War with Russia

My first concern was for the Baltic States and what this display of Russian aggression would mean for them. I recalled, with some discomfort, my interview in September 2013 on Latvian TV, in which I had said so confidently, in response to some sharp questions from my interviewer, that I saw no threat to the Baltic States from this Russian government. How wrong I had been. All the Chiefs of Defense of these freedom-loving, western European–oriented countries were my friends. All had family members who had been deported to Siberia or liquidated in the purges of the Soviet era. The previous Estonian Chief of Defense had himself been deported to the Russian Gulags with his entire family as a child, aged nine. All had experienced the brutality of conscription into the Soviet military and, as the Soviet Union collapsed in 1992, all had put their lives on the line and answered their country’s call to break away from the Soviet empire. They understood the horror of what might be coming around the corner in a way that I as a Brit, or SACEUR as an American, could not even begin to do. These were men who really understood the meaning of the word “freedom.”

I phoned them all in turn: Riho Terras, Raimonds Graube, and Arvydas Pocius. They were calm, but utterly realistic. They reported unprecedented levels of Russian military activity in their airspace, seaspace, and along their land borders with Russia. These, they reported, were clearly designed to intimidate them. This was the way the old Soviet Union did business and they were under no illusions as to what they were witnessing now.

It turned out that the Americans had been there before me, a sign of America’s historical commitment to the Baltic States which had never wavered, even during the years of Soviet occupation. General Marty Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, had conference-called them earlier that day. In the face of their concern he had ordered the immediate deployment of a squadron of F-16 fighter-bombers to the Baltics. With that one gesture, I knew that America was continuing to underpin and guarantee the freedom of Europe; if Russia attacked, however far-fetched that might seem, it would mean engaging those aircraft. And that would mean America was also being attacked. Nevertheless, my friends expressed disappointment, some bitterness, but no surprise, that none of the major European NATO powers—Britain, France or Germany—had shown any solidarity with them. They could have said to me, “I told you so.” But none did. They didn’t need to.

Back at SHAPE, our daily lives quickly became dominated by the crisis in Ukraine and how NATO should respond. At the end of one briefing, SACEUR, NATO’s strategic commander, a genial, Harley Davidson–riding, US Air Force fighter pilot from the Deep South, asked me for my thoughts as a land commander. “Phil,” I replied, “the NATO nations won’t like it, but now is the time to deploy a brigade to the Baltic States to show the Russians that we’re serious about defending them.”

Sadly, and in the course of this book you will see why, this was a political bridge too far for the North Atlantic Council. But militarily and, I would argue, politically, it was the right thing to do. An all-arms brigade of 5,000 men with tanks, armored infantry, attack helicopters, and artillery would have sent a powerful message to the President: “Thus far perhaps, but no further.” It would also have irrevocably bound all NATO nations into the defense of the Baltic States.

I quickly made two more phone calls, to Air Chief Marshal Stu Peach, the UK’s Vice Chief of Defense Staff, in the Ministry of Defense in London, and to Mariot Leslie, the UK’s Ambassador to NATO in Brussels. I suggested that now was the time for Britain to show solidarity with the Baltic States and particularly with Estonia, whose lion-hearted soldiers had fought and died alongside American and British soldiers in faraway Afghanistan. That America’s battle-hardened troops would be there, ready and willing to defend the values of individual freedom, democracy, and the rule of law which had made the USA such a beacon of hope for the world, I had little doubt. The wheels of government turned and, shortly afterwards, to his credit, the British prime minister authorized the deployment of four RAF Typhoons to Estonia. But the question remained: would the effort be sustained?