Is Narva next? That's the question being asked more and more frequently in Western media these days. The idea is that if the war in Ukraine comes to an end, Russia might feel tempted to test a NATO country.

Narva is said to be a suitable target because it could serve as the stage for a "little green men" scenario similar to what happened in Crimea. Since the residents of Narva are predominantly Russian-speaking, it would be easy to rush to their "rescue" under the slogan: Let's save our compatriots from the oppression of a fascist government! And because this would essentially be a hybrid attack ("those people aren't ours!"), Article 5 might not even be triggered.

Bases and security

I remember that when Estonia joined NATO in 2004 and Vladimir Putin's Russia began showing the first signs of expansionist ambition, I argued — in television and radio programs as well as in print — that the best guarantee of Estonia's security would be a permanent NATO base in Narva. This was met with discomfort, to put it mildly, by many who saw no threat in Russia at the time. I was accused of warmongering. Subsequent events made clear where the truth lay.

Of course, it is welcome news that now, 21 years later, it has been decided that the Estonian Defense Forces will establish a base in Narva, housing more than 200 Estonian and allied troops. It is encouraging that Estonia is set to spend as much as 5.4 percent of its GDP on defense, that a defense industry park and an explosives plant are being developed.

And, as if out of the blue, it was announced that Estonia's first drone training center has been completed in Nurmsi — featuring Europe's largest grass airfield and funded with money from Luxembourg, no less. On top of all that, there's even talk that Estonia might begin tinkering with developing its own cruise missile.

Enviable Lithuania

Still, there's a twinge of envy in the fact that a classic NATO base isn't coming to Narva, but to Lithuania instead. As is well known, a permanent base for German units — complete with barracks and housing for soldiers' families — is set to be completed there next year.

The base is planned to accommodate up to 4,000 troops, will cost more than €2 billion and will, importantly, be located just 20 kilometers from the border of Belarus, a vassal state of Russia. For those who may have forgotten, Belarusian territory was used to launch attacks on Ukraine, and at various times it has been employed for orchestrating migrant provocations.

This marks a historic event, as never before since World War II have German soldiers been permanently stationed abroad.

The rise of Poland

It's no exaggeration to say that Europe is currently facing a serious security crisis. On top of the war in Ukraine comes the unpredictability of a new U.S. administration. It is not out of the question that Washington could drastically scale back its commitment to alliances with European countries — or, in the longer term, withdraw into itself entirely.

That's why it's wise for the small Baltic states to start strengthening their ties — especially military ones — with nearby or like-minded countries. Chief among them are Finland, Sweden and Poland.

In particular, greater investment should be made in relations with Poland. First, Poland has played a key logistical role in supplying weapons to Ukraine. Second, the country has a historically clear-eyed understanding of what Russia truly represents. After all, the wounds of the Katyn massacre are far from healed.

Most importantly, Poland has put itself forward as one of Europe's new leaders. Prime Minister Donald Tusk recently declared that Poland must become the leading economic and military power in Eastern Europe. The development and current capability of Poland's armed forces are already impressive, and there are plans to double the size of the army in the near future. It's also significant that this stronger Poland has pledged to defend the Baltic states. Poland has not ruled out the possibility of "hosting" allied nuclear weapons on its territory, if necessary.

NATO's director of nuclear policy, Jim Stokes, recently told the "Välisilm" program that, in his view, placing nuclear weapons in countries bordering Russia does not enhance their security.

That's a debatable position. It seems unlikely that Russia would have attacked Ukraine if the country had still possessed nuclear weapons. Unfortunately, under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, Ukraine gave up its share of the Soviet Union's nuclear arsenal to Russia. In return, the United Kingdom, Russia and the United States pledged to guarantee Ukraine's security. Bill Clinton, who was U.S. president at the time, has since said he is ashamed of breaking that promise.

--

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