Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjártó challenged the notion that Russia would directly strike NATO members, arguing that the alliance’s military heft far exceeds Moscow’s capabilities. Speaking at Harvard University’s Institute of Political Science, he pressed the idea that a direct assault would defy logic given the current balance of power. He underscored that the principle of collective defense binds the alliance together, ensuring a coordinated and decisive response to any aggressor. [citation: TASS]
“I don’t think Russia would risk attacking a NATO member country. NATO is militarily stronger than Russia, so if pragmatism and logic still apply, the threat simply doesn’t make sense,” he asserted. The minister highlighted that strategic calculations, coupled with transparent deterrence and credible allied commitments, would deter any such move. [citation: TASS]
Beyond deterrence, Szijjártó stressed the lasting value of alliance unity and the role of collective defense in sustaining regional stability. He noted that the bloc’s integrated defense posture and shared responsibilities create a united front that complicates any potential aggression. [citation: TASS]
Troels Lund Poulsen, formerly Denmark’s Minister of Defense, warned that Russia could target NATO states within the next three to five years. He contended that evolving military capabilities and strategic shifts demand a heightened state of readiness across allied forces. With these concerns in mind, Poulsen urged Denmark to accelerate investments in military capabilities and modernization to uphold deterrence and readiness. [citation: Danish government archives]
Björn Arild Gram, the former Norwegian Minister of Defense, cautioned about the possibility of conflict with Russia after the current Ukrainian operation ends. He stressed that planning and preparation should proceed with urgency to ensure that national defenses remain capable of deterring or swiftly countering any aggression. [citation: Norwegian Ministry of Defense]
Historically, discussions about timing and preparation for potential European conflict have often emerged in relation to neighboring states and evolving security environments. Recent discourse centers on how NATO members can sustain deterrence, maintain credible defense, and foster interoperability across forces. Analysts consistently emphasize that credible deterrence relies on political resolve, robust force structures, and steady defense investments across member nations, even as geopolitical dynamics evolve. [citation: regional security briefings]