Europe wants to prepare citizens for war but Portuguese and Italians can be a problem: “If society is not willing, we will not be able to win”

Survival guides, ensure groceries and simulacres of mass evacuation. Europe is striving to prepare its citizens for the growing threat of a conflict that reaches its door.

In recent months, several European nations have been giving worrying guidance – imagining garages and meter stations transformed into bunkers and promoting psychological resilience.

One of the messages that has been making the most is the need for a change in the population’s mindset to prepare for war. Like NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte told Brussels security experts in December: “It’s time to move to a war mindset.”

European leaders fear that Russian President Vladimir Putin, encouraged by victories in Ukraine, can try further on the continent, while the US, a powerful and long -time ally in Europe, adopt a more hostile position on the maintenance of European security, raising doubts about how willing to intervene in case of invasion of a Nato country.

But doubts about the effectiveness of these contingency plans subsist and, moreover, if civilians will take the guidelines seriously.

“Go home, close all windows and doors”

The European Commission urged all citizens to store food and other essential assets to support them for at least 72 hours in the event of a crisis. In the guidelines published in March, the commission stressed the need for Europe to promote a culture of “preparation” and “resilience”.

This at a time when countries have been adopting their own emergency guidelines, including conflicts.

Last June, Germany updated its directive to global defense, stressing nominations on what to do in case of conflict in Europe. The document provides for the complete transformation of the daily life of German citizens in the event of war.

Sweden has published a survival guide entitled “In the event of crisis or war.” The pamphlet was distributed to millions of families in November, after being updated for the first time in six years due to the increase in military threat levels.

The pamphlet gives the Swedish instructions on the warnings to be issued in the event of war, including an outdoor alert system that, according to the pamphlet, is operational in most regions. “Enter home, close all windows and doors and, if possible, turn off the ventilation. For more information, listen to the Sweriges Radio Public Radio, channel P4,” it refers to the pamphlet.

It also gives advice on where to look for shelter during an air strike, including cellars, garages and metro stations. If it is caught abroad, without immediate shelter, it advises to lie on the floor, “preferably in a small hole or ditch.”

Specific advice is given to Swedish citizens regarding nuclear weapons attacks, telling them to “shelter as if they were in an air attack. Civil Defense shelters are the best protection.” And he adds: “Radiation levels will dramatically lower after a few days.”

It also includes evacuation tips, as well as stop bleeding, how to deal with anxiety, and how to talk to children about crisis and war.

For Finland – which shares a border of 1,340 kilometers with Russia, the longest of all NATO Member States – the defense of its sovereignty against Moscow has long been part of the thought of the population.

For decades the country has been preparing for the possibility of a conflict with Russia. Since the 1950s, it is mandatory to build anti-bomb shelters under apartment blocks and office buildings.

It is certain that the Nordic country, which joined NATO in 2023 after decades of non-alignment, has been accelerating its state of readiness since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

Two years ago, motivated by the Russian War, the Finnish government took stock of its emergency shelters available, finding that it had a total of 50,500 – which could shelter a possible 4.8 million people in a country of 5.6 million.

In November, the Helsinquia Interior Ministry also issued new guidelines for crisis situations, giving readers advice on how to prepare for long energy cuts, water cuts, telecommunications interruptions, extreme weather phenomena and military conflicts.

Will people hear?

Although countries have updated their civilian protection guidelines, there is no guarantee that people pay attention to them.

Claudia Major, vice president for the transatlantic security of the Marshall German Fund, told CNN that the councils of the countries should be taken seriously. The expert stressed the need to be prepared not only for a direct military threat from Russia, but also for what he called the “gray zone” between war and peace – which encompasses lower levels of aggression and hybrid war.

However, it warns: “There is a terminue line between promoting the preparation of the population [para um conflito] without falling into alarmism and catastrophering. We want people to be aware, but we don’t want to get scared. “

For some countries, especially those in Moscow’s sphere of influence, Russia’s threat is more tangible. For others, it is harder to understand.

Claudia Major points to Finland – who lost territory to Russia during the Winter War of 1939-40 – and the Baltic Nations, which were annexed by the Soviet Union between 1940 and 1991, as countries where the threat of Russia is more rooted in what he called the “DNA” of countries.

“The existential threat, the fear of being invaded, of disappearing from the map, is very real in the Baltic States. They wonder why other countries do not realize it,” he said.

“The Finns, throughout the Cold War period, took the defense seriously,” added Claudia Major. “Why are we all going to Finland now and look at their bunkers system, their medicines reservations and their reserve system? They have learned from the story; no one will help us. We have to do it for ourselves.”

Claudia Major referred to Portugal, Italy and the United Kingdom as countries where the threat of Russia is less present in the national conscience. Italy, he says, is more concerned with the threat of terrorism and instability of the fragile countries near the southern border of the country. “It’s much closer to them,” he says. “It’s another problem for your stability, prosperity and internal politics.”

The United Kingdom was last invaded by a foreign power in 1066, while many Western European countries were invaded during World War II. This means that current generations have less experience and their civilians may be less likely to follow government advice.

“The question is how to change the DNA of a country, this is the crucial question,” said Claudia Major.

“Protect and survive”

The effectiveness of these civil protection plans is not clear either. In the past, they were really ridiculed.

For decades, during the Cold War, the British government has provided official information to its citizens to protect themselves from the Soviet nuclear threat.

The most prominent source of British public information was known as the “Protect and Survive” campaign, produced between 1974 and 1980. The campaign offered information on nuclear precipitation dangers, instructions to follow in hours and days after a nuclear attack and a survival plan.

A pamphlet released in May 1980 included tips on how to build a makeshift radioactive precipitation room, including a so -called inner refuge for protection against radioactive dust.

The campaign was criticized for offering unrealistic advice and presenting a false sense of optimism in the face of nuclear annihilation. It was for a long time satirized in British popular culture.

British researcher Taras Young, author of the book “Nuclear War in the UK”, told CNN that “Protect and Survive” was created as a multimedia campaign in the 1970s, but was never thought to be public until there was a high probability of nuclear war.

However, after Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher reached power in 1979, the British newspaper The Times demanded that the government publish the leaflets. “As a result, it was published at a time when there was no imminent attack threat, so people looked at him differently,” explains Young. For this reason, he says, there was a “negative cultural reaction” against the book, adding that he was ridiculed in series of popular British comedy.

Taras Young pointed out as one of the most comic suggestions the British government’s advice to paint the windows to help prevent the heat of the heat from a nuclear explosion. Civilians were instructed to “coat the windows inside with light -colored dilute ink, so as to reflect much of the warmth, even if the explosion that followed them.”

In comparison, Taras Young considers that the modern advice in Europe – including the UK guidelines on the preparation for emergency situations – are more realistic and incorporate more important psychological aspects, such as how to deal with trauma.

For Claudia Major, it is never too much to underline the need to prepare civilians for external threats, namely in the “gray zone”.

“We tend to look at the military aspect, but we are terribly vulnerable in the gray zone. Therefore, we have to think about the deterrent, defense and resilience. And this implies, namely, a greater preparation of society.”

And warns: “If society is not willing and is not prepared to support a war, as Ukrainian society is doing right now, we will not be able to win.”