5 fights that will shape NATO’s next Russia war plans

NATO is initiating discussions this month to determine the forces and weaponry required to defend against a potential Russian attack and the associated costs. The talks will establish capability targets for 2029, requiring each of the 32 member countries to contribute specific forces and equipment. The deadline heightens the pressure, as Europe fears Russia might attack a NATO nation by then.

Simultaneously, the U.S. administration is contemplating a significant reduction in its European forces, which could leave the alliance short of troops and critical capabilities, including refueling aircraft, long-range missiles, and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets.

The negotiations will test the extent to which each country is willing to invest, how much Europe can function without U.S. assistance, and whether NATO's military strategies should incorporate emerging technologies like robotics and artificial intelligence. French Admiral Pierre Vandier, NATO's Supreme Allied Commander Transformation, emphasizes that the objective is to launch a transformative cycle rather than a mere repetition of existing plans.

The five key debates expected to shape the negotiations include:

1. Setting the ambition level: Determining the precise number of troops and military capabilities each ally intends to contribute is the most significant challenge. Traditionally, allies have aimed for 18 spare brigades, comprising around 5,000 soldiers each, for crisis management missions outside NATO territory. However, U.S. pressure to shift more security responsibility to European allies — referred to as NATO 3.0 — might compel allies to reduce or entirely eliminate these requirements.

2. Bridging the American gap: The Pentagon plans to review U.S. forces in Europe, potentially resulting in the withdrawal of assets like strategic bombers, fighter jets, drones, submarines, and warships. This move, scheduled for December, falls within the NATO discussions, raising concerns that the U.S. might remove essential capabilities from the alliance's arsenal.

In response, allies might have to reallocate resources and consider alternative solutions, such as shared burdens and reliance on less expensive alternatives to U.S. weapons.

3. Addressing regional concerns: While NATO promotes a "360-degree" approach to security, recent events have led to a shift in focus towards Russia, Ukraine, and the Arctic. Some allies argue for increased attention to other threats, such as Russian mercenary activity in Libya, weaponized migration, submarine threats in the Black Sea, and drone attacks on vessels. They propose reprioritizing the alliance's focus to better address these emerging challenges.

4. Balancing drones and tanks: The growing prominence of drone warfare in Ukraine has sparked a debate over the appropriate balance between investing in unmanned capabilities and maintaining conventional military equipment like tanks and artillery. Many allies are planning to expand their use of unmanned systems, with the U.K. adopting a hybrid fleet of autonomous vessels and France allocating substantial funds for drones and loitering munitions.

Germany is even establishing its first dedicated drone regiment. This trend is further supported by Europe's ongoing struggle to recruit sufficient soldiers, prompting calls for a greater reliance on unmanned solutions.