"I think the West should learn from the war in Ukraine that mass matters. We cannot rely solely on a small arsenal of very expensive, highly precise, and highly effective weapons. We still need numbers and mass to seriously deter Russia, and if deterrence fails, to repel and defend against Russia," Tarien told "Vikerhommik" on Wednesday while discussing air defense.

The former Air Force commander explained that historically, the U.S. and its Western allies have relied more on aircraft for their air defense, while the Russian side has focused on air defense missiles. Only recently has the West started to pay more attention to air defense missiles, placing greater importance on ground-based air defense systems.

The West also believed itself to be behind Russia's military technology, Tarien added, but the full-scale invasion has disproved this.

"We thought that we were behind Russian technology, that Russia was very large and capable, but in reality, we are technically superior, though we have fallen behind Russia in terms of mass. Russia has focused on mass production and has stockpiled systems in huge quantities. The West needs to adapt to this, and that adjustment is already underway," he said.

Tarien, the current head of NATO's Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence in Tallinn, also highlighted the U.S. Patriot air defense system. This was already considered obsolete, but it works significantly better in Ukraine than Russia's technology.

No one can build total air defense

Tarien also acknowledged that although Israel has managed to repulse two major missile attacks by Iran recently with very little damage, including Tusday's which had over 200 missiles. But no country can build a completely reliable air defense system.

"Most countries in the world would struggle if faced with such an attack. This includes the U.S. While the U.S. could concentrate its resources in a specific area if they knew a strike was imminent, they do not have a constant state of readiness or a permanent defense shield. Given the size of the territory, it's practically impossible; even all of the world's resources wouldn't be able to provide such dense coverage over such a vast area," he said.

Advance warning is crucial

In this regard, Tarien repeatedly stressed the importance of early warning and intelligence to help prepare for a possible air attack.

"It is crucial to know about such [attack intentions] in advance — to know that someone has a serious intent," he said. "On both occasions when Iran has launched missiles at Israel in the past year, U.S. intelligence publicly stated, and Israeli intelligence surely also knew, that such an intent existed. Their missile defense shield was able to function very well, with practically nothing getting through. This prior knowledge, the early warning, the first layer — intelligence — is the most important," he said.

The proof of this is Hamas' October attack on Israel 7 last year. Israeli intelligence had little information and therefore the damage was significant. "When Israel's early warning, meaning intelligence, did not function on October 7 last year, they were seriously hit both on the ground and by missiles."

The advance warning time is shorter if the enemy's attack plans are forgotten or ignored by intelligence or if it is carried out by a "lone wolf." Decisions then have to be made quickly.

"So first comes intelligence and early warning, when a missile has been launched. Then sensors detect it and calculate its trajectory. Then there's a decision point—whether the decision is delegated to machines or involves humans. This is where the big difference lies: whether early warning indicates that an attack is coming or whether it's peacetime and a complete surprise. In the latter case, a human is usually the decision-maker, and that takes time. We don't want to shoot down a hobby pilot just because an unidentified flying object appears. So I emphasize once again, intelligence and early warning are crucial," said Tarien .

"Once humans or machines have determined that it is a missile and it has a dangerous trajectory, only then is the countermeasure activated — in this case, an air defense missile. These are designed to fly close to the attacking missile and detonate their warhead, causing damage to the incoming missile, which then falls out of the sky," he said, explaining how anti-aircraft systems work.

Estonia will soon have two layers of air defense

Commenting on Estonia's air defense, Tarien mentioned the cost: "I believe that in repelling Iran's attack a few days ago, Israel probably spent the equivalent of Estonia's entire annual defense budget, or something in that range. It's hard to estimate exact numbers without knowing which missiles were used. We need to look at our budget realistically."

He also referred to the layered nature of air defense, where Estonia has both short and mid-range air defense. "The procurement includes the Iris-T system from the German company Diehl, which has proven itself very effective in Ukraine," he added.

"And the higher tier of the defense shield, which in Ukraine is provided by the Patriot system, is so resource-intensive that I don't believe Estonia will have the means to acquire it independently within the next 10 to 15 years. In this regard, we will have to rely on our allies," said Tarien.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!