Summary
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte warned that the alliance must adopt a “wartime mindset” to prepare for long-term confrontation with Russia.
Speaking in Brussels, he urged members to increase defense spending beyond the 2% GDP target, noting that only 23 of 32 members currently meet it.
Rutte emphasized boosting defense production, addressing cyber threats, and countering China’s military buildup and actions toward Taiwan.
His remarks come as Donald Trump threatens to withhold defense support from NATO members failing to meet spending commitments, raising concerns about alliance unity.
Because Russia doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Also it is better to be prepared and not need it, rather than not be prepared and lose a large portion of the population, industry, potentially getting genocided away etc.
I agree about that but in the case of defence against a potential Russian invasion of European NATO members I think it’s a false dichotomy. We are already stronger than Russia by nearly all measures and would be better off investing in infrastructure that makes us more prosperous and resilient whatever the future holds.
Are we stronger than Russia + China + Iran + any other country that joins them?
If we were strong enough, we could have helped Ukraine win. Multiple countries have neglected their military up to a point it should be considered treason.
There seems to be a general misconception that Europe has been unable to help Ukraine more when it has actually been a free choice for them. That’s the whole purpose of NATO - it binds member states to shared defence. Ukraine was not a member when it was invaded.
Russia: Ukraine. China: needs to keeping selling us stuff to keep its property bubble from crashing the economy, far away. Iran: Israel.
Imagining a terrifying and powerful threat and gearing up for a world war is a good way of helping that to actually happen. Fair enough. Some people want that. Perhaps because they stand to profit individually from the economics of it, are lacking purpose or are simply bored.
“Imagining a terrifying and powerful threat and gearing up for a world war is a good way of helping that to actually happen”
Except the threat isn’t imaginary. Same shit was said about Russia in 2008, 2014 and here we are, after 2022 happened. Three years and they are still occupying a significant amount of Ukraine. The truth is - if NATO is a defensive alliance, then gearing up with a shitloads of weapons to defend any offensive action doesn’t make a world war happen easier - quite the opposite. It prevents opportunists who would grab territory with no consequence - like Russia did in 2008 and 2014.
And all the time the eastern flank of NATO was screaming about a threat and being told by the western part to calm down and don’t be hawks, when their entire existence was threatened. All because it’s pretty simple - because the western part of NATO is only possible to be invaded when the eastern side has been taken over and capitulated. Hence why the idiotic policy that was luckily reversed, to let Russia capture the Baltics in case of a war, and retake them later. Everyone on the eastern flank knows what happens to people under russian occupation, it just doesn’t get through to people who don’t have to worry about the consequences of doing nothing and pushing the problem down the line with appeasement and ignoring it altogether.
Also, Ukraine had a pact with the US for defense if the integrity of the country was ever touched. And then 2014 happened and what? If a threat big enough exists that countries are scared of fighting it, NATO means fuckall. It’ll be the start of WW2 again with alliances that don’t do anything when their “buffer zone” is being taken over by hostiles.
China is not a warmongering country. Neither is Iran. I’m not sure your point here.