Putin’s threats leave Nato at breaking point

European Nato allies fear Article 5 may effectively no longer exist, leaving the Continent vulnerable to attacks from Russia, diplomatic and military insiders have warned. The key Nato guarantee of collective defence, under which an attack on one member would be deemed an attack on all, is at breaking point due to Donald Trump’s lukewarm support of the alliance. CIA director John Ratcliffe’s visit to Moscow this week, during which he reportedly warned the Kremlin not to strike Nato, may have calmed some fears over the US commitment to its European allies. Shorts Yet there are still concerns that the US might not join in with a Nato response to a strike by Russia, particularly if there was a debate about whether it constituted an all-out act of war. Fears are growing of a conflict on the Continent outside Ukraine, with US intelligence cautioning earlier this month that a strike on a European Nato state could come as soon as this year. Moscow’s rhetoric against the UK has also ramped up over the past two weeks in response to news that British-made drones were used by Ukraine to attack Russian targets and Britain sharing its long-range missile blueprints with Kyiv. ‘Cavalry not coming’ General Sir Richard Barrons, a former UK forces commander and co-author of the Strategic Defence Review, told The i Paper there was a “developing sense of the US cavalry not coming” inside Europe’s military and diplomatic circles. “So that makes it easy [for Russia] to talk up threats against big European players because they are pretty confident that the US is going to keep out of it now,” he said. He fears Russia, as a way of testing Nato’s resolve, could do “something that is clearly a breach of Article 5, and then watch the US not come, and realise that Europe isn’t ready for a fight right now”. The former general added: “People talk about Narva [an Estonian city on the border with Russia] and Svalbard [Norway’s Arctic island outpost], and indeed in some contexts people talk about isolating the UK partly because of our geography, but also because of the place we hold in the Russian firmament.” Professor Katarzyna Zysk, of the Norwegian Institute for Defence Studies, said she believed while an “unambiguous attack” would “possibly” be honoured by the US, “uncertainty grows in the case of a sub-threshold one”. She added: “Article 5 obliges each ally to take such action as it deems necessary, so the US can satisfy the obligation with consultations, sanctions, enablers while withholding combat forces. “The dangerous cases are the ambiguous incidents, and indecision, where allies disagree on whether the threshold was crossed.” General Sir Richard Barrons, a former UK forces commander and co-author of the Strategic Defence Review, told The i Paper there was a “developing sense of the US cavalry not coming” inside Europe’s military and diplomatic circles (Photo: AP) Drumbeat of war growing louder Zysk said that “the Trump administration’s long-standing criticism of Nato, Europe, on occasion even contempt, threats… as well as announcements this year of planned US troop reductions in Europe, and cuts to the support of Ukraine, have caused officials in some European countries to question US reliability and credibility as an ally”. She added: “The damage to trust has been amplified by circumstances given the ongoing war of aggression in Europe and escalating attacks on European Nato countries under the threshold [of Article 5]. This is exactly the wrong signal to send to Moscow. “I would still argue that Russia lacks the capacity to wage a direct war with a united Nato. But the risk grows if the Western front weakens further. An opportunistic attack is more likely if the Kremlin doubts that Nato can impose unacceptable cost on Russia.” As the drumbeat of war on the Continent grows louder, the head of the Royal Navy, Gen Sir Gwyn Jenkins, hinted at the turmoil among European Nato countries when he said this week that “alliances feel fragile” and he feared “a number of possible scenarios in future that could lead to catastrophic events with no certainty we can avoid them”. Allies discuss alternative to Article 5 Speaking to the Defence Talks podcast, Jenkins appeared to suggest there were active discussions at the highest levels about a contingency plan for getting around Article 5. In the event of a conflict, Jenkins said, the Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF) of 10 countries – including the UK and northern European allies – could be the first responders to an emerging conflict because unlike Nato, the JEF does not need consensus to take action. He said: “Because you don’t need consensus among all ten nations in JEF to act, it gives you a political flexibility to respond, particularly in crisis, earlier than we might see Nato being able to mobilise with its higher bar of consensus being required for action.” However, there are some who believe the US would still come through for Europe if Russia did decide to launch military action against a Nato state. A former senior British official told The i Paper they were “confident Article 5 is strong and the US is committed (especially as the eastern flank countries are those meeting/exceeding their spending pledges)”. The official added: “⁠Europe stepping up and doing more is a good thing regardless – we (Europe) will still need the US for a long time.” CIA director’s warning should be ‘read carefully’ On Thursday, asked about the purpose of Ratcliffe’s visit, Trump claimed Russia would not strike Nato. The US president told reporters in the Oval Office he had had “good talks” with Vladimir Putin, adding: “He’s not going to be attacking a Nato territory.” But Trump also declined to confirm reports that Ratcliffe had warned Moscow not to strike, saying: “I don’t want to comment on that but they’re not going to attack.” Zysk said reports about the CIA director’s warning, if confirmed, were encouraging but “should be read carefully”. She added: “One reason is that the private warning was undercut by Trump’s public statement calling it semi-routine and declining to confirm the warning. That weakens the deterrence signal sent to Moscow, and what could be a reassurance signal to allies. “The last time the CIA director warned the Kremlin against invading it did not have the intended result, given Russia invaded Ukraine only three months later.” Amid fears of US reluctance to honour Article 5, Andy Burnham has made clear he wants the UK to move closer to Europe, particularly on defence issues. Zysk said the increase in spending by European Nato allies, particularly Germany, would partly compensate for US reticence, but there were some years to go before countries would be fully ready for conflict. German readiness is not scheduled to be reached until 2029, she said, while technical superiority would not be achieved until 2039.