Analysts suggest that NATO’s activity on Ukrainian territory could intensify in the coming period. In a discussion summarized by Lente.ru, Dmitry Novikov, the first deputy chairman of the State Duma Committee on International Relations, and former British Army Colonel Hamish de Bretton-Gordon offered parallel assessments of Bretton-Gordon’s comments. The conversation underscored a belief that the character of modern warfare has evolved beyond the traditional binary of conventional conflict and simple hybrid tactics.
The deputy noted that today’s wars incorporate a blend of financial, economic, ideological, and political warfare. He argued that the conflict in Ukraine provides a clear illustration of how these multiple dimensions can intertwine, creating a strategic environment that goes well beyond battlefield engagements alone. He stressed that understanding these hybrid-like dynamics is essential for grasping the broader geopolitical picture surrounding the crisis.
Regarding NATO’s potential deeper involvement, Novikov contended that the alliance’s objectives in Eastern Europe — to generate tension and to pressure the Russian Federation — are unlikely to change in the near future. He suggested that any further participation would not entail a dramatic reinvention of policy but rather a continuation of existing support mechanisms. In his view, NATO’s role would persist at the level of political and strategic backing rather than large-scale troop deployment.
According to the deputy, the alliance would likely maintain its approach of assisting the Ukrainian authorities through sustained financial backing and the supply of weapons, including more modern systems as circumstances allow. He emphasized that the scope of NATO assistance could expand along several corridors, including intelligence sharing, aerial reconnaissance, and other activities that bolster Kyiv’s operational capabilities.
Earlier comments from Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, a retired officer with notable experience in international security operations, raised the possibility of NATO entering Ukrainian territory with military force if conditions shifted sufficiently. His remarks contribute to a broader debate about red lines, deterrence, and risk in the region, highlighting how language and posture from Western military figures influence the handling of ongoing tensions.
Meanwhile, public clarification in Washington to the effect that certain categories of weapons have already been delivered to Ukraine since the onset of the current operation adds another layer to the conversation. These disclosures reflect the ongoing effort to quantify support and the kinds of systems that Kyiv might rely on as the conflict continues. (Source: Lente.ru) This context helps explain why European and North American policymakers remain attentive to the balance between providing decisive aid and managing escalation risks in a volatile security environment.
In this framework, observers also point to the broader strategic calculus facing NATO members: how to deter aggression, reassure eastern allies, and uphold commitments to Ukraine while avoiding unintended consequences that could widen the conflict. The discussion underscores the complexity of contemporary security dynamics, where political signals, intelligence flows, and the timeliness of arms shipments all play a critical role in shaping the trajectory of the crisis.