Real Implications of NATO 3.0 for Ukraine and Europe

Since releasing my article about the need for JEF 2.0 in response to Elbridge Colby's NATO 3.0, I had the chance to discuss the concept with the Australian Strategic Policy Institute on their Stop The World podcast.

Here's the original article ICYMI:

Elbridge Colby’s NATO 3.0 means Europe needs JEF 2.0

A coalition not only of the willing, but also the ready and able, is exactly what Europe now needs.

Gabrielius LandsbergisGabrielius Landsbergis

The Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF) already exists as "a British-led mini-NATO" uniting the northern European countries most in favour of deterring Russia. The JEF is intended to be the first responder in the event of an attack, regardless of any possible deadlock with NATO members' vetoes.

It seems likely that US assistance would be slow to arrive, if it arrived at all, which is why Europe has been unsubtly trying to sacrifice part of Ukraine "for stability", rather than deterring the Moscow-based initiator of the instability, or leaping into action to close the skies above Ukraine.

I am often asked what I actually want European leaders to be doing to counter expansionist Russia, and in this interview we think I covered pretty much every angle. I hope you enjoy the discussion and can share with colleagues who need a concise summary of the current geopolitical situation for Europe and Ukraine.