NATO returns to homefront

The year 2014 brought a decisive turn for the world's largest military alliance: Away from the "out of area" NATO with its expensive and protracted peacekeeping mission in Afghanistan back to defending Europe. It's a sharp turn that wasn't completely voluntary for the alliance. Russia forced the move with its attack on Ukraine's sovereignty.

Following the planned withdrawal from Afghanistan, NATO was counting on saving some money and calmly approaching new tasks. But that's not going to happen. Instead, old capabilities in Europe that were dismantled with a clear conscience after the end of the Soviet Union 20 years ago now have to hurriedly be built up again. Russia is being seen as a threat to NATO's easternmost member states. Even if it's unlikely that Russia would march into Estonia or Latvia, the feeling in Brussels is that President Putin's Russia is no longer a partner, but an unpredictable, power-hungry country. NATO feels called upon to show its strength.

The alliance has already stepped up its military presence in the Baltic Sea and in the air space between Finland and Romania. Now, it also wants to prepare itself on the ground. It has created a rapid response force that, at least initially, isn't particularly rapid nor particularly forceful. It will take some time until enough soldiers – around 4,000 – are ready to be deployed in the Baltics or Poland in the case of a crisis.

The "spearhead" force is supposed to be kept in a constant state of readiness. That means additional strain on personnel and extra costs for the German army, the Bundeswehr, as well. To credibly deter Russia with conventional troops, the NATO states have to acquire more infantry and tank forces – forces they've done without in recent years. Rebuilding them will be expensive and time intensive.

The spear follows the head

If you move the spearhead, it's only logical that the rest of the spear, i.e. more troops, must follow. If the crisis lasts a long time, Germany will have to think about re-introducing conscription because the Bundeswehr is already having difficulties covering its personnel needs with voluntary staff. In addition to military preparedness of the deterrence strategy against Russia, NATO states must continue to press ahead with diplomatic means. A de-escalation or a solution to the conflict with Putin is a thousand times better than the saber rattling that NATO has been forced into.

We're still far from the level of military power seen during the Cold War era, when millions of soldiers faced off against each other in Central Europe. But NATO has to do forward planning and be prepared for every eventuality. Including that Russia may not be content to sit back and watch the forging of the "spearhead." Increased activity along NATO borders, troop deployments and targeted acts of provocation should all be expected.

Will it end in an arms race between Russia and NATO? Next year, it will be the task of the 28 NATO member states to safeguard their cohesion and resolve. The southern member states don't appear to feel especially threatened by the Ukraine crisis. NATO member Turkey, for example, continues to do profitable business with Russia in addition to attending NATO meetings.

A further challenge to the alliance's southeastern flank is the threat from the terrorist army Islamic State, which could infiltrate Turkey from its base in Syria, and is currently in the process of securing a toehold in Libya. NATO doesn't yet have an answer to this challenge. It's not something that can be solved with a rapid response force. Or can it? Under US leadership, a new alliance against Islamic State is being formed. NATO doesn't have a role within this alliance yet, but that could change.