Despite the statements by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov that the armed conflict in Ukraine will not end until NATO reduces its military presence in the countries on the Alliance’s eastern flank, there are currently no signs that the West is even considering such a scenario. At the same time, the EU is stepping up, and nearly all NATO member states have confirmed their readiness to increase defence spending.
Russia only understands the language of force. Everything else is an illusion. Therefore, peace is only possible through strength. The recent NATO summit confirmed that reinforcing defence must become a priority for all EU countries. It is now evident that Europe can no longer rely solely on the United States. Donald Trump’s unpredictability has accelerated a reassessment of the EU’s strategic and budgetary priorities. And although the United States has not officially declared any intention to leave NATO, the sense of strategic uncertainty has compelled Europe to acknowledge the need for greater self-reliance in defence. That said, despite Trump’s unpredictability, he has never outright rejected the alliance with the EU or the United States’ membership in NATO. The Alliance is strong and united, and the summit in The Hague confirmed it: nearly all members are prepared to increase their defence budgets.
This was stated in an interview with the Guildhall news agency by Member of the European Parliament and former Commander of the Estonian Defence Forces, Lieutenant General Riho Terras.
According to reports by The Financial Times and Reuters, Russia allegedly demanded the withdrawal of NATO forces from Eastern Europe as a condition for normalizing relations with the United States. Earlier, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov also stated that the war in Ukraine «will not end» until NATO removes its troops from the Baltic states. How do you assess such demands from the Russian side?
Riho Terras: Russia has been making this demand since at least the 2007 Munich Security Conference, where Putin criticised NATO’s expansion to the East. He reiterated the same request in late 2021, just before launching the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. So there is nothing new in it.
Currently, there are no signs of the West to even think about this option. After the NATO summit, I can say with confidence that the alliance is united and strong. Germany is deploying its brigade to Lithuania, British troops are defending Estonia alongside us, and even Donald Trump has praised the Baltic States for their significant commitment to our shared defence.
Several NATO and EU officials — including NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte and German intelligence chief Bruno Kahl — have stated that Russia is preparing for a possible attack on NATO-member EU countries in the near future. What actions must be taken to undermine Russia’s military and economic potential and to prevent such an attack? Why, after three years of sanctions and international pressure, does Russia still pose a military threat to the EU?
Riho Terras: I am familiar with these forecasts, but what matters most is that it’s the West and not Russia that will ultimately decide whether such a war becomes possible. And of course, the resilience of the Ukrainian people and soldiers remains crucial. We must continue to provide Ukraine with weapons, ammunition, and financial support. Whether Russia has the capacity to attack Europe depends on the outcome of the war in Ukraine.
What I can confirm is that the EU is mobilising, with Germany taking the lead under Chancellor Merz. After the recent NATO summit, there was near-unanimous agreement to increase defence spending across the alliance.
On sanctions: Russia’s shadow fleet remains a major loophole. The Kremlin still receives billions through illicit oil trade. And we must be honest with ourselves, the EU bears part of the blame, having relied too long on cheap Russian gas. Only recently are we seeing more decisive action to eliminate this dependency.
I believe more sanctions can still be imposed. And if the US under Donald Trump fully commits to countering Russian aggression, it could deal a heavy blow to the Kremlin’s economic base. The most recent decisions by the US show unfortunately the exact opposite.
Do you share the Western concept of «peace through strength» in relation to Russia? What should this principle entail in concrete terms?
Riho Terras: The Baltics, Poles, Finns, and above all, the Ukrainians, understand all too well that Russia only responds to the language of strength. Anything else is wishful thinking. So yes, I fully support the concept of «peace through strength».
The recent NATO summit succeeded in reinforcing the shared understanding that increased defence spending is essential. How this will translate into practice remains to be seen. Spain and Slovenia, for instance, have expressed reservations about committing to the proposed NATO target of raising defence spending to 5% of GDP by 2035.
What is clear is that Europe has realised it can no longer depend solely on the US. Trump’s unpredictability has accelerated a shift in the EU’s political and budgetary priorities. Although the US has not officially threatened to leave NATO, the sense of strategic uncertainty has led the EU to acknowledge the need for greater self-reliance in defence.
What additional instruments of pressure have not yet been used against Russia but could be? (Particularly with a focus on oil revenues.)
Riho Terras: As mentioned above, we have not done enough to sanction the shadow fleet. We have to follow the international maritime laws, therefore we can’t completely ban the vessels that Russia uses to benefit their illegal trade.
Another issue is that even the EU can’t control certain global events, for example the escalating conflicts in the Middle-East. When Israel attacked Iran, the fear of supply disruption boosted oil prices globally. Russia’s crude alone jumped 15%.
A key element in preparing for a potential military confrontation is preparing society. To what extent do European societies grasp the reality of such a threat?
Riho Terras: Countries bordering Russia naturally perceive the threat from Moscow very differently compared to more distant EU members like Ireland or Spain. For nations such as Poland, the Baltic states, and Finland, as well as other Nordic countries, the danger is tangible. In Finland, for instance, caution has reached the point where citizens are considering purchasing a real estate unwise because of the risk that Vladimir Putin may launch an attack against the country.
Defence spending reflects these perceptions well. Poland and Estonia are among the EU’s top spenders on defence as a percentage of GDP, while countries like Ireland, Spain, and Portugal rank the bottom.
In larger EU countries such as Germany and France, opinions remain more divided. Some still believe it is possible to restore constructive relations with the Kremlin through renewed economic ties. However, in Germany, a major shift in public and political thinking has occurred. Chancellor Friedrich Merz has no illusions about the Russian threat and is committed to building Europe’s strongest military. The reintroduction of compulsory military service is also being seriously considered.
Do you agree with the notion that Russia’s war against Ukraine is already a war against the entire West?
Riho Terras: This has been a core part of my message from the very beginning: Ukraine’s war is also our war. Russia’s hybrid attacks and information warfare against Europe are already a reality. We may not be at war in the traditional, brutal sense with Russian missiles striking our cities. But when viewed through the lens of modern warfare, we are engaged. And the EU is seriously preparing for a direct assault from the East.
In an era of unpredictability in Washington, the world needs clear democratic leadership. Can the European Union rise to fulfill that role? What foundations should this leadership be built upon?
Riho Terras: Even though Trump is unpredictable and his decisions are harder to predict than a lottery jackpot, we must not isolate the US from its allies. Trump has never turned his back on the EU, nor has he ever said that the US would leave NATO.
But it is true that the EU needs a clear leader. In my view, the new German Chancellor, Friedrich Merz, is well suited for the task, besides, he strongly supports Ukraine.
Does the EU factor in the possible collapse or paralysis of NATO in its strategic planning, and is there a “Plan B” if such a scenario materializes?
Riho Terras: We must not think that way. NATO is strong, we are united, and the most recent summit clearly demonstrated that nearly all members are willing to increase their defence spending. With a few exceptions of which President Trump himself described as «hard cases» and promised to address personally. I am referring here to Spain, which has been reluctant to contribute as much as others in the alliance.
Proposals for alternative European defence alliances or a separate European Defence Union are actually counterproductive in the current situation, as they risk fragmenting NATO’s unity. And that is something we simply cannot afford right now. We must strengthen our belief, and even more importantly, we must strengthen Vladimir Putin’s believe in NATO’s unity and capability.
What role does maintaining and deepening a strong partnership and dialogue with the United States play in this context? What approach should the EU adopt in response to Donald Trump’s policies?
Riho Terras: The US remains our ally, and we must not undermine transatlantic relations. The NATO summit in The Hague demonstrated that strong mutual ties and respect between Europe and the US are still possible. Trump’s responses at the press conference reflected a positive and friendly tone. Speaking about his meeting with President Zelenskyy, he described it as “couldn’t have been nicer.” These are encouraging signs.
However, Russia listens carefully to every word the US President says. They use their influence through media, social media, propaganda, and by stoking societal tensions in the US, to disrupt any positive progress we make.
Trump’s unpredictability is a given and something we cannot control. And his approach is America first, that is clear. Perhaps the most important lesson he has taught Europe is that we must rely more on ourselves. We need to be more self-assured when it comes to defence and confronting threats like Russia.
What role does the partnership with Ukraine play here, and in which areas?
Riho Terras: Europe stands firmly behind Ukraine, and this is a message we must make absolutely clear to Donald Trump. He may aspire to be a global peacemaker, but he does not understand Russia or the true nature of the war in Ukraine. What Europe must do is send a strong, united signal. And that is that regardless of decisions made in the White House, our support for Ukraine will continue, until victory is achieved.
Has the European Union clearly defined its objective for Ukraine’s victory in the war against Russia?
Riho Terras: The EU does not have a single, united, and clearly defined objective for what constitutes Ukraine’s victory, at least not formally. But one thing is clear and that is that it is Ukraine that ultimately has the right to define the criteria for its own victory. Personally, I believe we should accept nothing less than the full restoration of Ukraine’s territorial integrity and the prosecution of Russian war criminals, from the foot soldiers to Putin himself. But I cannot speak on behalf of the entire EU here.
Taras Moklyak, Guildhall news agency, exclusive.
Только главные новости в нашем Telegram, Facebook и GoogleNews!
Tweet