Global Affairs Session 96 21 September 2026

EUROPE WANTS WAR?

Why the sudden war-cries against Russia

Europe's rhetoric toward Russia has hardened sharply during August-September 2026. Russia intensified missile and drone attacks on Ukraine, while Ukraine expanded deep strikes against Russian refineries and Moscow itself. Poland, France, Germany and Switzerland raised security warnings, although NATO says no direct attack is imminent. Washington still mixes sanctions, negotiations and restraint. The central argument is whether stronger European deterrence lowers the risk of war, or whether accumulating military steps make NATO-Russia escalation easier.

Summary

Europe's rhetoric toward Russia has hardened sharply during August-September 2026.

Russia intensified missile and drone attacks on Ukraine, while Ukraine expanded deep strikes against Russian refineries and Moscow itself. Poland, France, Germany and Switzerland raised security warnings, although NATO says no direct attack is imminent.

Washington still mixes sanctions, negotiations and restraint. The central argument is whether stronger European deterrence lowers the risk of war, or whether accumulating military steps make NATO-Russia escalation easier.

Why Europe's language hardened

1. European rhetoric hardened sharply after August incidents, intensified Russian strikes, and growing fears of hybrid attacks.
2. The Economist described the war as intensifying, expanding and stuck, with northern Europe preparing for prolonged confrontation.
3. Financial Times highlighted European concerns about sabotage, cyber operations, espionage, drones, and weak deterrence.
4. Germany attributed an attempted explosive drone attack at Leipzig airport to Russia, which Moscow denied.
5. Von der Leyen proposed a European Security Council and coordinated responses to sabotage and drone incidents.
6. The debate is shifting from supporting Ukraine toward protecting Europe directly from a wider confrontation.

Is Russia European?

1. Transcontinental Status: Russia is fundamentally a Eurasian nation, spanning across both Europe and Asia.
2. Geographic Divide: The Ural Mountains serve as the conventional physical border separating European Russia from Asian Russia.
3. Land vs. Population: Approximately 75% of Russia’s landmass lies in Asia, yet the vast majority of its population resides in the European section, which hosts major cities like Moscow and St. Petersburg.
4. European political ties: Historically and politically, Russia has been deeply entrenched in European affairs for centuries, a trend that accelerated significantly during the reign of Peter the Great.
5. Dual Identity: The country maintains a unique hybrid character, balancing strong Eurasian geographic features with heavily European demographic and historical development.

Russia Europe relations – deep history

1. 1200s–1400s: Mongol domination weakened Russian links with Western Europe while Moscow gradually emerged as the leading Russian centre.
2. 1500s–1600s: Muscovy expanded westward, frequently clashing with Poland-Lithuania and Sweden while increasing trade and diplomatic contacts with Europe.
3. 1682–1725: Peter the Great westernised Russia, built St Petersburg and strengthened European military, technological and cultural connections.
4. 1700–1721: Russia defeated Sweden in the Great Northern War, gaining Baltic access and becoming a major European power.
5. 1760s–1790s: Catherine the Great expanded Russian influence through wars, diplomacy and the partitions of Poland.
6. 1800–1815: Russia fought Napoleon, helped defeat France and became a central power in post-Napoleonic European diplomacy.
7. 1815–1900: Russia alternated cooperation and rivalry with European powers, especially during the Crimean War and Balkan crises.

Russia Europe relations – 20th century

1. 1900–1917: Imperial Russia remained a major European power, joining Britain and France against Germany and Austria-Hungary in World War I.
2. 1917–1939: Bolshevik Revolution created ideological hostility; Soviet Russia faced isolation, though diplomatic and economic relations gradually resumed.
3. 1939–1945: Nazi-Soviet Pact collapsed after Germany invaded USSR; Soviets then became crucial Allies against Nazi Germany.
4. 1945–1991: Europe divided during the Cold War - Soviet-dominated Eastern Europe confronted NATO-backed Western Europe.
5. 1991–2000s: Soviet collapse encouraged cooperation; Russia developed closer political, economic and security links with European institutions and NATO.
6. 2000s–2014: Cooperation increasingly mixed with tensions over NATO enlargement, European security arrangements, Georgia and competing regional interests.
7. 2014–2026: Crimea and especially the 2022 Ukraine invasion transformed relations into confrontation, sanctions, military deterrence and reduced cooperation.

September 2026 – Russia hitting Ukraine harder

1. Russia has intensified attacks on Ukrainian logistics, industry, transport, energy facilities, and urban areas.
2. Strikes happened on warehouses, steel plants, railways, ports, and major distribution networks.
3. Ukraine says these attacks are increasingly designed to weaken economic resilience alongside battlefield pressure.
4. Russia has expanded ballistic attacks, including modified RM48U training missiles launched from S-400 systems.
5. On September 20, Russian drones killed four civilians in Kyiv region, including three children.
6. Russia says it targets military and logistical infrastructure, while civilian casualties continue to rise.

Ukraine taking the war deep inside Russia

1. Ukraine has expanded long-range strikes against Russian refineries, logistics hubs, military sites, and energy infrastructure.
2. Kyiv says the objective is reducing Russian fuel production, military support capacity, and state revenue.
3. Russian refineries faced repeated drone attacks throughout 2026, forcing shutdowns, restrictions, and production cuts.
4. On September 20, Ukraine launched the largest reported drone attack yet against the Moscow region.
5. The war's geography has widened, with both sides striking infrastructure far beyond the conventional frontline.

Death toll after four and a half years

1. Russia's full-scale invasion began on 24 February 2022.
2. The Economist estimates 3,73,000 to 6,97,000 Russian military deaths by September 20, midpoint roughly 5,06,000.
3. Mediazona and Meduza separately estimated 3,52,000 Russian military deaths through the end of 2025.
4. Ukraine reported 55,000 military deaths in February; CSIS estimated 1,00,000 to 1,40,000 through December 2025.
5. Using those non-equivalent estimates, Russian deaths average about 300 daily; Ukrainian estimates imply 70 to 100.
6. UN monitors recorded at least 17,234 civilian deaths in Ukraine through August 2026, averaging about ten daily.
7. Daily figures are arithmetic averages across the war, not estimates of the current day's battlefield deaths.

Poland, France and Germany fear danger moving west

1. Poland increasingly warns that Russian attacks and hybrid activity are moving closer to NATO territory.
2. Donald Tusk said Poland must prepare for provocations, while avoiding claims that a Russian attack is certain.
3. Poland joined an anti-ballistic missile coalition with Ukraine and announced another military assistance package.
4. France says Russian hybrid threats have intensified and ordered stronger protection for critical infrastructure.
5. Germany's Leipzig attribution reinforces fears that confrontation may increasingly occur below NATO's Article Five threshold.
6. Russia denies planning attacks on NATO and rejects European allegations of orchestrated sabotage and drone operations.

Pacifist Putin

1. Post-9/11 cooperation (2001): Russia expanded intelligence sharing with the United States, opened Russian airspace to humanitarian flights connected with the Afghanistan campaign, increased support for the Northern Alliance, and accepted a temporary U.S. military presence in parts of Central Asia.
2. Bundestag address (2001): Putin used his September 2001 address to Germany's Bundestag to support European integration, declare the Cold War over, and present Russia as seeking democratic development and closer partnership with Europe.
3. NATO-Russia Council (2002): Russia and NATO established the NATO-Russia Council, where Russia and individual NATO members were formally to work as equal partners on agreed areas including counterterrorism, arms control and search-and-rescue cooperation.
4. Closure of Cold War-era overseas facilities (2001–02): Russia closed its Lourdes intelligence facility in Cuba and withdrew from Cam Ranh Bay in Vietnam, citing changing security requirements and costs; the moves also occurred amid a broader attempt to improve relations with Washington.
5. Norway-Russia maritime settlement (2010): Under President Dmitry Medvedev, Russia and Norway concluded a treaty resolving a maritime delimitation dispute that had been negotiated for roughly four decades while maintaining established fisheries cooperation.
6. WTO accession (2012): Russia joined the WTO after nearly two decades of negotiations, accepting international trade disciplines and commitments that included reductions in many tariff ceilings.
7. Syrian chemical-weapons agreement (2013): Russia and the Obama administration negotiated a framework that put Syria's declared chemical-weapons stockpile under OPCW/UN supervision for removal and destruction, although later investigations found that Syria's declaration had not covered its entire chemical-weapons programme.
8. New START extension (2021): Russia and the Biden administration mutually agreed to a clean five-year extension of New START, maintaining limits and verification mechanisms governing the two countries' strategic nuclear forces.

Neutral Switzerland is warning about the threat!

1. Switzerland matters because it remains militarily neutral and outside NATO, yet its security warnings have hardened.
2. Swiss army chief Benedikt Roos warned that critical infrastructure could attract hostile Russian attention.
3. On September 18, Switzerland formally adopted its 2026 Security Policy Strategy after months of consultation.
4. The strategy says citizens and institutions should recognise heightened threats and prepare to protect the country.
5. It prioritises resilience, civilian protection, stronger defence capabilities, and preparedness against long-range weapons.
6. Switzerland still assesses a direct armed attack as unlikely, distinguishing preparedness from predicting imminent war.

America following a different path

1. Washington is pursuing diplomacy, sanctions, and selective restraint rather than simply matching Europe's harder rhetoric.
2. Trump said Putin appeared willing to make a deal, though European and Ukrainian officials remain sceptical.
3. On September 14, Trump urged Ukraine to stop attacks against Russian diesel infrastructure.
4. Both Russia and Ukraine continued energy strikes despite Trump's attempt to secure a limited ceasefire.
5. Washington also increased pressure through new Russia sanctions while continuing direct negotiations with both sides.
6. By September 20, Trump and Zelensky had agreed to meet during the United Nations General Assembly.

John Mearsheimer, 1914 and 1938

1. Analyst John Mearsheimer argues Russia retains the stronger attritional position and Ukrainian deep strikes cannot reverse that balance.
2. He rejects claims that Moscow plans to conquer NATO states, focusing instead on Ukraine's strategic alignment.
3. His warning is that deeper Western involvement could eventually provoke Russian retaliation against NATO-linked targets.
4. European governments counter that insufficient deterrence could encourage more coercion, sabotage, and military pressure.
5. The 1914 analogy warns how alliances, mobilisation, fear, and miscalculation can widen a regional crisis.
6. The 1938 analogy warns that concessions to an expansionist power can fail to produce lasting peace.

Conclusion

The evidence does not clearly show a unified Europe seeking war.

It shows widening violence, deeper Ukrainian strikes, heavier Russian attacks and growing European fear of spillover.

Poland and France favour stronger deterrence. Switzerland is strengthening preparedness while still calling direct attack unlikely. Washington continues sanctions and diplomacy simultaneously. Mearsheimer argues escalation itself is becoming the danger.

Europe therefore faces a difficult question: how to deter Russia effectively without turning an indirect confrontation into a direct NATO-Russia war.

Value addition

Glossary and related terms

Deterrence

A security strategy intended to discourage an adversary from taking an action by making the expected costs or risks appear too high.

Hybrid attack

A hostile action that combines or alternates military and non-military tools such as cyber operations, sabotage, disinformation, covert activity or economic pressure.

Sabotage

Deliberate damage or disruption directed at equipment, infrastructure, production or services.

Cyber operation

An action conducted through computer networks or digital systems, including espionage, disruption, intrusion or defence.

Critical infrastructure

Systems and facilities whose disruption can seriously affect essential services, public safety, the economy or national security.

NATO

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization, a collective-defence alliance linking North American and European members.

Article Five

The NATO treaty provision under which an armed attack against one or more members can be treated as an attack against them all, with each ally determining the action it considers necessary.

European Security Council

A proposed European-level security coordination body referenced in the session; the phrase is presented here as a proposal, not as an existing NATO institution.

Transcontinental state

A country whose territory extends across more than one continent.

Eurasia

The combined continental landmass of Europe and Asia; the term is often used in geography and geopolitics.

Ural Mountains

The mountain chain conventionally used as part of the geographic boundary between Europe and Asia.

NATO enlargement

The admission of additional countries into NATO over time.

Deep strike

A long-range attack against targets well beyond the immediate battlefield or front line.

Ballistic missile

A missile that is powered during part of its flight and then follows a largely ballistic trajectory toward its target.

S-400

A Russian surface-to-air missile system referenced in the session in connection with modified training missiles.

Attritional warfare

A form of warfare in which each side seeks to wear down the other through sustained losses of personnel, equipment, ammunition, logistics or economic capacity.

Anti-ballistic missile

A defensive interceptor intended to detect and engage ballistic missiles.

NATO-Russia Council

A forum established in 2002 for consultation and cooperation between Russia and individual NATO member states in agreed areas.

OPCW

The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, the international body that implements the Chemical Weapons Convention.

New START

A United States-Russia strategic arms-control treaty that set limits and verification arrangements for specified deployed strategic nuclear forces.

Military neutrality

A policy of remaining outside military alliances or armed conflicts under defined legal and political conditions.

Sanctions

Restrictions imposed by governments or international bodies on trade, finance, travel, technology or other activity to exert pressure on a state, organisation or individual.

Ceasefire

An agreement or arrangement to stop or limit fighting, temporarily or for a specified area or purpose.

United Nations General Assembly

The main deliberative body of the United Nations in which all UN member states are represented.

Escalation

An increase in the intensity, geographic scope, capabilities used, political stakes or participants in a conflict.

Miscalculation

A mistaken assessment of another actor’s intentions, capabilities, likely reaction or tolerance for risk.

1914 analogy

A comparison with the outbreak of the First World War, used in the session to highlight alliance chains, mobilisation, fear and miscalculation.

1938 analogy

A comparison with the Munich crisis, used in the session to highlight the argument that concessions to an expansionist power may fail to secure lasting peace.