Jaw Jaw is Better Than War War
Attributed to Sir Winston Churchill, this title quote, although incorrect,[1] is meant to imply that it is better for countries to have open discussions than it is to physically attack each other. However the citation is phrased, most of us can agree with the sentiment. If we can avoid killing by talking, then that should be the preferred option. But for how long?
On the fringes of last week’s UN General Assembly, Germany’s Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul met with his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov. After the meeting, Minister Wadephul announced “Now is the time to talk to Russia.” As I write this (28 Sep) A rocket-powered drone has destroyed the top half of a hospital in Kyiv. One feels compelled to wonder what we would say to the Russians, were we to accept Minister Wadephul’s advice.
I am not an artillery officer but have spent much time studying its effects because it is such an integral component of combined arms theory. One of the many effects that artily offers is shock effect. There is a synergism created by many rounds simultaneously striking a single target from multiple locations. A good analogy for non-military readers would be the difference between poking each individual finger of your hand at someone’s chest and striking that person’s chest with your fist.
There has been an increasing number of provocations across Europe by Russia. Arguably these provocations have been ongoing for years and recently there seems to be a growing consensus that Russia is testing the mettle of European countries and prodding them to see whether they continue to “jaw, jaw” or whether they flip over to “war, war.” I wrote about this in a recent post (Aug 28th) Would NATO go to War With Russia Over Latvia?
It occurs to me that there may be an “elegant” way to get Russia’s attention with very little downside risk to NATO; and by elegant, I mean simple to implement as opposed to having anything to do with beauty or grace. What might Russia do if every European country launched a large drone or cruise missile at a large single military target inside Russia? Ukraine could gather European leaders and give them the targeting data, and the Fire Control Coordination Centres of all the nations’ militaries could do the calculations to ensure that all of the munitions landed on target within a minute or two of each other. Ukraine would join the effort with its own weapons and if Russia were to complain that it had been attacked by Europe, all NATO countries could deny any such “nonsense” while allowing Ukraine to claim complete credit for all of the munitions. I can hear the moral outrage rising from some readers, but my response would be that such an action would be merely the provision of military munitions to Ukraine, something that many NATO countries currently do already. Rather than send those munitions by truck or by rail, the munitions would be sent “by air.”
Would Russia then declare war on ALL of NATO? Highly unlikely. Would it retaliate in kind? Again, that would be unlikely since such a massive strike by Russia (if even possible) would be an open declaration of war on all of Europe. Poland might even consider such an act as the firing of the starter’s pistol for a race to the Russian border by ground troops. But even in a country with a muzzled media, such an occurrence would give Russians pause to consider what had just occurred.
Don’t misunderstand my suggestion. I am NOT proposing that NATO provoke a war with Russia. That would be a bad idea. Remember, NATO is a defensive alliance. That said, there is well-established precedent in international law that countries are allowed to defend themselves, and as we students of war and warfare know, there is active defence and there is passive defence. I am suggesting that NATO stop endlessly complaining about Russian provocation and demonstrate to the Kremlin that they have been playing with fire.
Here is another legal/military term to contemplate: disproportionate response.
[1] According to Churchill’s official biographer, Churchill actually said, ‘Meeting jaw to jaw is better than war.’
