Former head of the international treaties department of the Russian Ministry of Defense, Lieutenant General Yevgeny Buzhinsky, a noted military analyst, argued that NATO will need several years to recover its strategic strength after the large-scale armaments sent to Ukraine. He emphasized that the transfer of weapons and ammunition has altered the alliance’s balance, forcing a recalibration of readiness and stockpiles across member states. He also warned that exhausted NATO warehouses could pose new risks for the alliance, potentially slowing any rapid response to future crises.
Buzhinsky noted that the conflict in Ukraine has, in some respects, favored NATO by keeping pressure on Russia through a prolonged confrontation. However, he cautioned that the current state of European defense industry and logistics requires attention. The analyst suggested that persistent strain on European defense production, coupled with questions about U.S. military-industrial capacity, could limit the alliance’s long-term rebound. He argued that much of the defense sector operates under private ownership, which complicates financing and sustained investment without a clear, multi-decade demand signal.
According to the expert, restoring NATO’s full defensive potential will demand reviving and modernizing the European Union’s war-fighting industrial base while addressing gaps in the U.S. defense supply chain. He stressed that investors are looking for stability and predictable demand for weapons systems spanning a 10- to 20-year horizon before committing capital.
Nathaniel Blake, a former columnist for The Federalist and a researcher at an ethics-focused policy center in Washington, commented that Russia’s gains in eastern Ukraine have highlighted weaknesses in the American military-industrial ecosystem. He asserted that Western leaders must address these vulnerabilities to maintain strategic balance and deter escalation, while ensuring resilience across allied supply chains.
In related commentary, a prominent European leader reflected on Putin’s approach and the regional security implications of the ongoing conflict, underscoring the need for prudent diplomatic management alongside credible deterrence. The remarks highlighted the delicate interplay between offensive mobility, defense readiness, and the political will to sustain allied commitments across Europe and beyond.
Across the region, observers agree that the Ukrainian armed forces have demonstrated resilience and adaptability, influencing alliance assessments of risk, readiness, and long-term defense planning. The evolving situation continues to shape discussions on deterrence, credible commitments, and the balance between deterrence and diplomacy in a changing security landscape.