NATO is reportedly developing plans for precise, long-range strikes deep into Russian territory in the event of a war breaking out, a significant departure from its historical defensive strategy. The shift in thinking is driven by the ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, according to a report by The Wall Street Journal.
A New Doctrine of "Denial"
The 32-member alliance is moving beyond simply blocking advancing troops at borders to considering more aggressive tactics aimed at preemptive strikes against military bases, supply depots, and industrial facilities beyond the front lines. This strategy, discussed at NATO's first-ever Deep Strike Symposium hosted by U.S. Air Force Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, NATO's top military commander, reflects a consensus that deterring Russia requires more active prevention.
General Grynkewich outlined this approach, describing a strategy where NATO forces would first block an initial attack and then blunt follow-on actions. If an offensive continues, he stated, "we will break the warfighting system engaged against us" by targeting not only advancing forces but also "anything and everything that supports, sustains, or controls that force."
Emphasis on Precision Weaponry
Central to this evolving strategy is the development and deployment of highly precise deep-strike weaponry. While the United States has been upgrading its missile systems, including Tomahawk cruise missiles and ATACMS rockets, European allies are also accelerating efforts to field new models and expand their stocks of missiles such as Storm Shadow, Scalp, and Taurus.
Fabian Hoffmann, a senior researcher specializing in missiles at the Norwegian Institute for Defence Studies, noted that at least 48 new low-cost cruise missile projects involving 20 manufacturers have been publicized across Europe, though many are years from delivery. The definition of "deep" strikes can range from approximately 100 miles to hundreds of miles behind enemy lines.
Lessons from Ukraine
Ukraine's experience in the conflict with Russia has significantly informed NATO's strategic rethinking. Ukrainian Ambassador to NATO, Alyona Getmanchuk, emphasized that "defense also means striking back," drawing parallels to Kyiv's successful targeting of distant Russian military and economic assets, including rocket-fuel producers and oil refineries.
Polish Maj. Gen. Ireneusz Nowak highlighted the importance of striking Russia's defense-industrial base and stated that deep precision attacks are crucial for deterrence. He suggested that if Ukraine possessed such capabilities earlier in the conflict, it might have avoided protracted trench warfare. The concept of "denial," or the active prevention of Moscow's conventional forces, is now recognized as doctrine by military leaders across the alliance.
Political Considerations and Future Capabilities
Despite the military planning, some experts question the political willingness of European leaders to endorse deep-strike responses to Russian aggression. Nico Lange, a former chief of staff in Germany’s Defence Ministry, pointed to a potential disconnect between military necessity and political perceptions of defense.
Military leaders aim to make deep-strike attacks an automatic response to a Russian attack and underscore the necessity of stockpiling these weapons. The ongoing conflict has demonstrated the critical need for substantial precision weapon supplies, as targets can shift and relocate. As Hoffmann noted, being unprepared for a high-intensity conflict with an adversary possessing deep arsenals of long-range strike capabilities would be a significant disadvantage.
The strategy of deep precision strikes, first utilized by the U.S. in the 1991 Gulf War, has evolved significantly with advancements in cruise missiles and drones. NATO commanders stress that to prepare for and deter war, Europe must rapidly expand its deep-strike arsenals. As Poland's Nowak concluded, "The message needs to be: Don’t do anything stupid, because we can punish you. But to be credible, we need to have those capabilities."