STRIKE THE TRUTH

Several Telegram channels have recently promoted the idea of a “Narva People’s Republic". This campaign closely resembles the messaging used during the occupation of Crimea and Donbas in 2014. While small channels alone may have limited influence, the broader context is concerning. Russian television hosts are also openly discussing the possibility of invading Narva to disrupt NATO, and several high-level European leaders have warned that Russia could test Europe in the near future. Taken together, these signals raise serious concerns about regional security in Europe.  This week’s blog post explores these questions: How capable is Russia of striking Europe, and are the Baltic states at risk of an attack in the near term?   WHAT IS THE NARVA PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC? Over the past few weeks, a number of pro-Russian Telegram channels and social media accounts have been circulating claims about a so-called “ Narva People’s Republic ” in north-eastern Estonia, near the Russian border. T...

Russia has employed s ome truly hair-raising tactics in its war against Ukraine. Compounding this, much of its equipment looks less suited for the battlefield and more at home in a museum. Together, these factors have turned Russia into something of a global military punchline. We’ve seen aging Soviet-era tanks that seem better suited for World War II, reports of horses and even camels being used to transport supplies, and soldiers disguising themselves as piles of rubble or trash in an attempt to evade Ukrainian drones. In this blog post, I want to move past the mockery and examine a more serious question: despite these shortcomings, Russia remains a powerful and capable axis power. But just how capable is it, really? And could it realistically cope with a full-scale war against the West? HOW DANGEROUS IS RUSSIA, REALLY? For all the images that invite ridicule, it would be a serious mistake to confuse embarrassment with incapability. Take the much-mocked Russian “ penguin ” camouflage...

The NATO summit is just around the corner, and it will be interesting to see how things play out. Reportedly, the meeting has been shortened to just 2,5 hours—supposedly to accommodate Donald Trump’s notoriously short attention span. Still, shorter doesn’t necessarily mean worse. It might just be the ideal length to keep him focused. In this blog post, I want to take a closer look at the 2% defense spending target—what it has actually achieved—and then explore the case for increasing that to 5%, and why that figure might be more realistic than it seems. Yes, countries are navigating a great deal of economic uncertainty right now, but investing in defense remains crucial. Let’s explore why.   NO TARGET, THEN 2% TARGET   For much of its history, NATO didn’t operate with a formal defense spending benchmark. Contributions were more of a gentleman’s agreement—everyone was expected to chip in, but how much and how seriously was left vague. Predictably, that led to imbalances. A hand...

Since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine by Russia, thoughts have swirled around the possibility of the bloody conflict spilling over into neighboring NATO countries. If it were to happen, what would it look like? What shape would a conflict between Russia and the defensive alliance take? In this blog post, we take a closer look at the core principles outlined in NATO's Articles 4 and 5. Following that, we delve into an analysis of Russia's losses and current capabilities. Finally, we assess the probability of escalation and examine the potential scenarios in which the conflict might unfold. NATO'S ARTICLES 4 AND 5 In essence, NATO, which stands for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, was established in 1949 as a defensive alliance with a core belief: an attack on one member country constitutes an attack on all members. Consequently, if a country faces military incursions or conflicts, all member states commit to uniting in its defense. This fundamental principle is enc...

In the spotlight of global interest lies the Arctic, a vast expanse of icy waters and untapped resources. Notably, Russia has emerged as a dominant force, actively bolstering its military presence in this strategically vital region. This blog post endeavors to offer a thorough examination of Russian military power in the Arctic, delving into critical facets such as strategic objectives, infrastructure development, economic interests, and the far-reaching international implications of its assertive actions. An Icebreaker moored in Murmansk, in the Kola Peninsula STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES AND MILITARY GOALS Russia's Arctic military endeavors are driven by strategic imperatives that revolve around securing economic and geopolitical interests, fortifying national defense, and projecting strength to NATO allies, primarily in the North Atlantic. The Arctic, rich in natural resources and vital shipping routes, holds considerable economic value. Russia aims to assert control over these resource...

Rosatom is one of the biggest nuclear energy companies in the world. It has building projects in many different international countries, but it is also owned by the Russian Federation. The same Russia that is responsible for the illegal invasion in Ukraine, and the overall political instability and fear in Europe.  In this post, we will explore what Rosatom is, and what ongoing projects they have with Hungary and Turkey. We find out if those deals can influence these two NATO outliers to make choices that are friendly to the Kremlin, but hurt the West.  WHAT IS ROSATOM? Rosatom, or in full Rosatom State Nuclear Energy Corporation, is one of the largest companies in the nuclear energy industry in the world. It is a Russian state corporation with headquarters in Moscow. They specialize in high-tech products, nuclear energy, and nuclear non-energy goods. The Rosatom flag with the Russian Federation flag (Picture: Unknown)  It was established in 2007. It is an umbrella corpor...