The 18th Annual Baltic Conference on Defence (ABCD), organised by the International Centre for Defence and Security and the Estonian Ministry of Defence, took place on 24-25 September 2024 in Tallinn, Estonia at the Nordic Hotel Forum.
Preparing for an Uncertain Future:
A Brave New Europe for a Perilous New World?
The Annual Baltic Conference on Defence (ABCD) 2024 focused on the urgent task of building Europe’s own defence readiness. While providing military assistance to support Ukraine’s victory remains the most pressing task, NATO Allies and European states must continue to enhance their collective deterrence and defence posture to meet the military threat posed by Russia, which continues to reform and improve its military posture despite waging a large-scale war. Maintaining a strong and effective transatlantic partnership against this threat is as vital as ever, but Europe must be ready to play a more prominent role. The increased capability requirements will challenge the European Allies and their defence industries. More defence investment is imperative, and creative solutions will be required. The European Union, which continues to redefine its role in defence, also has a part to play in enhancing Europe’s defence readiness. The magnitude of the challenges European states face together also underlines the importance of ensuring their societies’ involvement in defence and motivating their citizens to be actively engaged.
ABCD 2024 Key Takeaways:
- Russia remains a long-term threat.
- Importance of political will.
A new set of NATO regional defence plans has been approved. Militarily, these are sensible, sound, and fit for purpose. But, political will and a firm commitment to deliver the defence capabilities stemming from the military requirements are essential.
- The defence industry must be viewed as an integrated pillar of the collective defence approach.
Ramping up critical capabilities, especially in ammunition production, is essential. The defence industry needs to be fast, agile, and innovative. It must be able to adopt lessons learned in Ukraine. National prerogatives, as well as multilateral tools and instruments such as EU mechanisms, are crucial to accelerate this effort.
- Societal resilience needs to become an integral part of deterrence.
Confidence, competence, and experience are crucial elements of the will to fight and defend, whereas developing these competencies at an individual level can foster a collective readiness.
- It is more important than ever to deepen global partnerships.
Today’s threats and challenges are global although their impact may be regional. Enhanced collaboration between Europe and Asia is needed to address global dynamics and common security threats, especially as emerging technologies continue to evolve, as do security concerns.
The takeaways that follow are not intended to be an exhaustive record of the panels, and the views expressed below were not necessarily shared by all participants.
Keynote Session: How to Deter and Defeat Russia?
The opening session focused on how to deter and defeat Russia and what could be learned from Ukraine´s experience on the battlefield. There was a strong sense of urgency regarding defence spending, as about one-third of NATO Allies have not met the 2% expenditure target yet. It was noted that the investments in defence should be considerably higher.
The conversation highlighted Ukraine’s role as a dynamic testing ground for new defence technologies, emphasising the importance of digitalisation on the battlefield. While acknowledging that innovative technologies were crucial, there was also a consensus that traditional tools, like battle tanks and air defence systems, nonetheless, remained relevant.
The panellists agreed that governments should engage with defence industry actors as their partners, in particular, sharing battlefield lessons to enhance weapon effectiveness and setting clear timelines regarding their expectations. The discussion underscored the importance of a united front against global threats, learning from both Ukraine’s experiences and Russia’s evolving tactics. Furthermore, it was stressed that the sanctions regime was important. It was, however, noted that Russia managed to maintain some access to western assets and source western components. Therefore, Ukraine needed an asymmetric technological advantage in order to win.
The Night Owl Session by RAND Europe: New World, Old Dangers: Does NATO Need a New Nuclear Posture?
The late-night session on the first day was co-hosted by RAND Europe. The panellists debated whether NATO’s nuclear posture was sufficient or whether it needed to be adjusted to today’s reality. The speakers emphasised that Russia aimed to undermine NATO’s unity and that the Alliance’s deterrence relied heavily on the resolve and capabilities of its superpower members. Therefore, European nations, particularly France and the UK, needed to enhance their contributions, especially in the nuclear realm, while also exploring effective backup options.
The panellists pointed out that the real challenge lay not in Russia’s capabilities but in how the west perceived and reacted to the threat posed by Russia, highlighting some mixed signals: e.g., firm support for Ukraine vs crippling fear of escalation. There was an assumption that despite his aggressive rhetoric, Putin may not have an actual intention to escalate the conflict and that NATO’s nuclear posture thus remains credible. However, a shift in mindset is required to create strategic dilemmas for Russia. Additionally, there is a need to reconsider how nuclear assets could be used to support conventional operations.
The panellists did not believe that a return to the old arms control regime was probable. The discussion also paid attention to the growing military cooperation among nations like Iran, China, North Korea, and Russia.
Breakfast Breakout #1: Ukraine: Way Forward after NATO Washington Summit
The first breakfast session aimed to answer the following three questions: Can Ukraine gear up for success with aid from the west? How can Europe maximise its support to Ukraine in order to win the war of attrition? What technological changes have occurred in the course of Russia’s war in Ukraine? The speakers highlighted the existential threat that Ukraine was facing and the significant impact that the war had on Europe´s as well as global security. They emphasised that supporting Ukraine was crucial for Europe’s security and that it was paramount to keep Ukraine at the centre of discussions. The panellists noted the historic transfer of weapons to a non-EU country and the largest military training mission in the European Union’s history, with 60 000 Ukrainians having participated already. The need to maintain the pace with a focus on air defence and ammunition was stressed. The urgency of helping boost Ukraine’s own defence industry was emphasised.
The panellists called for a winning strategy to help Ukraine repel Russian aggression, acknowledging that peace talks may be far beyond the horizon and that today’s priority should be to strengthen Ukraine’s position in any future negotiations. The panellists agreed that the focus should be on defining the modalities of Ukraine’s membership in NATO. Security guarantees for Ukraine need to be ensured, for without them, peace would not last. It was stressed that even if the active phase of war were to end at some point, the conflict would persist. Hence, the need to spend more on defence will remain for the long term.
Breakfast Breakout #2: World in Turmoil: the Global Security Flashpoints and Influence on Europe
The second breakfast session discussed what effect out-of-region conflicts have on Europe’s security and how Europe could better mitigate its current challenges in order to prepare for future ones. The risks posed by China, particularly the ones regarding economic incursions and critical infrastructure investments, were underscored. Similarly, it was noted that a potential conflict in the Indo-Pacific would significantly affect European security. Countries like Japan, South Korea, and Australia stepping up to support Ukraine is also illustrative of the interconnectedness of global security. Broadening partnerships in the region, particularly with India, was considered important.
The growing cooperation between Russia and China was considered to be a far-reaching development: in addition to Ukraine, the Arctic and the new trade routes opening due to climate change were discussed. The evolving ties between Russia, North Korea, and Iran were emphasised as well.
While NATO is adapting quickly, there was a call for more action to counter external challenges. It primarily implied the need to boost defence spending in Europe, as well as to enhance collaboration between Europe and Asia to address global dynamics and common security threats, especially as emerging technologies continue to evolve, as do security concerns.
Keynote Session: Shifting Threat Perceptions
The speakers underlined that while crises had been accumulating, they did not replace one another but continued to evolve simultaneously. The competition to dominate in new domains has been unfolding, as has lately become explicit in the information space. The panellists pointed out the importance of resilience and the dangers posed by interdependencies, particularly in energy security and supply chains. A clear definition of Europe’s defence pillar was deemed essential, alongside the building of a strategic culture that promoted cooperation with the US and a strong European defence industry.
The panel stressed the need for a united front against threats posed by Russia, advocating global engagement and local networking to strengthen collective defence. There was a consensus that supporting Ukraine is vital not only for the country’s survival but also for upholding the rules-based international order. Panellists touched upon growing cooperation between China and Russia and its implications for the future.
Session One: Europe´s Role in Strengthening Transatlantic Security: Leveraging from Institutional Collaboration
The session discussed what Europe could do to contribute more to fairer transatlantic burden-sharing. It debated how NATO and the European Union could align their strategies, legal frameworks, and policy instruments to counter the multitude of threats.
The participants highlighted the importance of the EU in energising markets and stimulating defence supplies. They underscored the need to boost demand, particularly for ammunition, and to reward nations that collaborate effectively, managing to improve mass production in the short term. The panel noted that while European defence spending had increased, the European defence market remained fragmented, requiring a new EU defence agenda.
The EU and NATO partnership was considered stronger than ever. Cooperation in various areas including the defence industry, critical capabilities, and military mobility, remained essential for ensuring European security, whereas the ability to exchange classified information was recognised as an urgent matter. The discussion, nevertheless, stressed the need for European nations to take strategic responsibility for their defence, focusing on what each of them could do to guarantee collective security rather than relying solely on the United States. Thus, more investments were required, particularly in areas like intelligence, strategic airlift, air-to-air refuelling, missile defence, and long-range capabilities.
Session Two: Quo Vadis NATO?
The panel focused on the new regional defence plans that provide Allies with new opportunities but also set additional demands on the Alliance. NATO must focus on maintaining political cohesion to stay credible and relevant. It was highlighted that the new set of regional plans helped to solve the interoperability challenge by cooperating in groupings. More attention should be paid to the new domains, such as space and cyber.
The panellists highlighted the importance of adapting and transforming the Alliance, as well as maintaining its technological advantage and ensuring sustained US commitment. Although the transatlantic bond was irreplaceable, the strengthening of the European pillar of NATO was essential in an environment that favoured a win-win strategy rather than a zero-sum game.
The panel also addressed the need to deepen global partnerships to confront regional threats and improve military requirements while also ensuring that national plans aligned with NATO’s new regional defence plans. The importance of resilience, innovation, and effective communication were singled out as elements vital to gathering public support for NATO’s evolving military requirements.
Session Three: Will to Defend. Society and Defence
Armies win battles, but it is nations that win wars, highlighting the importance of a strong will to defend. Confidence, competence, and experience are crucial elements of the will to fight and defend, whereas developing these competencies at an individual level can foster a collective readiness.
The final discussion of the day summarised key points such as the need for military and industrial interoperability to ensure that equipment components could be exchanged among companies. In the same context, the speakers highlighted the importance of investing in redundancy and backup capabilities. The panellists debated the reserve armies’ potential in the context of prolonged war and its influence on economies. Awareness among decision-makers and agile industrial strategies to tackle various challenges without becoming predictable to adversaries were, likewise, stressed.
