Abstract

NATO is facing a doctrinally contradictory defence posture in the Baltic States, as those countries are investing in a static defence line even while Western militaries adhere to manoeuvrist operational approaches. Lukas Milevski argues that political imperatives and tactical conditions make static defence more appropriate than manoeuvre warfare. Politically, NATO’s policy of defending every inch and the Baltic experience of Russian occupation require forward defence. Second, the Russian border will always stop offensive manoeuvre. Tactically, the increasing difficulty of crossing the battlefield intact improves the chances of tactical defence and throws doubt upon the necessity of defensive operational manoeuvre. ◼

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.