After the publication of the report by the French Institute of International Relations (IFRI), a debate was sparked in European security circles about how the continent would fare in a direct conflict with Russia. The conclusion is troubling: Europe would have trouble mobilizing enough troops, ensuring weapons production and responding to a large-scale attack.
According to IFRI, one of the most influential French think tanks, Russia has an advantage in both mobilization and societal resilience thanks to its centralized regime and war economy. Although the European armies are technologically more advanced, they are fragmented, slow and unprepared for a long-term, high-intensity conflict.
Weaknesses in mobilization and industry
According to the study, up to 20 out of 30 European countries have professional ground forces of less than 15,000 soldiers. Most would only be able to send a few battalions outside their territory in the event of a crisis. The only exceptions are countries such as France, Germany, Great Britain or Poland. The report also talks about “critical military gaps” – from a lack of ammunition to low stocks of heavy equipment to low interoperability between armies.
Although Europe has a better air force and navy than Russia, it lacks a coherent “defense economy” strategy. Even after the increase in budgets after 2022, production capacity remains low in many countries – industrial orders are often only in the hundreds of units per year.
Six armies that would challenge Russia: Slovakia is missing among them
As pointed out by the server The Defense Postaccording to IFRI data, only six countries in Europe have forces that could assemble larger combat formations – that is, more than one brigade ready for long-term deployment. These are France, Germany, Great Britain, Poland, Italy and Spain. Most other states have armed forces at the level of several thousand professional soldiers without significant reserves.
Slovakia is not among these countries. Its army has approximately 14,000 professional soldiers and lacks a robust reserve system or its own heavy industry capable of replenishing supplies during a conflict. Experts remind that, despite the planned modernizations, Slovakia is dependent on the collective defense of NATO in the event of a major war.
Three scenarios until 2030
The authors of the study for , outlined three possible development scenarios until 2030.
The first is “Frozen War 2.0” – a state where neither Ukraine nor Russia achieve victory and the conflict turns into long-term attrition. In that case, Europe would face public fatigue and growing disputes over further aid to Kyiv.
The second scenario envisages the intensification of indirect confrontation as hybrid operations, sabotage, cyber attacks and propaganda. Russia would thus test NATO’s resolve and prepare the ground for a short but decisive military action on the alliance’s borders.
The third scenario envisages an open conventional crisis in the event that NATO’s cohesion weakens or the involvement of the United States is reduced. According to IFRI, such a situation could lead to an attack on one of the smaller eastern members of the alliance.
Political and psychological dependence on the US
French experts also draw attention to Europe’s “psychological dependence” on the United States. Although European leaders talk about strategic autonomy, without American command, intelligence and satellite support, most European militaries would not be able to conduct a large-scale defense operation.
What can Europe do about it?
IFRI proposes multi-year contracts for the arms industry, expansion of joint production capacities and acceleration of military mobility across the continent. At the same time, it recommends investments in the protection of critical infrastructure and strengthening cooperation in cyber and information defense.
