To respond to Russia after the Ukraine War, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) members have begun to increase their military power through regional alliances. In this context, power centers such as “the Scandinavian Pole”, “the Baltic Pole”, “the Eastern European Pole” and “the Balkan Pole” are likely to emerge within the organization. Recently, Europe is turning to alternative collaborations to strengthen its defense. Thus, the risk of polarization increases within NATO.
From this point of view, Ankara Center for Crisis and Policy Studies (ANKASAM) presents the views of Gleen Diesen, Professor at the University of Southeast Norway, to evaluate the danger of deblocking (forming a bloc on a regional level) within NATO and the future of European security.
- Russia’s threat of the use of force (including nuclear weapons) towards Eastern Europe, the Baltic, Scandinavia, and the Arctic is rapidly progressing. Do you think that NATO is doing its part to contend with the “Russian threat?” And do you also think that Europe or NATO are well-prepared for any attack from Russia?
I disagree with the premise to some extent. Russia has cautioned that the West’s growing involvement in Ukraine is making a direct war between Russia and NATO increasingly likely. Russia has not threatened to launch a nuclear attack on Europe, this has been a popular narrative in the Western media but I would like to see specific quotes to support this claim. The Russian nuclear doctrine only permits the use of nuclear weapons in retaliation to a nuclear strike or when the existence of the state is threatened.
The Russian threat must be assessed from the perspective of the security dilemma. On one hand, NATO must have the military capabilities to defend itself against Russia, although on the other hand, an excessively aggressive military posture by NATO will only instigate Russia to respond. NATO was a source of stability during the Cold War as it was a status-quo power, while post-Cold War NATO has become a revisionist power that continuously expands and uses military force against other states. NATO would be the best content with the “Russian threat” if it strengthens its defensive potential and abandons its expansionist and revisionist impulses.
- NATO increases its military cooperation on a regional level in case of Russia’s possible assault. Do you think this could lead to a deblocking (forming bloc on a regional level) within NATO?
I think that NATO has overextended itself in the proxy war against Russia in Ukraine. I expect the current unity to be replaced with deeper divisions within NATO as some European countries will likely gravitate towards a more permanent hostile approach towards Russia and others will seek to scale back the confrontation. This will likely result in regional arrangements within NATO being formed.
- What is your future prediction about European security?
My predictions about European security remain the same as it has been for the past 25 years: the European security architecture will collapse and as a result, we will either have a major European war or find an agreement to restore pan-European security. The pan-European security agreements emerged immediately after the Cold War as we signed the Charter of Paris for a New Europe in 1990 that embraced principles such as a Europe without dividing lines based on indivisible security and sovereign equality. These principles were then included in the formation of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) in 1994.
NATO expansionism canceled the pan-European security agreements. Instead of ending the dividing lines, NATO moved the dividing lines toward Russian borders. Instead of indivisible security, NATO expanded its security at the expense of Russian security. Instead of sovereign equality, NATO has been constructing an international system based on sovereign inequality based on the concept of an “international rules-based order.” Subsequently, a new Cold War continued over where the new dividing lines in Europe should be drawn that causes conflicts in the border regions of Moldova, Georgia, Belarus, and Ukraine. There are only two options left, return to the pan-European security agreements or go to war.
Gleen Diesen
Glenn Diesen is a professor at the University of Southeast Norway and editor of the journal Russia in Global Affairs. His research focus is on Russian conservatism, political economy, and Greater Eurasia. Diesen’s latest books are “Europe as the Western Peninsula of Greater Eurasia” (2021); “The Return of Eurasia” (2021); “Russian Conservatism” (2021); “Great Power Politics in the Fourth Industrial Revolution” (2021); “Russia in a Changing World” (2020); “The Decay of Western Civilization and Resurgence of Russia” (2018); “Russia’s Geoeconomic Strategy for Greater Eurasia” (2017); “EU and NATO relations with Russia” (2015).
