility
that Putin is not bluffing, and he may in fact resort to the use of nuclear weapons
in case of war.
Indeed he very well may have no other choice- Russia has zero hope of ever defeating a fully
mobilized NATO alliance, and though it may be poised to strike deep into eastern Europe
and even hold that territory for a time, it would never ultimately be able to make these
gains permanent- NATO forces and member-state's economies are simply far superior to Russia's
own.
Launching such a war would prove devastating for Moscow, and though Putin could make the
conflict an extremely bloody one for NATO, fighting could very realistically reach the
very outskirts of Moscow itself as Russia once more fights a catastrophically defensive
war for survival- though this time against a far superior foe.
This would leave Russia with only one option: use of its nuclear arsenal to avoid all out
defeat.
Though this would trigger a retaliatory response from the West, a Russia with its back up against
the wall may choose to launch a limited set of nuclear strikes against purely military
targets, hoping to limit the scope of NATO's own nuclear response.
Even if NATO responded in kind, with a limited range of nuclear strikes against Russian military
forces, such a nuclear exchange would be disastrous to the world as a whole, with untold ecological
and economic fallout.
All of these variables are well known to President Putin, and in fact he may one day be counting
on them as he launches a brief but aggressive war to seize the Baltic States.
By then shoring up his position and threatening the use of nuclear weapons, he may in fact
force NATO to sue for peace rather than risk escalating the scope of the conflict.
Not only would Russia win large amounts of territory for itself in such a war, but it
would win a truly game-changing political victory by completely undermining the fundamental
tenets of NATO: that the alliance will fight to protect all member states.
This could potentially lead to a fracturing of NATO, or at the very least kill the confidence
of current and prospective member states, weakening the West- which has for decades
been Russia's ultimate goal.
So, how do you think a war against NATO would fare for Russia?
Should NATO risk nuclear war to defend its partners?
Let us know in the comments!
Also, be sure to check out our other video called Is the Chinese Military Ready To Defeat
the USA?
Thanks for watching, and as always, please don’t forget to like, share and subscribe.
See you next time!