Regardless of Russia’s strong objection, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation has constantly admitted new members and moved close to Russia’s border, which leads to the escalation of Russia-NATO tension and, in all likelihood, a “Cold War 2.0”. NATO expansion to the “East” and its repercussion on global security are matters of great public concern.
Seven decades of “Eastward enlargement” and the straw that breaks the camel's back
After the disintegration of the Soviet-dominated Warsaw Pact, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) should have been dissolved as its counterweight no longer existed. However, it did not dissolve itself but admitted more members. Established in 1949 with 12 member countries, after 8 rounds of enlargement, NATO has brought its total members to 30 including the former countries in the Warsaw Pact namely Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary (admitted in 1999), Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria (admitted in 2004) and Albania (in 2009). Despite the dissolution of the Soviet Union, NATO has always regarded Russia, the country taking over almost all the “heritage” of the Soviet Union, as the primary security threat. Therefore, the world’s largest military organisation has constantly accelerated the “Eastward enlargement” to extinguish Moscow’s hope of restoring the once-mighty status of the Soviet Union. Thanks to its membership expansion, NATO has been able to fulfil the plan of deploying weapons and equipment to Eastern Europe to deal with the security instability in the East. Besides, this is also a solid foundation for NATO to conduct annual military exercises in the Baltic sea and develop an alliance to exert pressure on Russia by imposing sanctions as well as reducing Russia’s influence in the region.
In the face of NATO’s intention, Moscow assumes that the organisation and the West have treated Russia unfairly as they have not placed Russia in an important position in the European security architecture and people from NATO’s member countries always flaunt hostility toward Russia. Besides, Russia infers that NATO is the factor that instigates the “Colour revolution” in the post-Soviet space to restrain, block Russia in all respects and break the strategic balance between Russia and NATO. Tit-for-tat actions have led to the escalation of tension between the two sides.
The 2014 coup in Ukraine that overthrew the administration of President Viktor Yanukovich is the milestone that marks the deterioration of the two sides. In fact, when NATO admitted more member countries, especially those in Eastern Europe, Russia voiced objections and then took action. Therefore, Moscow has issued a “red line” warning since several countries in post-Soviet space expressed their desire to join NATO and the organisation had the intention of granting membership to those countries because they pose a threat to Russia’s national security. President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly stressed that countries of post-Soviet space are not only neighbours but also an indispensable part of Russia’s history, culture, and spirit. From a geo-political angle, these countries are considered as the “buffer zone” between Russia and NATO; therefore, their participant in NATO will lead to Russia’s loss of the strategic buffer zone, break the security architecture, pose a threat to the living space and diminish the geopolitical influence that Russia attained in the post-Soviet era. To maintain the strategic buffer zone and contain external security threats, Russia must promptly respond and attempt to restrain NATO’s Eastward expansion of influence. Accordingly, Russia has demanded NATO’s withdrawal of all forces and vehicles from countries joining NATO after 1997 including Poland, Estonia, Litva, Latvia, and those in the Balkan region. Furthermore, the Kremlin has also requested NATO not to admit Ukraine and conduct military drills in Central Asia, Eastern Europe, Ukraine, and the Caucasus countries without Russia’s consent.
After Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, NATO suspended its partnership for peace with Russia and considered Russia the top security threat in the region. Thus, Moscow’s core security proposals were outright rejected by NATO. The organisation also accused Russia of having violated international law for backing the separatist forces in the East of Ukraine. The aforementioned dissonance along with NATO’s acceptance of applications of Gruzia, Bosnia – Herzegovina, and Ukraine (in 2021) is “the last straw” that inflames the Russia-NATO conflict. According to the Foreign Minister of Russia - Sergei Lavrov, over the past time, NATO has attempted to bring back the unipolarity as it was in the Cold War although this organisation has always asserted itself as a defensive military alliance that causes no harm to the security of any nations. However, as a matter of fact, NATO has repeatedly shifted its defensive line from the “Berlin Wall” to Russian territory. The Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of Russia, Dmitry Medvedev, has also stressed that the speeches about NATO’s efforts to membership expansion are not idle words and a set of common threats. Thus, it is necessary to prepare for aggression.
Repercussions of NATO “expansion”
According to international military experts, the conflict in Ukraine has broken the European security architecture, which was established after the Cold War and new world order will be probably formed. This has been evidenced by Finland’s and Sweden’s application for membership of NATO on May 15th, 2022. The fact that two neutral countries readily abandon their history to prioritise diplomatic policies is to avoid being in a “dilemma” when the confrontation of superpowers may teeter on the brink of “Cold War 2.0”. However, the two countries' request for the membership of NATO will lead to the probable escalation of Russia-NATO tension.
As a democratic country and parliamentary republic, Finland possesses elite military forces along with advanced weapons and equipment and a flexible policy on force mobilisation. The country has a relatively mighty Air Force with over 300 aircraft of all types including 50 modern fighter aircraft and a pre-production order of 64 F-35s. Additionally, Finland’s Air Force and Navy operate in harsh weather of the Baltic Sea region on a regular basis; therefore, they can deal with complex situations. As for Sweden, despite the small number of regular military forces, its strength lies in the systems of weapons and equipment with advanced means of electronic warfare and flight tracker, smart artillery systems and modern counter-battery radar, multi-role fighter aircraft JAS 39 Gripen, etc. Moreover, Sweden is also located in an important strategic position in the region with over 2.400 km of coastline and a part of the territory in the Arctic. If these Northern European gain admission, NATO’s borderline that is contiguous to Russia will double (from 1.207 km to 2.575 km) and form an arc around the North of Russia. The military alliance, at the time, can organise military drills and establish military bases next to Russia’s border and Kaliningrad along with the Saint-Petersburg seaport of Russia will be isolated. The Baltic Sea is prone to become NATO’s sea, and the organisation can approach the Kola peninsula.
Kola peninsula is considered Russia’s inviolable fortress and an important territory in security architecture since Russia can get access to the Barent and the North Sea. In the Arctic, Russia has the upper hand when the country has established 10 military air bases, and 1 fleet of heavy-duty icebreakers; nearly 40 of which belong to the special air defence system. It is believed that Kola Bay is the place where the world’s largest nuclear weapons are concentrated because a majority of nuclear submarines of the Northern Fleet are stationed. And Plesetsk spaceport, where thermonuclear ballistic missiles are stored, is also in the Kola peninsula. Therefore, Russia will react if Finland and Sweden join NATO. As stated by Sergey Ryabkov – Deputy Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation, Finland’s and Sweden’s move to join NATO
will lead to far-reaching consequences which make the military tension in this region increased and unpredictable. At present, Russia has not made any responses; however, according to military experts, Russia will take into account the deployment of nuclear weapons that is close to Finland’s border and the Baltic Sea if NATO dispatches its forces to Finland. In case NATO mounts important military equipment or garrisons a large number of troops in Finland, Russia’s responses, in all likelihood, will be more drastic. In other words, if Finland and Sweden become the official members of NATO, the arms race in Europe will be speeded up and the probable return of the “ghost” of the Cold War will be more catastrophic.
Numerous analysts have pointed out that if “Cold War 2.0” occurs, the world will become deeply polarised between Russia with other countries and NATO. At present, many countries, particularly superpowers, have interwoven benefits and interdependence; therefore, this confrontation will be a far cry from the period of the former NATO-Warsaw Pact confrontation.
Specifically, the tension between the two sides will make a series of issues such as the situation on the Korean peninsula, the nuclear programme of Iran, the situation in Afghanistan, etc. reach a stalemate and the efforts of the international community in dealing with non-traditional security challenges like preventing climate change, ensuring food security, etc. will be also hindered.
According to military experts, if NATO continues to “encroach” the post-Soviet space and cross the “red line” of Russia, surely, the Kremlin will take necessary countermeasures; at the time, a new conflict – “Cold War 2.0” will break out and cause unforeseen consequences in terms of economy, politics, security, and military. The international community hopes that the leaders of the two sides will sit at the negotiating table, handle the disagreements by peaceful measures and find ways to “cool down” the tension so that peace and stability in the region and world can be ensured since what is happening in Europe is just the beginning of a new period of upheaval.
LAM PHUONG