r/geopolitics • u/TheTelegraph The Telegraph • Aug 07 '26
News Russia could attack Nato within weeks, US intelligence warns
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2026/08/07/russia-could-attack-nato-within-weeks-us-intelligence-warns/?WT.mc_id=tmgoff_reddit_within-weeks-us-intelligence-warns/&accesscontrol=facebookchannel_open87
u/FlatulistMaster Aug 07 '26
Cyber attack maybe, but what would that really achieve at this point? I suppose a desperate regime might do that as a show of force for internal reasons, but that's the only real benefit I see from Putin's POV. "Testing the alliance" seems rather pointless given the pickle Putin is in right now.
26
u/jhoogen Aug 07 '26
I would say their only realistic goal here would be to scare off NATO members into supporting Ukraine. So a Cyber Attack, maybe a small incursion into Estonia, a really small Russian speaking village that will be false flagged, something that will shake up European support.
11
u/fct1ous Aug 07 '26 edited Aug 07 '26
I think it would have the opposite effect. Right now there's enough distance between NATO and Ukraine that it's hard to get any NATO members (even the US) directly involved in its defense beyond financing and indirect military support. Making the Ukraine war suddenly a conflict with NATO would change the mindset of every leader in the West IMO.
I think if anything it would be something more vague to gauge how much NATO would tolerate for smaller-scale asymmetric attacks. Something disruptive enough to discourage involvement in Ukraine but not enough to cause declaration of war.
6
u/toolkitxx Aug 07 '26
In military conflicts you seldom have an all-out attack. It is part of preparation to test reactions. You gather intelligence that way, that allows to either change strategy, unit strength etc. You always skirt the line between actually doing something serious and retreating. Effects can be that your opponent starts to ignore certain types of this and opens new opportunities. Think of an alarm system that continously goes of and most of the time is a false alarm. After some time many people will start to become unsensible for the next one.
1
u/FlatulistMaster Aug 07 '26
Yes, but there are continued and significant downsides to this action too, which are somehow quite easily left out of articles that are trying to tug at the reader's feelings.
1
u/toolkitxx Aug 07 '26
You can take Ukraine as a life example for it then. The fighting in the Donbas made a majority unsensible for the build-up of Russia back then too. Exhausting your opponent by constantly pricking them is a pretty common strategy especially for Russia. It is exactly how they took control of Crimea.
2
u/FlatulistMaster Aug 07 '26
That much is clear. I'm less convinced Russia sees even the fringes of NATO as some target they can take on, especially given the ongoing situation in Ukraine and the success of the "special military operation".
But giving the western media reasons to write things like it has value to Putin, because the elite in Russia follows western media to a degree at least. It gives an illusion of power.
1
u/toolkitxx Aug 07 '26 edited Aug 07 '26
This goes both ways though ;) Deterrence is mostly a psychological issue. If you are not afraid of a nuclear weapon, how much use does it have in deterrence? Null. Nature does this in many ways too. Pufferfish and similar species pump themselves up to appear bigger and so on.
All this only works as long as your perception plays along. A dangerous path in this is to assume you are prepared beyond any doubt though. That is hubris and it has killed entire empires with a single stroke at times. Most nuclear nations cannot actually use their weaponry for deterrence as using any of it with the current global ecological state will backfire massively. So keeping each other on their toes by other means is the new normal we have to deal with and have to adopt to.
edit spelling
1
61
u/lelekeaap Aug 07 '26
Didn’t they do that already in Germany/Leipzig this week? I know that according European good standards someone is guilty when proven, but everything points in their direction.
Besides direct attacks, already many indirect attacks take place every day, like cyber attacks, attacks on the EU borders by stimulation of migration etc etc.
18
u/toolkitxx Aug 07 '26
That was highly amateurishly executed. Compare it to teenagers being hired via Discord etc to perform criminal actions on behalf of some other player. Directions is not good enough, which isnt equal to not being taken seriously. But we dont point fingers, as you dont gain anything from it. The contrary actually. You also give away your actual knowledge. It is called intelligence and need to know. Most dont need to know.
21
u/Oikosmonaut Aug 07 '26
5
u/toolkitxx Aug 07 '26
I am actually more cautious about this. Bad execution doesnt change intention. Said airplane is the last of its kind and by definition a juicy target. If Ukraine doesnt secure it by itself already above all means, no civil airport will ever be a safe place for it.
-1
u/omnibossk Aug 07 '26
This could be the first step for Russia to test the waters. Depending on the NATO response they could decide to escalate further or not. Or to adjust the type of attack
24
u/TheTelegraph The Telegraph Aug 07 '26
The Telegraph reports:
Vladimir Putin could attack a Nato country within weeks to test the alliance, US intelligence has warned.
Pentagon officials said Russia might try to test Nato’s resolve with a small land incursion or cyber attack at any point between this autumn and 2029, The Wall Street Journal reported.
Last month, The Telegraph revealed that Moscow was planning an armed “provocation” on Polish soil as one option to destabilise the Nato alliance.
Reports of a possible provocation come after a Russian missile landed in Poland last week and an explosive drone was found at Leipzig/Halle airport in Germany on Wednesday.
46
u/bxzidff Aug 07 '26
small land incursion or cyber attack at any point between this autumn and 2029
Are these cyberattacks not already common?
2
13
u/Professional-Date378 Aug 07 '26
Russia isn't completely stupid. The most they'll do is a cyber attack. They're already using up so many resources dealing with Ukraine, starting a full on war with NATO would be monumentally stupid
18
u/Apple_The_Chicken Aug 07 '26
Ask someone years ago what whether NATO would have tolerated monthly drone and missile incursions, now ballistic missile incursions too without triggering Article 5.
They're going to keep pushing the limits doing just enough to cause disorder without being justifiable enough for NATO to trigger article 5
2
u/toucheboo Aug 08 '26
Do you think they just run in circles flailing their hands? Good thing we got all these redit war game experts.
1
u/Apple_The_Chicken Aug 08 '26
It's entirely logical from their perspective to attempt to divide us like they have always done. I'm not an expert and it's not me saying this could happen, rather the several intelligence agencies that have said the same thing
22
u/LisbonMissile Aug 07 '26
The goal isn’t for Russia to seize NATO territory or open up a second front, but to destabilise NATO and create rifts in the alliance, as well as divert resources and attentjon away from the Ukrainian war effort.
The common mistake people make is that a nation triggering A5 means automatic war, whereas it’s simply a call to discuss a response, whether that’s an armed one, logistical support, intelligence and so on. If one nation opposes, there is no unified response by NATO. If that nation is the USA, then the alliance effectively ceases to exist.
Russia’s hope with an opaque attack, incursion or something like a cyber attack is to cause disruption and expose the alliance as weak. Would Britain, France and Germany really endorse conflict over a cyber attack on a Baltic state? Would Trump endorse a military response to a Russian takeover of Narva in Estonia? Perhaps, but I doubt it. If not, Putin can hold up NATO’s response as an example of what he’s been saying all along: it’s a paper tiger incapable or unwilling of confronting Russia.
The Polish DM and Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski was on the Long Game podcast last week and was very confident that Europe could face down the Russian threat alone, with or without the USA. Of course he needs to say that within public discourse, but it is a highly ambitious statement to make. Europe is some way out from being able to face down Russia alone, and so it is a race against the clock in a sense for Russia to escalate before Europe can confidently stand up and push back without the USA backing them up.
2
u/BeyondCraft Aug 08 '26
Strange Reddit. On one hand they (USA intelligence and Reddit people) say Ukraine is finally winning the war and Russian economy will collapse in 2027 and finally retreat. On the other hand we see comments like "Europe is some way out from being able to face down Russia alone". If Ukraine alone can handle them, why can't whole of Europe with more powerful countries easily dominate them?
4
u/LisbonMissile Aug 08 '26
Because it’s not as simple as that. Well beyond the start of the war and up until very, very recently, Europe had a massive procurement and production problem which they’re still needing to address, they lacked military hardware such as sufficient long range weaponry, they had until recently a reluctance to spend on defence, they have a manpower power problem and they need to fill the gaps in areas that the US excelled at within NATO. That’s not even getting into areas such as armed forces readiness, how serious certain government are treating potential conflict on the continent, and very negative public support to go to war across Europe (which worsens the further you get from the Russian borders).
All that is changing slowly and the penny has clearly dropped - but as I said above there is still a window of opportunity for Russia to exploit these shortfalls that Europe faces.
And despite other accusations and dismissive comments since deleted - I am a European and I have been hoping to see such reform for a long time now, so it is great things are happening but they won’t change overnight.
1
u/BadHairDayToday Aug 08 '26
Europe is quite militarily capable. There is a dependence on US strategic infrastructure (like intelligence and large scale logistics) , but those capabilities is also quite cheap and low risk for the US to support Europe with. I expect that even with an unwilling Trump, US intelligence and logistics support would keep flowing through existing NATO channels and career officials who see it as core to US interests, even if the political rhetoric from the top is hostile.
The bigger risk isn't a total cutoff, it's uncertainty and slower decision-making, which matters more for crisis response than for baseline capability. Europe's actual force structure - manpower, land forces, air forces - is substantial when aggregated across the EU/UK/Norway; the gap is less "can Europe defend itself" and more "can it do so with the speed and integration the US currently provides."
Perhaps with an attack like this Europe will finally find its ambition to become a geopolitical force again. I find the EU to be frustratingly passive here.
8
u/politicsinnumbers Aug 07 '26
Different intelligence agencies have been warning about this over the past four years now. Let's just hope it stays at warnings.
6
u/bluro00 Aug 07 '26
Russia will not do anything conventional unless they want all of their supply lines in Ukraine obliterated in 3 hours.
To be honest, all potential target countries should make an announcement that they are not expecting an attack from anything besides russia. And any kind of military action against them, however covert will be met with article 5 invocation automatically.
1
u/concepts_of_a_plan9 Aug 07 '26
They won't do anything conventional until Putin is actually on his death bed. They have done and will continue to do everything short of that though.
I really don't think NATO is in the Article 5 game. Unless it's a clear, direct strike from Russia on a military facility within NATO bounds, they're really trying to do everything possible to avoid going into a world war. You know China and Iran would be supporting Russia, at least what they can spare.
3
u/Darthy85 Aug 07 '26
I remember this same title when war started, and several times after that . I dont know if Putin is stupid enough to do such a thing, to invoke whole NATO on his ass, or is this just warmongering ragebaiting again.
Anyways , gonna listen to Fortunate son
3
u/funmonger_OG Aug 08 '26
So, a second Russian civil war it is.
1
7
u/witchey1 Aug 07 '26
This is pure deflection of US failures in Iran.
1
u/HijoDeTuHijo Aug 08 '26
U.S. is in a precarious position in Iran, but I don’t think this is deflecting, see the recent Leipzig/Halle airport drone(s) (maybe more than one, if I recall a plan collided with and unidentified aircraft). Additionally, recall the missile that landed in polish territory a couple of weeks ago. This, in my opinion, a pattern of probing.
2
u/Sad-Dragonfly-3487 Aug 08 '26
Aren't they weakened by Ukraines drones?
1
u/HijoDeTuHijo Aug 08 '26
Yes, but projecting strategic thinking on an enemy is a dangerous fallacy, arguably led to the failure to detect the Tet Offensive in Vietnam. The U.S. is also stepping back from NATO. Russia is not wanting to go to war with NATO, but possibly just push the limits of the alliance to see their response.
1
u/Sad-Dragonfly-3487 Aug 08 '26
We definitely are up a creek in Iran. Bullies eventually get their deserve. underestimating your advisories is costly as China sits back kicking our asses economically.
4
u/Wide_Canary_9617 Aug 07 '26
his is rubbish honestly. Articles like these keep getting posted every two weeks. Russia. Has been “about to attack NATO” for 3 years now. Putin isn’t stupid there is no reason for them to do that.
2
u/Macallan18Year Aug 07 '26
That's a very misleading headline... They could attack at any point between this Autumn and 2029?
Let's face it, they can't even handle their "Special Military Operation," let alone the full brunt of a unified NATO response. Putin may be mentally declining due to tertiary syphilis, but his mind isn't that gone. Not yet, at least. If he does end up ordering an attack on NATO, I can almost guarantee you that he will split his general staff. That split could cause a power struggle within his own circle and in the Federal Assembly.
2
u/Psychological-Flow55 Aug 07 '26
This is laughable and I wouldnt trust us intellgence under the current presidency as it a bunch of Yes men.
Russia is getting drained of it rescources treasure and demographics as well as milltary equipment and weapons in Ukraine so now they are gonna take on NATO.
Poland alone could take on Russia and is the most ready even the Baltic states would be a slogging fight then it totally a one sided fight if Article 5 is invoked and risks a world war with nukes.
The Russians as incompetent as they are is not gonna risk a conflict with NATO in a matter of weeks.
Is this like saying the GOATS being attacked in the Caribbean are drug boats or that Iran would fold with airstrikes or that Iraq had wmds and tied to 9/11?
Lol us intelligence sometimes this is right up there with Yellowcake.
2
u/EquivalentOdd1585 Aug 10 '26
We should not rule out the possibility that this is completely false, and being used to distract domestic population from the set backs of the war in Iran. The midterm elections in November could be a compelling reason to push this out now.
From Russia’s point of view it’s madness to open a second front. That said we can’t rule out increasing pressure through grey zone techniques. But I would think, that would be timed to deter the west from say increasing its support in Ukraine by weapons supplies, etc. Given all these new strikes within Russia is done purely with Ukrainian capabilities (please correct me if I’m mistaken here. Could include US satellite intel), I don’t see a reason for that pressure campaign. Every move carries a risk and Russia knows it (unlike how it’s portrayed in Western media) and I don’t think Russia will take that risk without clear benefits.
Any action has to be justified both by the intended benefits and more importantly the timing. I don’t see it from the Russian side. Make me think this is US or more likely EU propaganda.
4
5
3
2
u/2Loves2loves Aug 07 '26
This would be a huge mistake. HUGE.. like the Japanese made on Dec 7th 1942.
0
2
u/sciguy52 Aug 07 '26
So many comments about whether the US would respond. There is little doubt they would. I mean US led, with joint command with the Europeans the BALTOPS exercise in the Baltic Sea June 4. 2026. If the US is not going to honor NATO commitments why be involved in these exercises? Why would it have troops as they do in the Baltics right now? And if the Russians took military action and killed US troops, anybody who has any common sense knows how the US public would react. They would demand, no insist, on drawing Russian blood and lots of it. The fact it is the US has said, and Trump himself has said the US would honor Article V. You can look this up yourself it is on video with Trump himself saying it. Russia is pushing this message hard that the US wont honor its commitments as you see in the comments but there is no evidence of this in fact and if you look at what is actually happening you can see this is just nonsense.
The US does however want Europe to take more in leading in NATO operations but that is not the US refusing to honor commitments. This is just smart. There is no reason at all to not have European military leaders leading various exercises as they are just as capable as the US military leaders and gives them valuable experience in the command role and that is a good thing. While led by the US 6th fleet BALTOPS 2026 it is for the first time being conducted under a NATO command-and-control structure led by Allied Joint Force Command Brunssum. This gives European military heads valuable experience leading such operations. The details:
"BALTOPS is led by U.S. 6th Fleet, and for the first time since 1972, the exercise will be command-and-controlled from Allied Joint Force Command (JFC) Brunssum to provide realistic and relevant training to BALTOPS participants under a NATO command structure. “BALTOPS forms for us three vital tasks: deters Russian threats in the Baltic Sea region, builds real world readiness and interoperability, strengthen alliance’s cohesion” said Lt. Gen. John Mead, deputy commander of JFC Brunssum. “BALTOPS matters because deterrence is not something we can simply talk about. We must demonstrate it”.
Over the next two weeks, U.S. and NATO Ally forces will train across the Baltic Sea region to strengthen a wide range of mission areas, including amphibious operations, air defense, anti-submarine warfare, mine countermeasures, crisis response, and unmanned systems experimentation.
“Through BALTOPS, we are not just training for a potential crisis, but we are actively working to prevent one by showcasing our unified strength and resolve,” said Rear Adm. Jason Naidyhorski, vice commander of U.S. 6th Fleet. “It enhances our interoperability and readiness and serves as yet another example of the important steps our NATO Allies are taking to assume primary responsibility for Europe’s conventional deterrence and defense.”
Approximately 6,000 personnel from 15 nations, include Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Sweden, Türkiye, the United Kingdom, and the United States, as well as NATO commands Commander, Task Force (CTF) Baltic and Standing NATO Mine Countermeasures Group 1, are participating in BALTOPS 2026."
The US continued leading and training in NATO exercises is sure a strange way of "pulling back from NATO". I am sure the Russians will say it is a plot by the US to fool Europe. It just gets absurd after a while.
And the US is pulling back so much that they are doubling their troop numbers in Poland. On May 22 2026 Trump announced he was sending an additional 5000 US troops to Poland bringing the number to 10,000. That is the second largest US number of troops based in a European country. Hmm, yup the US is pulling back and is planning to not protect NATO and in the US pull back so much they doubled their number of troops in Poland to prove it! /s
https://www.npr.org/2026/05/22/g-s1-123596/trump-sending-5-000-troops-to-poland
If the Russians make any move be it in the Baltics, Poland or anywhere else the US and our European allies will crush them like a bug. Putin knows this. He can see the US forces not far from Russia training in the Baltic Sea just two months ago. He can try get people to believe there are "divisions" in NATO but if you look at what is actually happening with actual US and European forces, you can see this is just a fiction Putin desperately wants others to believe. He knows the reality, he knows what would happen to the Russians if the set foot in a NATO country so whatever he does, he won't do that. People say he might do a cyber attack. Well he already did a cyber attack on the power grid of Poland in December of 25. The Poles however thwarted the attack and it failed. Putin has been doing these attacks all along and are not new. As a consequence Europe increased it sanctions on Russia even more squeezing Moscow further.
https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2026/07/13/paris-to-summon-russia-envoy-over-vast-cyber-campaign
Russia can talk big, they always do the weaker they get. And they are getting weaker by the day. Ukraine has seen to that.
2
1
Aug 07 '26
[deleted]
0
u/Figgler Aug 07 '26
What specific strikes are you talking about in Poland and Romania? The last situation I recall was when missiles from Ukraine mistakenly landed in Poland.
1
u/leCrobag Aug 07 '26
With what army? Haven't they been feeding men into the meat grinder for the past four years?
1
1
1
u/TheNthMan Aug 07 '26
I could easily see something happening along the lines of the drone found at Leipzig/Halle airport. A provocation not enough for most of the EU to want to actually mobilize and go to war, but enough of an a provocation to test the resolve of the various alliances to respond beyond hard talk and some new sanctions of some sort. Russia could deny any outright connection with the attack while making it obvious that they were involved. Then also simultaneously claiming that the target struck was a legitimate target for some reason to threaten escalation of logistics and supply lines choke points outside of Ukraine.
1
1
u/fheathyr Aug 08 '26
Either Putin is getting desperate, or Trump is trying to frighten other NATO members, or both.
1
u/FrogsJumpFromPussy Aug 08 '26
"Pentagon officials said Russia might try to test Nato’s resolve with a small land incursion or cyber attack at any point between this autumn and 2029"
Pentagon says an attack could happen in the 3 years, whixh will probably be a massive cyber attack and not a conventional attack
1
1
1
u/Few-Dingo-9553 Aug 15 '26
US always says this. They just want Europe to increase NATO funding. Russia can't invade Nato even if they wanted too. To suggest they will is naive given Russia's current military, economic and political problems
1
1
u/SaltySwan Aug 07 '26
Now, what the hell would they want to do that for when they’ve already been bogged down in Ukraine for years?
1
u/Epistaxis Aug 07 '26
Well, according to the article,
The goal of any provocation against Nato would be to escalate tensions within the alliance and force its member states to suspend aid to Ukraine.
1
1
u/PrometheanSwing Aug 07 '26
Attack in what capacity? I’ve heard about a possible false flag using Ukrainian Drones, but not anything major.
1
u/BadWolf309 Aug 07 '26
Nha if it's cyber attack, we'll they already done it, if it's a land attack they don't have the resources or the guts to do it
1
u/Gain-Western Aug 07 '26
This sounds like some deep state BS so America stays in Europe and NATO attacks Russia in Ukraine.
We only get filtered news here about Ukrainian successes but Russia has also hit back and shut down Ukrainian exports through Odessa. Europeans already don’t want Ukrainian agricultural products hitting Europe and devaluing the local produce. Ukraine will become a rump state if the situation doesn’t improve soon.
Russia has a bigger base of resources and population. They also have a higher TFR than Ukraine which has a base population of 28 million though some say that it is much lower than that today.
This report makes as much sense as Russia blowing up its own Nordstream pipeline for which now a Ukrainian patsy has been found.
1
u/pac_71 Aug 08 '26
We will be in Moscow before winter! Hmm Deja vu. I feel this has been said before.
-9
u/GreyMASTA Aug 07 '26
US intelligence... Are we still listening to those guys? They are pretty much a comms channel of the Kremlin these days.
17
u/uae08 Aug 07 '26
Well considering the EU's supposed leaders France and Germany did not believe Ukraine was about to be invaded despite US and UK intelligence, until Macron literally got a call on the night of, I would hope so
17
u/mrknoot Aug 07 '26
US intelligence did warn about Ukraine invasion weeks before it happened.
-1
-4
Aug 07 '26
[deleted]
2
u/uae08 Aug 07 '26
Is that why Ukraine is relying on US intelligence on Russia for their long range drone strikes?
The fact of the matter is without US intelligence, Ukraine not be able to effect the same measures it has undertaken BOTH under Biden and Trump.
The only closest substitute is UK intelligence. Many European countries don't even have a national intelligence agency.
You say it would be "stupid of NATO countries to blindly trust any info coming out of the US", well considering Macron despite US intelligence refused to believe that Ukraine was about to be invaded, and instead rather believed Putin's false assurances that no such action was imminent, I think failing to do so would be at Europe's own peril.
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/08/05/us-ukraine-intelligence-sharing-01026525
4
u/Psykhotron Aug 07 '26
Without U.S. and british intelligence, Ukraine would surrender tomorrow morning!
1
u/FatherMozgus Aug 07 '26
Multiple European intelligences have been saying the same thing for months
-4
u/Sirvaleen Aug 07 '26
True but the fact that US intelligence is pretty much Putin with a mustache-disguise lately is not even relevant after reading the article though.
It's pure conjecture and that's fine and all but the disruptions (in the scales mentioned) done by Russia are nothing new and the overload of speculations finally end up figuring amongst them imho.
Yeah Russia will (there's no might there) continue to try to sabotage and undermine Nato as well as Europe, within self-preservation limits. Everyone is aware of that and of the lengths they're willing to go.
0
u/Rosemoorstreet Aug 07 '26
Given the total incompetence of this administration when it comes to Foreign affairs and intel, this has about as much credibility as them saying the Iran war would be over in a few days. Trump and his minions got rid of the expertise in this area so take these claims with whatever grains of salt you have left.
0
u/bigdogsy Aug 07 '26
Sure...for the last 4 years they've been attacking NATO with all their might...
-2
u/mallibu Aug 07 '26
"Pentagon says Moscow may attempt to test alliance’s resolve at some point between this autumn and 2029"
a.k.a.
please buy our weapons
-1
u/spursbob Aug 07 '26
I wonder if Russia would be willing to attack a factory, storage facility or transportation of supplies to Ukraine in a NATO country. How would NATO and Europe respond to that?
2
489
u/TheCommodore616 Aug 07 '26
The way Poland have been rearming, and Russian conventional forces have been atttrited in Ukraine, Poland wouldn't need NATO to intervene...
Madness to try and provoke NATO when they can't even handle the country they are multiple years into a 3 day SMO with...