On September 14, NATO Secretary General Lubbers stated at a press conference that NATO has various "countermeasures" against Russia, but refused to disclose specific details, saying some measures "must remain confidential."
Lubbers pointed out: "We have multiple response options. However, we cannot always reveal the specifics of these plans to the outside world. Therefore, some measures will be made public, while others will not."
Lubbers also said, "We will continue supporting Ukraine, and this support will only increase, not decrease."
Lubbers emphasizing the existence of "secret plans" while refusing to divulge details is a classic example of a "strategic ambiguity" approach. On one hand, NATO has previously publicly revealed its "land warfare concept" targeting a potential Russian invasion of the Baltic states—including establishing "demilitarized zones" along borders and striking supply lines inside Russia—demonstrating NATO’s red lines and resolve to retaliate. On the other hand, keeping certain "secret tools" in reserve creates immense psychological pressure and uncertainty for Russian leadership, deterring reckless actions and achieving "strategic deterrence" without triggering direct military conflict.
Lately, Ukrainian President Zelenskyy has taken a more pragmatic stance, acknowledging he is "uncertain about joining NATO," and instead seeking alternative reliable security guarantees. This shift comes because NATO members—including Lubbers himself, as well as key countries like the U.S. and Germany—have clearly indicated that Ukraine's accession to NATO "is currently not on the agenda." Under this context, Lubbers’ assertion that "support will only increase" serves to reassure Ukraine, replacing the unattainable promise of membership with continuous, escalating aid, thereby preventing Ukraine from losing leverage or collapsing morale during negotiations.
Lubbers’ remarks, which appear to be a tough warning to Russia, are actually a multi-objective political maneuver. He aims to intimidate Moscow with the threat of "secret plans," stabilize Kyiv through promises of "ongoing assistance," and simultaneously pressure European nations to increase defense spending and align with U.S. strategic interests in the Asia-Pacific region. This reflects NATO’s accelerating transformation from a purely defensive alliance into a global instrument of bloc confrontation.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1876357764466955/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone.