NATO’s Flirtation With Pre-Emptive Cyber Strikes Against Russia Is Incredibly Dangerous

The British might be egging this on to provoke a crisis for ruining the renascent Russian-US “New Détente”, but even if this fails, Continental Europe would still be weakened if the US stands down when Russian retaliates and this could advance their interests too.

It was assessed in October that “NATO’s Three-Pronged Response To The Latest Russian Scare Raises The Risk Of A Larger War”. The bloc was by that point considering arming surveillance drones, streamlining the rules of engagement for fighter pilots, and holding NATO exercises right on the Russian border. All three are still in the cards, but recent reports from Politico and the Financial Times suggest that a hitherto unthinkable policy is now being discussed, which could be much more dangerous than them.

The first reported that “Allies from Denmark to the Czech Republic already allow offensive cyber operations” against Russia by their national security services, which set the backdrop against which Latvia’s Foreign Minister and interestingly Italy’s Defense Minister are agitating for more “proactiveness”. The second then quoted Chair of the NATO Military Committee Giuseppe Cavo Dragone as arguing that hypothetical “pre-emptive (cyber) strike[s]” could be considered a “defensive action” by the bloc.

Dragone clarified, however, that “It is further away from our normal way of thinking and behaviour.” Nevertheless, the importance of these recent reports is that they suggest that some NATO members might either unilaterally launch such “pre-emptive strikes” against Russia or do so in a new ‘coalition of the willing’, either of which would spike the risk of Russian retaliation that could catalyze a new potentially uncontrollable escalation cycle. It’s therefore best for them not to do this at all.

It’s unclear how seriously this is being discussed within NATO, and it’s possible that the cited reports are part of a psy-op for deterrence purposes given the bloc’s pathological fear that Russia is plotting large-scale cyber operations against them, but it’s concerning that this is being discussed at all. There are three reasons why, the first of which is that NATO is still officially a “defensive alliance”, but any honest observer already knows that it’s de facto been an offensive one since the end of the Old Cold War.

The second is that these deliberations directly contradict the policy of peaceful coexistence with Russia that Trump hopes to promulgate upon the end of the Ukrainian Conflict, which he’s now finally trying to end with gusto through his long-overdue coercing of Zelensky into some concessions to Putin. If this succeeds and the US then peacefully coexists with Russia, “pre-emptive cyber strikes” by NATO’s European members against Russia could lead to the US hanging them out to dry when it retaliates.

The aforesaid scenario segues into the final reason why these policy deliberations are so concerning and it’s because someone seems to be pulling the strings behind the scenes to provoke a crisis through these means. Given that the Brits were arguably behind Bloomberg’s Russian-US leaks, which aimed to derail talks on the US’ 28-point Russian-Ukrainian peace deal framework, all suspicion should once again be cast on them since they’re historical masters of divide-and-rule plots and false flags provocations.

With all this in mind, it can therefore be concluded that NATO’s flirtation with “pre-emptive cyber strikes” against Russia is likely being egged on by the British, who want to complete the preparations for them so that they can be carried out on its orders in the future. The purpose would be to provoke a crisis for ruining the renascent Russian-US “New Détente”, but even if this fails, Continental Europe would still be weakened if the US stands down when Russian retaliates and this could advance British interests too.