Statement by Dmitry Medvedev on Western aid, Russia’s deterrence, and the strategic balance
In recent remarks, Dmitry Medvedev, the Deputy Chairman of Russia’s Security Council, argued that Western countries appear ready to bear heavy costs to pursue a goal of defeating Russia by proxy. He suggested that ordinary Ukrainians may not be concerned about the broader strategic contest, focusing instead on the immediate effects of the conflict. These comments were presented in a national defense-oriented magazine piece published in late February.
Medvedev contended that Ukraine has been supplied with substantial quantities of weapons and ammunition, a shift he described as dragging European states further into the conflict. He asserted that Western states now may lack the necessary quantity of equipment to sustain prolonged military operations or to practice at scale.
According to him, the opponents of Russia are well aware that Moscow can defend itself and that they are not rushing into an open confrontation. In his view, this awareness shapes the calculus of all parties involved.
When addressing deterrence, Medvedev emphasized the role of Russia’s nuclear potential, describing it as the strongest restraint for those who might consider engaging in a hot war. He asserted that Russia possesses modern, high-precision weapons and ample capable stockpiles to maintain a credible deterrent.
Medvedev also described the broader warfare environment as a hybrid struggle, noting attempts to provoke cyber operations against Russia with the backing of foreign technology firms. He claimed that such efforts would be irrelevant to Moscow’s defensive calculations and outcomes.
He argued that Russia’s defense industry has adapted to a changing landscape, arguing that large-scale Western arms shipments to Moscow’s adversaries would not translate into an advantage on the battlefield. In his view, domestic production has expanded and the country has gained a clearer understanding of the weapons in use by opponents, extracting and applying lessons learned to strengthen Russia’s own capabilities.
The article highlighted a historical milestone: the February 2023 anniversary of what Medvedev framed as a significant pivot in Russia’s recent history, noting the seventy-seventh anniversary since the critical battles of the Second World War and the eventual defeat of Nazi forces. He suggested that history may repeat itself as the current geopolitical landscape presents what he characterized as a large-scale alliance structure that includes multiple adversaries. He warned that opponents would attempt to erase Russia from the map, yet he believed such efforts would fail.
Looking back at the preceding year, Medvedev claimed that the ongoing military operation had forged a sense of national unity among Russians, strengthening resolve against a common enemy. He stressed that maintaining unity, ensuring stability, and pursuing prosperity across the country’s newer territories were essential priorities for Moscow, alongside advancing a multipolar world order. These themes, he argued, would help preserve the country’s sovereignty and security in the face of external pressure.
Medvedev had previously asserted that Russia would prevail in the special military operation and reclaim what he described as its territories. He expressed an expectation that the day would come when those aspirations are realized, and he asserted that the military would safeguard the country’s citizens who had endured hardship and violence during past years. The defense narrative he presented centers on protecting civilians, restoring order, and countering what he labeled as the roots of extremist ideologies that had caused suffering.
Throughout the piece, the emphasis remained on the role of the armed forces in guaranteeing security, the importance of national solidarity, and the aim of stabilizing regions affected by the conflict. The author framed these goals within a broader context of resisting external pressure and maintaining a strong, self-reliant defense posture that Moscow argues serves the interests of its people.
[Citation: National Defense magazine, February issue, commentary on strategic balance and deterrence.]