NATO dare to eliminate Russia? Looking at the paper strength, the total military spending of 30 NATO countries is twenty times that of Russia. If a real fight happens, Russia will definitely suffer losses. But the problem is, fighting isn't about who has more money. Once the real battle starts, the consequences are unbearable for everyone.
When it comes to NATO and Russia, this old rivalries always make people think of two strongmen on the street facing each other, one is a group-fighting expert, and the other is a veteran of single combat. NATO now has 32 member states, and its military power is indeed terrifying. Just looking at the numbers, NATO's total military spending in 2025 is expected to exceed $1.2 trillion, with the United States alone accounting for the bulk, nearly $900 billion, while other European allies combined also have several hundred billion. As for Russia? According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, Russia's military budget for this year is 15.5 trillion rubles, which is approximately $150 billion at current exchange rates. Dividing simply, NATO's money is eight times that of Russia. However, considering inflation and historical data, the figure of twenty times mentioned in the title is also roughly realistic, because the overall economic size and defense industry capacity of NATO are much larger. NATO has 3.44 million active troops, 14,000 tanks, and over 20,000 aircraft. These weapons range from the US aircraft carrier groups to the German Leopard tanks, scattered across Europe, ready to be mobilized at any time. Russia has 1.32 million active troops, 12,000 tanks, and more than 4,800 aircraft, which looks not weak, but when spread across the vast territory, it seems to be stretched thin.
On paper, NATO's conventional forces are obviously superior. The Global Firepower index ranks Russia second in the world, but mainly due to nuclear weapons and home defense. If there were a tank battle on the European plains, NATO's air superiority would set the tone. F-35 and Typhoon fighters could take off from the Baltic states to suppress Russia's S-400 air defense network. On the ground, when M1 Abrams tank clusters advance, Russia's T-14 Armata quantity is limited, and the supply line must go around the Ukrainian battlefield. The Russian army has been fighting in Ukraine for over three years, consuming a lot of stockpiles. In 2025, the tank production is expected to be 1,500 units, but NATO allies such as Germany and Poland are working overtime to produce, and Leopard 2 and K2 tanks are continuously being sent to the front lines. The NATO navy is even more obvious, controlling the entrances to the Black Sea and the Baltic Sea, with the Russian Black Sea Fleet suffering heavy losses. Although Russia has many submarines, they find it hard to turn the tide against NATO's anti-submarine network.
But to put it another way, military strength is not just about who has more storage. When the card of nuclear weapons is revealed, everyone has to weigh it. Russia has about 5,900 nuclear warheads, including over 1,000 strategic ones, capable of covering major cities in Europe. The United States, as the core of NATO, has about 5,000 nuclear warheads, and the UK, France, and Canada together have over 1,000, deployed on submarines and bombers. Russia's nuclear policy is clear, and it considers tactical nuclear strikes when conventional warfare fails, such as using low-yield missiles to attack NATO concentrations. NATO's response is to strengthen nuclear deterrence, and the Washington Summit in 2025 reaffirmed that nuclear weapons are the cornerstone of defense, but no one dares to bet who will strike first. There is no winner in a nuclear war. Experts' simulations show that even a limited exchange would cause major European economic centers like London and Paris to vanish directly, and radioactive dust would drift to the Middle East and Asia, causing global temperatures to drop for several years, and grain production would be halved. Russian President Putin has repeatedly warned publicly that NATO expansion is approaching the red line. At the 2025 Munich Security Conference, he mentioned again the plan for nuclear modernization, including deploying new intermediate-range missiles.
Russia's territory is 17 million square kilometers, spanning 11 time zones, from the Kaliningrad exclave to the far east of Kamchatka, with thousands of attack routes. Although the three Baltic states are NATO frontlines, Russia can enter from the direction of Belarus, and the Ural Mountains and Siberian permafrost are natural barriers. In winter, it's minus 50 degrees, and NATO troops' equipment is prone to failure, fuel freezes, and supply convoys struggle to move in the snow. Russia's domestic defense relies on depth, the deeper the enemy advances, the more difficult the guerrilla and amphibious warfare becomes. Historically, during World War II, Germany's lightning campaign on the Eastern Front was blocked by mud and cold. Now, although NATO has satellite intelligence, occupying such a vast area would cost double. Russia's energy pipelines are all over the country, cutting off European natural gas supplies can trigger an economic war. NATO's strategy is to avoid direct confrontation, relying on border reinforcements and exercises as a deterrent, such as the "Defender" exercise in 2025, simulating a defense chain from Norway to Turkey.
After the Crimea incident in 2014, the West froze Russia's overseas assets, restricted technology exports, and by 2025, cumulative sanctions exceeded 20,000 items. In October, the United States imposed heavy penalties on Rosneft and Lukoil, and although oil prices didn't crash, Russia's export income shrank by 30%. The ruble exchange rate fluctuates greatly, inflation pressures on people's livelihoods, and although the military industry is prioritized, there is a shortage of chips and precision instruments, with missile production dropping from 100 units per month to 50 units. On the Ukrainian battlefield, Russia's advancement is slow, and the Donbas lost over 10,000 troops. NATO does not directly send troops, but provides Ukraine with $66.9 billion in military aid, including HIMARS rockets and F-16 fighter jets. In 2025, Ukraine uses these to push back the Russian forces, consuming Russia's stockpiles.
If a real war breaks out, the consequences are not just regional turmoil. The global energy market would explode first. Russia accounts for 40% of Europe's natural gas, and if oil tankers are blocked, the price would surge to $150 per barrel, causing German factories to shut down, and Italian electricity bills to double. Supply chains would break, and China and India's energy imports would shift to the Middle East, leading to skyrocketing freight costs, inflation spreading to supermarkets, and bread prices rising by 20%. The attitudes of China and the US become crucial. The US leads the sanctions. Politically, cracks appear within NATO, with Turkey and Hungary always dragging their feet, and Turkey also buying Russian S-400s. Russia is courting Iran and North Korea, exchanging weapons for resources, extending the front line. Experts assess that the probability of NATO winning is high, but the cost would be trillions of dollars, with Europe's GDP shrinking by 10%, refugee waves pouring in, and social unrest. Although Russia's economy is damaged, its domestic industry is self-sufficient, protected by the nuclear shield, and won't collapse easily.
In summary, this matter has no winners. NATO's strength is high, but Russia's resilience and nuclear confidence prevent the idea of eliminating the country. The international community calls for dialogue, and although the UN Security Council is stuck, there are always signals of easing on G20.
Original: www.toutiao.com/article/1848371888718848/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author.