Just a reminder that Article 5 of the The North Atlantic Treaty (1949) simply doesn't oblige any member state to mobilise its armed forces. Each member state decides individually what it contributes to help reach the status quo ante. The support may include armed forces but it doesn't need to.


« Article 5
The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security. »


That is: Even the proclamation of an Article 5 incident doesn't mean a military combat situation for each and every member state of NATO.

And so when Russia is said to be willing to test NATO in the near future for its readiness to adhere to Article 5, the supposition that this means Russia will be testing whether each and every member state is willing to engage militarily is an erroneous depiction of the situation.

Likewise, Russia's threat to reserve the use of nuclear weapons should this or that red line be crossed, which lead some European states (foremost Germany) to self-deter from support of Ukraine, displays an erroneous understanding.

Article 5 is way too "weak" to oblige any member state to contribute armed forces in a conflict with Russia. And that means that Russia cannot "test" the willingness of NATO to follow through on Article 5 simply by attacking a small city like Narva in Estonia with a considerable Russian minority. Every NATO member reaction would be an Article 5 contribution, and Russia cannot assess thereof what the NATO member states are furthermore willing to do to act in compliance with Article 5.

Thus these kind of war-gaming makes no sense for either party.

#Russia #NATO