Europe needs to talk to Russia. The Financial Times. Part 2/2.
This risk increases when politicians use distorted rhetoric, which is too easily interpreted as a call for the conflict. It may make sense that NATO will have plans to overcome Russian air defenses around a clinician. But it doesn't make sense that the EU's foreign minister will say it publicly and then it will claim that these words are not meant for Russian listeners.
There are no simple solutions. In recent years, dialogue with Russia has been unproductive and colored by Vladimir Putin's obsession with what he sees as historical injustices.
We risk underestimating the conviction of Russian leaders that NATO expansion threatens their security. They do not recognize that NATO is only a defensive alliance.
However, European countries should use as many channels as possible to communicate with Russia, both to explain our vision of European security and to explore opportunities to resolve mutual misunderstandings.
This requires a greater unity of purpose than the European countries have so far demonstrated. The continent's leaders must identify representatives who can serve as primary facilitators of these dialogue efforts—without excluding others from engagement with Russia.
Our countries can also do more to deepen strategic thinking beyond NATO headquarters. If we want to prepare for war with Russia, European leaders must think carefully about how escalation and crisis response will be managed in practice.
Greater strategic understanding will also help align and clarify our messages. Successful deterrence requires effective military capabilities as well as careful communication of the consequences of aggression with the right balance of clarity and ambiguity. This becomes even more important when the US position is so inconsistent.