NATO is not ready for war The war between Russia and Ukraine

For decades, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has prepared for war, confident of its superiority over any adversary. Its member states have invested heavily in modern weapons. Stealth aircraft, precision weapons, secret submarines, and city-sized aircraft carriers were the guardians of the West.

This force appeared unshakable until recently. On September 10, during another massive Russian air attack on Ukraine, more than 20 Russian drones crossed into neighboring Poland. The NATO member had to do it Scramble Millions of euros worth of military equipment – ​​F-16 and F-35 fighter jets, military helicopters and Patriot surface-to-air missile systems – to shoot down potential threats. Several drones were shot down, including three witness drones and several cheaply made foam dummies.

Not only was this interception costly, but it also shattered the myth of Western military power. Trillions of dollars invested in the military-industrial complex have not been able to protect NATO’s borders from twenty cheap drones.

In the following days, unidentified drones closed airports in Norway, Denmark and Germany, costing airlines millions of euros. In Belgium, drones were also spotted near a military base.

European media are full of stories about unidentified drones, air defenses, and speculation about possible directions of a Russian strike. Romania? Poland? Baltic countries? Along the entire eastern border of the European Union, there is nowhere where residents feel truly safe.

It is difficult to imagine the extent of the chaos if Russian forces launched an actual attack. How many countries might act under Article V of the NATO Charter, which allows collective action against a military threat against a single member, and how quickly? By then, where will the Russian forces be?

The central question remains: Can NATO and its modern military technologies stop such progress?

The war in Ukraine has shown that the answer is no. Russian forces display a tenacity in combat that is only possible under dictatorial regimes, where soldiers are indoctrinated and fear their leadership more than the enemy.

Modern methods of war against armies modeled on World Wars I and II are not nearly as effective as the generals once claimed. One only has to look at Ukraine’s frontline and its ever-evolving military strategies.

Faced with a massive military force with a seemingly unlimited budget and unrestricted military capacity, the Ukrainians had to adapt quickly. They began deploying drones against Russian armor, but the enemy did not stand idly by in the face of these attacks. It began building improvised metal cages on top of tank turrets to absorb explosions.

Precision strikes using Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) cluster munitions taught them how to disperse the munition into small spots, avoiding concentrations of troops and equipment.

Drones on both sides monitor the front line, but it is scorched earth: no movement of tanks or infantry can be seen. The Russian advance advances secretly, mostly at night, as teams of two or three men cross the bombing zones and gradually assemble for surprise attacks. Troops on both sides are dug deep into the ground. What is visible is only the number of victims – several thousand every week.

Is Europe ready for this kind of war? Are NATO soldiers able to survive for weeks in trenches and ruins, without communicating, to avoid detection and destruction?

A Gallup survey conducted last year suggests the answer is no. in poland, 45 percent of respondents said they would voluntarily defend their country in the event of a threat of war. In Spain, the figure was 29 percent; In Germany, only 23%; In Italy, a paltry 14 percent; The EU average was 32 percent.

After more than three years of war with Russia, Ukraine itself suffers from a severe personnel shortage. Conscription is becoming increasingly unpopular, and military evasion is widespread, according to Ukrainian media and Western observers. Even with Western weapons and funding, a shortage of soldiers limits Ukraine’s ability to withstand or launch meaningful attacks.

Currently, there are a large number of personnel working for European NATO allies 1.47 million; Which includes the United Kingdom. This seems large, until one compares it to Ukraine, where an 800,000-strong army faces a 600,000-strong Russian force on a 1,000-kilometre (621-mile) front for more than three years, then gradually retreats.

Then there is also the difficult question of how many countries will actually send their forces to the Eastern Front, and in what numbers. Are NATO member states on the eastern side left to fend for themselves, and supplied with weapons only by their Western allies? Will this lead to tensions within the alliance and the possibility of its paralysis or even disintegration?

Europe has only two options to feel even partially secure: either continue to rapidly spend trillions of euros to expand its military capabilities, or try to put an end to Russian aggression by providing full financial and military support to Ukraine.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has said that his country needs $60 billion annually to ward off Russian aggression. It is a heavy burden on the West, especially in these difficult times. However, this is insignificant compared to the price Ukraine is paying – in money, military and civilian lives, loss of territory, and destruction of infrastructure.

While Europe hesitates with calculators in hand, Ukraine fights. Every day that the war continues, the risk of it spreading westward increases.

Now is the time to make quick decisions.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Al Jazeera.