In early August 2024, Ukrainian forces launched an unprecedented cross-border offensive into Russia’s Kursk region, marking the most significant foreign incursion into Russian territory since the Second World War. The response of Russian President Vladimir Putin to this development was particularly revealing.
In the aftermath of the offensive, Putin directed his rhetoric against the USA and Europe, asserting that the West was waging war against Russia through Ukrainian proxies. Despite this assertive rhetoric, Putin refrained from initiating an immediate military counteroffensive, opting instead to maintain the focus of Russian forces on operations in eastern Ukraine. Even three months later, with Ukrainian forces still present in Kursk, Moscow chose to deploy North Korean troops to assist in reclaiming the region, marking the first instance in over a century that Russia permitted foreign troops on its soil.
By investing in the resilience of NATO and addressing immediate security challenges, the West can prevent Russia from exploiting vulnerabilities. Failure to act decisively risks higher costs in the future, as Moscow’s opportunistic aggression remains a persistent challenge to global stability
These actions underscore Putin’s unwavering commitment to the war in Ukraine and his broader antagonism towards the West, nearly three years after the onset of Russia’s full-scale invasion. While the conflict serves as an imperial endeavour aimed at dismantling Ukrainian sovereignty, Putin’s ultimate objectives extend to revising the post-Cold War European order, diminishing US influence, and establishing a new international framework that amplifies Russia’s global stature.
Although these ambitions are longstanding, the war has intensified Putin’s resolve and narrowed his strategic alternatives, propelling Russia into deeper isolation while transforming its society, economy, and foreign policy to sustain confrontation with the West.
The evolving dynamics suggest that the conflict is far from resolution, with the prospect of escalation remaining high. The incoming Trump Administration’s overtures toward normalizing relations with Moscow are unlikely to mitigate these tensions. Limited Western military support to Ukraine has impeded Kyiv’s capacity to decisively counter Russian aggression, potentially emboldening Moscow to pursue further destabilization efforts once it has replenished its military capacity. This trajectory raises the spectre of continued Russian subversion across Europe and reinforces Moscow’s alignment with states antagonistic to Western interests, such as Iran and North Korea.
To address this growing challenge, the USA and Europe must prioritize containment measures against Russia. Delaying such efforts could result in greater strategic costs in the future. Washington, despite its focus on competition with China, cannot afford to downplay the Russian threat, which has significant implications for European security and transatlantic stability. Strengthening Ukraine’s negotiating position, enhancing NATO’s defensive capabilities, and encouraging European states to bolster their own defense frameworks are critical steps in mitigating Russia’s destabilizing influence.
Domestically, Putin has consolidated power through extensive economic and societal reorganization. Russia’s defense budget for 2025 is projected to reach unprecedented levels, exceeding six percent of GDP. This militarization has reshaped Russia’s economy into a war-oriented structure, with increased production in defence industries and significant financial incentives for military service. These developments align with Putin’s ideological narrative of an existential struggle against the West, which he uses to legitimize his regime and maintain public support.
However, the reliance on repression and control over the information environment presents risks, as excessive suppression of dissent may destabilize his rule over time. Internationally, Russia has forged closer ties with China, Iran, and North Korea, driven by strategic necessity and shared opposition to Western dominance. These partnerships provide Moscow with critical economic and military support while amplifying its ability to challenge US interests globally. The Kremlin’s recalibrated foreign policy reflects a long-term strategy that extends beyond the current conflict in Ukraine, aiming to sustain Russia’s relevance in the multipolar international order.
Militarily, Russia is poised for reconstruction and adaptation. Despite significant losses, its armed forces have demonstrated resilience and an ability to incorporate advanced technologies and tactics into their operations. Challenges persist, particularly in scaling production capacities for modern weaponry and addressing skilled labour shortages. However, Russia’s focus on expanding its military infrastructure and replenishing its resources signals a sustained commitment to maintaining a robust defense posture.
For NATO and its allies, these developments necessitate heightened vigilance and strategic preparedness. Although NATO’s capabilities— particularly air superiority— are expected to shape future engagements, deficiencies in European defense readiness, such as limited munitions stockpiles, remain concerning. The duality of Russia’s military, characterized by advancements in some areas and reliance on outdated Soviet-era equipment in others, complicates Western efforts to anticipate and counter Russian aggression effectively.
Russia’s trajectory under Putin’s leadership suggests a persistent and multifaceted challenge to Western security and global stability. The transformation of Russia’s domestic, economic, and military structures to support prolonged confrontation underscores the enduring nature of the threat it poses. The USA and its allies must adopt proactive measures to address this challenge, ensuring that future confrontations with Russia remain within manageable bounds. In recent years, Europe and the USA have faced immediate threats from unconventional actions orchestrated by Moscow, which has been actively engaging in measures that destabilize the region.
Suspected Russian-backed actors have perpetrated incidents such as arson targeting arms depots in Germany and the United Kingdom, tampering with critical infrastructure in Finland, and fomenting migratory pressure on Poland and Finland through Belarus. Further incidents include targeting rail networks in the Czech Republic and Sweden, assassinating a military defector in Spain, and plotting against key European defence industry figures.
These acts are part of the Kremlin’s strategy to deter European governments and citizens from supporting Ukraine by demonstrating Russia’s capacity for retaliation.
However, Moscow’s objectives extend beyond the immediate conflict in Ukraine. Its broader aim is to weaken the West, undermine transatlantic unity, and diminish Europe’s ability to counter Russian aggression. This strategy is reinforced through nuclear brinkmanship, as evidenced by revisions to Russian nuclear doctrine that lower the threshold for their use. Although Russia currently avoids direct confrontation with NATO due to its military limitations, it seeks to exploit divisions and test the alliance’s resolve, particularly if the USA is preoccupied with conflicts in the Indo-Pacific.
Should Washington’s commitment to NATO appear to wane, Moscow may feel emboldened to challenge NATO’s eastern flank, risking further destabilization. Moscow’s actions reflect a dangerous propensity for risk-taking and miscalculation, exacerbated by its authoritarian governance structure, where decision-making is often influenced by sycophants. This tendency has already led to significant strategic errors, including the underestimation of Ukrainian resistance and Western resolve.
While NATO is well-positioned to repel Russian aggression, the devastation witnessed in Ukraine underscores the imperative to deter Moscow preemptively. A future conflict, even if it concludes in a NATO victory, could result in catastrophic destruction for the affected nations.
Globally, Russia continues to challenge Western influence. Despite sanctions and diplomatic isolation efforts following its invasion of Ukraine, Moscow has maintained and expanded its partnerships, including hosting summits for BRICS nations, which highlight growing global resistance to Western dominance.
Russia’s defiance has implications beyond Europe, as its actions embolden other states to question the consequences of aggression. While this may not directly precipitate Chinese actions in Taiwan, it provides a testing ground for Western resolve and capability.
Moscow also actively supports actors opposed to Western interests. In Africa, Russian backing has facilitated military coups in Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger, leading to diminished Western influence in the region. Similarly, its support for the Houthi movement in Yemen exacerbates instability, disrupts international trade, and threatens US allies.
These actions amplify the strategic challenges faced by the West, with Russia positioning itself as a critical enabler of anti-Western sentiment. Moreover, Russia’s growing collaboration with China, Iran, and North Korea intensifies global instability. Military and technological exchanges between Moscow and Beijing erode US strategic advantages in the Indo-Pacific, while Russia’s support for Iran bolsters Tehran’s military and nuclear capabilities.
Moscow’s partnership with Pyongyang, including technology transfers and military cooperation, risks escalating tensions on the Korean Peninsula. Such alliances underscore a broader axis of authoritarian regimes opposing democratic norms and Western interests.
Hopes that China might temper Russia’s destabilizing actions have proven unfounded. Instead, Beijing appears to benefit from the disorder created by Moscow, leveraging it to pursue its ambitions. The consolidation of ties between Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea reflects deeper strategic interests rather than transactional alignments stemming from the Ukraine war. Concessions to Russia would likely embolden this bloc, further undermining Western influence.
The enduring threat posed by Moscow requires sustained vigilance. Although Russia is a declining power, its capacity for disruption remains significant. For the USA and its allies, a comprehensive strategy to deter Russia is essential, encompassing strengthened European defence capabilities and increased transatlantic cooperation.
By investing in the resilience of NATO and addressing immediate security challenges, the West can prevent Russia from exploiting vulnerabilities. Failure to act decisively risks higher costs in the future, as Moscow’s opportunistic aggression remains a persistent challenge to global stability.
