Early this morning, Russia sent a swarm of drones into Poland. The crisis of the NATO alliance that people on both sides of the Atlantic have been denying or trying to put off is now here: This is the moment when the world finds out whether the United States remains committed to the defense of its allies.
Ever since he began running for president, Donald Trump has been equivocal at best about America’s security commitments to Europe. The allies have hoped to jolly Trump along, manipulating him by appealing to his vanity, calling him “Daddy,” acceding to his punitive tariffs without resistance, and generally accepting a humiliating subservience in the hope of at least buying time. The allies have even fantasized about the United States providing some form of security should they put troops in Ukraine; Vladimir Putin was never going to allow European forces in Ukraine, so this fantasy might have survived indefinitely.
Any real test of America’s commitment to European security seemed a problem for the future, and in the uneasy interregnum, the facade of transatlantic comity could be preserved until either Europe became strong enough to stand on its own or Trump departed the scene. This was congenial for both Americans and Europeans. Trump didn’t have to take the controversial step of openly abandoning the allies, even as he was abandoning them, and Europeans didn’t have to face the reality that the United States was no longer there for them, with all that implied for their security—and their defense spending.
Putin, on the other hand, had every reason to force the matter to a head sooner rather than later. The only thing surprising about his attack on Poland is that he didn’t do it sooner. (Russia denies having sent the drones into Polish territory.)
Start with the fact that such an attack has always been a viable option for Putin. People don’t pay much attention these days to the “laws” of neutrality, but for centuries prior to World War II, it was understood that if one nation’s government provided weapons and war matériel directly to another nation at war with a third nation, that legally made the donor a belligerent in the war and therefore subject to attack. An exception was made for private arms sales, which was how the United States managed to supply weapons to Britain and France during the period when Washington was neutral in World War I. But direct, government-to-government arms provisions and arms sales were a violation of neutrality, which gave the third nation the right, if it chose, to go to war with the providing nation or to use force to cut off the supply. The laws of neutrality don’t distinguish between aggressor and victim, because those distinctions are not always clear-cut. If Putin had at any time decided to bomb the supply lines to Ukraine from Poland, Romania, or Slovakia, he would have been within his rights to do so.
So why didn’t he? In the early phases of the war, he may not have had the capacity—Russian missiles couldn’t even hit Kyiv regularly at first. But the bigger deterrent was almost certainly the prospect of pulling NATO, and with it the United States, into the war. That was always Putin’s nightmare scenario, especially once Russian forces failed to achieve a rapid victory and became bogged down and vulnerable in Ukraine.
Had NATO entered the war at any time in the past three years, Russian forces in Ukraine would have been doomed. The United States, using ship- and submarine-launched missiles alone, would have been able to take out the Kursk bridge, thereby cutting off the most crucial Russian supply line and path for retreat. Russian forces trapped in Ukraine would have been sitting ducks for NATO missiles and aircraft. Putin would have faced the choice of a full-scale war with NATO that he could not possibly win—a nuclear war that, whatever else it accomplished, would destroy Russia—or surrender. Putin kept the Biden administration constantly on edge with threats of nuclear escalation, but in fact he was extremely careful not to do anything that might prompt an American and NATO response.
And yet, from the beginning, the only people more fearful than Putin of American intervention were Americans. Consider the Biden administration’s reaction at each stage of the war. American intelligence acquired detailed knowledge of Russia’s invasion plans, including the timing, no later than early November 2021. Between then and the invasion in February 2022, the Biden administration warned Putin not to invade, threatened sanctions if he did, and then very effectively provided the intelligence to allies and the media.
What the Biden administration did not do was take any step that might signal the possibility of American or NATO involvement. The United States did not move ships into the Black Sea, though these were international waters and it had every right to. It did not move any American or NATO forces forward in Europe, much less send any forces into Ukraine. On the contrary, the Biden administration was careful to do nothing that might indicate a willingness to respond militarily to the invasion that they had told the world was coming.
One can only imagine how Putin read those signals. His original plan had been to move so quickly against Ukraine that the United States and NATO would be confronted with a fait accompli before they had a chance to respond. But the Americans, in full knowledge of Putin’s plans months in advance, assiduously did nothing to suggest a response other than sanctions, which Putin was prepared to withstand.
Then came Russia’s disastrous invasion. As many as 190,000 Russian troops—essentially Putin’s entire deployable army at that time—were literally bogged down in the mud, trapped in Ukraine and under attack from surprisingly resilient Ukrainian forces. Surely Putin was in a panic at that point, for had NATO even threatened to take any action—such as blowing up the Kursk bridge and thereby trapping his army in Ukraine—he would have been left with the choice of surrender or all-out intercontinental nuclear war. He could not have used nuclear weapons in Ukraine without irradiating his own troops, and even if he did, the United States and NATO would be left untouched and capable of striking conventionally at whatever remained of his forces: checkmate.
And yet—again—the United States did nothing. It supplied weapons to Ukraine, with significant restrictions on their use, and deliberately took no action that could be construed as aggressive. Putin thus passed through the greatest moment of peril for Russia since Stalingrad.
Having escaped disaster and gauged the full extent of American self-deterrence, Putin began putting pressure on Ukraine’s neighbors and suppliers. This was a logical progression in the war, as well as a response to the contradictions at the heart of an American policy that sought to assist Ukraine while avoiding direct confrontation with Russia. Putin did not force the United States to choose between these objectives. Until now.
Putin’s primary goal right now is to force Ukraine’s surrender. Aiding Ukraine has already begun to be a controversial subject in Poland; the prospect of Russian attacks in retaliation could drive up opposition, especially if the United States proves unreliable. That in turn will force Ukrainians to contemplate a world without foreign assistance.
But Putin also has his eye on a bigger prize: the collapse of the NATO alliance. For many months Putin has been waging a “shadow war” against NATO member states—one that the Center for European Policy Analysis describes as “a concerted and coordinated campaign of attacks” aimed at raising the costs and risks to those nations aiding Ukraine. These have included sabotage of key infrastructure, arson, and assassination attempts against European defense executives. The Trump administration’s response has been to tell the Europeans they need to defend themselves, because the United States can no longer afford to do so; to hint at substantial withdrawals of American forces from Europe; and, most recently, to cancel a multiyear defense-training program for the Baltic allies.
The “shadow war” was a characteristic Putin probe to see what the United States would tolerate. The Trump administration’s lack of response encouraged Putin to take the next step and bring the “shadow war” out from the shadows. By overtly attacking Poland, Putin has forced the question of America’s security commitment to the fore. For Trump to do nothing in response to the constant strikes against civilian targets in Ukraine was one thing. If he does nothing in response to a Russian attack on Poland, Europeans will have to stop fooling themselves and face the fact that the Americans really aren’t there for them.
The post NATO’s Moment of Truth appeared first on The Atlantic.
