Conference on Russia Papers

This chapter examines whether Russia’s war in Ukraine has fostered a Nordic-Baltic variant of “magical realism” – a strategic narrative in which improbable scenarios are normalised as politically plausible. Drawing on regional history and contemporary threat perceptions, it traces how Russia’s brutality and ambiguity amplify anxieties while institutional assessments (NATO, EUCOM) risk overemphasising Russian reconstitution and underestimating allied advantages. The analysis situates quantitative claims within their social-scientific limits – constructed metrics, neglected error margins, and technocratic drift – and contrasts them with structural realities: Russia’s military attrition, economic strain, and likely preference for sub-threshold coercion over large-scale invasion. It argues that the centre of gravity in the Nordic–Baltic region is not the Baltic Defence Line but the confidence-based social contract that binds ministers, mayors, police chiefs, and citizens. The strategic task is therefore twofold: pierce magical realism with contextualised appraisal, and prioritise resilience against hybrid operations – sabotage, cyber, influence, and aerial incursions – designed to erode public trust and allied resolve.

This chapter explores contemporary dynamics in NATO’s deterrence posture in the Baltic Sea Region. Russia has been increasingly probing NATO reactions across the entirety of the Eastern Flank, normalising such incursions as part of its wider strategy of confrontation with NATO. Engaging with the foundations of deterrence theory, specifically the operative concepts of credibility and costly signalling, the chapter argues that neither NATO’s actual deterrence by punishment nor deterrence by denial postures are sufficient to deter Russian hostile intentions. One of the key reasons for this is a false fear of the so-called escalation trap, as escalation in fact deters a revisionist actor such as Russia that does not harbour genuine insecurity. The recommendation for deterring Russia, therefore, is precisely an embrace of escalation – those actions and strategies in both the Eastern Flank and Ukraine that would credibly signal resolve through readiness to accept high costs by building capability and transparent troop deployments.

This article analyses how France’s role in European and global geopolitics is evolving in response to recent challenges, such as Russian aggression in Ukraine, shifting US policies, and China’s rise to power. As the EU’s only nuclear power and a major diplomatic and military force, France is well positioned to strengthen European strategic autonomy, a concept that has long been a part of French foreign policy and is now gaining relevance. While French foreign policy remains rooted in Gaullist principles emphasising national sovereignty and independent decision-making, it has been tempered by increasing interdependence and the need for cooperation with European allies. France has played a leading role in providing political, diplomatic, and military support to Ukraine, and has intensified its efforts towards European defence coordination by expanding partnerships and investing in its defence industry. France’s stance has hardened in relation to Russia, although pragmatism may remain important if future European security necessitates re-engagement with Russia and adaptation to China’s global influence. France’s leadership is paramount in advancing European strategic autonomy, security, and multilateralism, though success hinges on internal consensus and coordinated European action within a rapidly evolving global landscape.

This chapter examines the “human dimension” of European security, focusing on the issue of Ukrainian war refugees and the potential for their repatriation. Pushing people out of Ukraine is becoming one of Russia’s most important strategies for achieving its so-called “special military operation” goals. Cynical attacks on civilian infrastructure in Ukraine, including thermal and electrical generation, combined with information and psychological operations are working towards this goal daily. The consequences of people leaving Ukraine could be painful for both Ukraine’s future and European security. The situation of millions of Ukrainian citizens, who are unable to find fulfilment in the EU and have no place to return home, represents a real catastrophe for the European continent. To avoid this, Ukraine and its allies need to start planning the return of their citizens today, with appropriate adjustments to the state’s socio-economic policy.