3 ms·

> There is no legitimate threat from Russia to Nato within the next 6 years Roark66 said "next ~6 years tops", so you two do not really disagree; the question

• trashtester 3y ago
  That publication, presumably intended for German decision makers, state that it would take Russia at least 6-10 years after concluding the war in Ukraine before they could rebuild to a point where they would be any threat to Nato. Furthermore, if the war ends with either a stalemate or a Russian loss, there will still be an Ukraine between them and most Nato countries (unless Ukraine joins Nato). While I definitely agree with the article that it makes sense for Germany increase their capabilities (not only by increasing budgets, but also by making sure the money is used to expand abilities, not just subsidise various industries or communities), there is no way Russia could become a serious threat to a united Nato even given 6-10 years of buildup. Also, countering Russia over a time over the next 10-15 years almost certainly will only require building up stockpiles of current generation hardware, combined with ensuring that enough personell is available. To do their fair share, Germany could aim at matching Polish strength, for instance. The article in question here is about the next generation of hardware, a "superweapon" by today's standards. If it arrives in 10 years, then that's pretty good timing. Let's say the War in Ukraine lasts to 2026, and Russa starts intensive rearmament (or just let the wartime production lines continue to run), then moderate Nato buildup would be enough until the 2030's. From there on, error bars grow larger. It is possible that Russia will collapse under corruption and demographic collapse, but it is also possible that they will be able to turn their economy around (possibly through heavy automation) while continuing to develop their military, especially if they maintain close relations to China. In such a world (that I think of as low probability), it's good to have new generations of weapons available. Meanwhile, China is in the middle of a collossal force buildup right now. I'm sure the "German Council for Foreign Relations" doesn't focus very much on that. But for Nato as a whole, China is a much, much more urgent danger within the next 10 years, and probably for at least 30 years. The only way I can see this change, would be if AI could be used to convert Russia's huge reserves of energy and raw materials into military strength. But countering that that would require a completely different type of planning, anyway.