The world’s most powerful military alliance faces an uncomfortable reality: it is not prepared to confront the threat from Vladimir Putin without direct US involvement. This has been recognized by the leaders of Latvia, Estonia and Finland, three countries in the line of fire against Russia, who have asked NATO and Europe for an urgent effort to strengthen their defensive capabilities.
“We are far from ready. That is absolutely clear,” declared Latvian President Edgars Rinkevics, at a meeting in Tallinn. “We cannot continue blindly trusting that the United States will continue to be involved as it has been until now,” the British newspaper reports. .
NATO countries are required to spend at least 2% of their GDP on defense, but for years only a third of members met this requirement. Although that figure has increased to two-thirds in 2024, it is still insufficient compared to the 6.3% that Russia will devote to its military spending in 2025. Estonia, Latvia and Finland, among NATO’s largest defense investors, have doubled their budget military since 2014, but they insist that it is not enough.
“We must increase our defensive capabilities because Russia remains a threat and demonstrates its inability to operate in a rules-based world,” said Kristen Michal, Estonian Prime Minister.
Finland, which shares a 1,200-kilometre border with Russia, has significantly strengthened its military capabilities. With a force of 280,000 soldiers and a mandatory military service program that covers almost 20% of its population, the country is one of the defensive pillars of the region. “We do not have this army out of concern for Stockholm or London. We have it because we are worried about Moscow,” stressed Finnish President Alexander Stubb.
Europe’s dependence on the United States is evident, but the re-election of Donald Trump as president has raised doubts about the future of this relationship. Trump has repeatedly criticized NATO members for failing to meet their spending commitments and has hinted that the United States could reduce its involvement in Europe to focus on the Indo-Pacific region.
“Trump understands the importance of alliances, but his stance adds pressure for Europe to correct its defensive deficit,” Stubb said. Meanwhile, leaders like Rinkevics suggest that NATO should raise its minimum spending requirement to 2.5% of GDP and, in some cases, reach 5%.
Military support for Ukraine remains a key factor, but the erosion of European arsenals and the limited capacity of the defense industry complicate the picture. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently acknowledged that his army does not have enough strength to recover all the territory occupied by Russia and pointed out diplomacy as the only way to prevent Putin from being rewarded for his invasion.
“We are training the Ukrainians, but our current capacity is not enough,” Rinkevics admitted. “Not only is there a lack of willingness to provide weapons, the defense industry is also unable to produce at the necessary pace.” As Europe seeks solutions to strengthen its defense and maintain support for Ukraine, the conclusion is clear: without a greater collective effort and the involvement of the United States, victory over Putin remains a distant goal.
