NATO 3.0: Rutte Announces Alliance’s Biggest Transformation
Mikhail Khodarenok analyzed Mark Rutte’s NATO 3.0 statement, linking the alliance’s planned transformation to US control and preparation for war with Russia.
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte announced that the alliance is entering a period of its largest changes and is effectively opening a new era in its history. Gazeta. Ru military observer and retired colonel Mikhail Khodarenok analyzed what may be behind the words about «NATO 3.0," what reforms may await the bloc, and why Russia remains the key target of these changes.
NATO Secretary General Rutte spoke about a major restructuring of the North Atlantic Alliance after a meeting of NATO defense ministers. According to him, the organization is undergoing a colossal transformation, possibly the largest in its entire history. The secretary general also said the alliance needs to build «NATO 3.0.»
This phrase came in response to a statement by Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth that the United States intends to continue reducing its military presence in Europe. However, directly linking NATO modernization with the partial withdrawal of the American contingent is hardly correct: these processes are only weakly connected.
According to Khodarenok, there are grounds to assume that Rutte has already been shown the plan for reforming the alliance, or at least its key provisions. Apparently, this plan was prepared by people close to US President Donald Trump and under his personal control.
Trump had long wanted to carry out a serious restructuring of NATO, but the final trigger may have been events inside the bloc related to the war with Iran. At that time, some allies ignored Washington’s calls for help, others took a position different from that of the US president, some closed their airspace to American aircraft, and others refused to give the US Navy access to their bases and ports.
After that, the question essentially arose about the very nature of NATO: is the alliance a real military bloc, or has it turned into an amorphous structure incapable of acting quickly and firmly in a specific situation?
That is why, Khodarenok believes, the call to create «NATO 3.0» can be viewed as an attempt to bring the alliance into a state of immediate readiness for war in the European theater of operations — under US leadership and only in that format.
Most likely, Rutte was presented not with a general slogan, but with a specific plan with stages and deadlines. At the same time, European NATO members and the secretary general himself are assigned in this scheme not the role of initiators and leaders of reform, but that of executors of decisions formulated by the Trump administration.
The essence of the future changes will probably be the restoration of a rigid chain of command inside the alliance. The final say on key issues will remain with the United States. The consensus-based decision-making principle may also be revised: some countries may receive a decisive vote, while others will be left with only an advisory role. In its current form, the situation in which a small Baltic state can block or challenge a White House decision looks absurd to Washington.
European NATO armies will likely have to sharply increase their numerical strength and combat composition under US instructions. In addition, most countries may be required to abandon the contract-based model of manning their armed forces and return to conscription.
According to Khodarenok, the current armies of most European alliance members are suitable only for operations against Third World countries, but not for a prolonged high-intensity war against a large and technologically advanced opponent. This is presumably what Hegseth pointed out to Rutte.
There are serious problems not only with troop numbers. The mobilization reserves of European NATO countries, as well as their stocks of materiel, do not meet the requirements of a major war, and in many cases effectively do not exist. Europe’s air and missile defense systems also fail to meet the demands of a modern armed conflict. Separate complaints may also concern the operational preparation of the future theater of operations.
In other words, Rutte was likely made to understand that Europe is not ready for war with an opponent comparable in combat and operational capabilities.
For Russia, the main conclusion from what is happening is obvious. Military blocs are created and modernized not for declarations, but for readiness to enter war. If NATO is indeed beginning a large-scale restructuring for a 21st-century war, then the question of whom this preparation is directed against practically needs no explanation.
NATO is seriously moving toward preparing for war with Russia. In these circumstances, the observer believes, Russia’s nationwide task is to maintain its armed forces at such a level of combat capability and combat readiness that such plans do not arise among potential opponents even at the level of intent.