The Russia-Ukraine conflict is grinding toward its third year as winter snow blankets the battlegrounds of Eastern Europe and casualties continue to climb.
Tens of thousands of lives have been claimed, entire towns flattened and millions of civilians displaced in what has become the largest land war in Europe since World War II.
Yet now, some 30 months after Vladimir Putin ordered his troops across the Ukrainian border, the bitter winds blowing through the trenches and windowless blown-out buildings could soon change amid rumblings that a ceasefire is on the horizon.
A major factor in this emerging possibility is the looming presidency of Donald Trump, who is expected to push for a deal to freeze the conflict in place, potentially leaving parts of Ukraine under Russian control and deploying Western peacekeepers to patrol the contact line.
For Kyiv this would be a bitter pill, albeit one that would at least temporarily stem the bloodshed; for Moscow, an extremely costly short-term win.
But for NATO, it raises a haunting question: What if their peacekeepers become targets and the alliance is drawn directly into the war?
It’s an unlikely prospect, but with East-West tensions higher now than at any other time since the Cuban Missile Crisis, one that must be considered.
The idea of a large-scale conflict between Russia and the Western-led security bloc is enough to have even the most seasoned strategists waking up with a jolt in a cold sweat – the cataclysm-inducing nuclear button is never far from reach.
But what if we were to set aside that ultimate horror for a moment and examine whether NATO’s combined strength could defeat the Kremlin’s armies in a war fought with so-called conventional, or non-nuclear, weapons?
Here, military chiefs, expert analysts and commentators examine how such a conflict might unfold and, crucially, how long it would take for NATO’s unparalleled might to overwhelm Russia’s embattled forces.
Pictured: F-35B Lightning jet launches from HMS Prince of Wales
A Swedish artillery team fires a projectile from an Archer self-propelled Howitzer during the NATO ‘Exercise Lightning Strike’ on November 20, 2024
A member of Ukraine’s 72nd Brigade Anti-air unit fires at a Russian Zala reconnaissance drone near Marinka, Ukraine
View from cockpit of U.S. Air Force F-16 shows a Russian Su-35 jet cutting across its nose at extreme close range
Britain’s Chief of the Defence Staff, Sir Tony Radakin, has claimed that an all-out conventional war between Russia and NATO would see the armed forces off the Western-led security bloc crush Vladimir Putin’s troops in short order.
He said in an interview with Forces News: ‘The inescapable fact is that any Russian assault or incursion against NATO would prompt an overwhelming response.
‘NATO’s combat air forces – which outnumber Russia’s 3 to 1 – would quickly establish air superiority.
‘NATO’s maritime forces would bottle up the Russian Navy in the Barents and the Baltic, just as Ukraine pushed the Black Sea Fleet from Crimea. NATO has four times as many ships and three times as many submarines as Russia.’
He went on to note that NATO’s collective defence budget is three-and-a-half times larger than the combined budgets of Russia and China, while its collective GDP is 20 times greater than Russia’s.
He also pointed out NATO’s vast pool of 3.5 million uniformed personnel on active duty, not to mention millions more reserve forces.
Ed Arnold, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), told the Kyiv Independent: ‘There is still an overwhelming ability by NATO for death and destruction… particularly in terms of long-range fire, anything launched from the fleet of F-35 (advanced jet fighters), for example.
‘If they (Russia) fought how they fight now, in Ukraine, against a NATO force, they would be destroyed pretty quickly,’ he added.
Other analysts concluded a fully committed and well resourced NATO force certainly has the capability to overwhelm Russia’s army, navy and air power, but warned the victory would undoubtedly come at significant cost.
Gordon B. Davis, a senior fellow at the CEPA think tank and NATO’s former deputy assistant secretary general, said: ‘Assuming a conventional fight only, NATO would outfight Russia’s air forces and naval fleets, although its bombers, drones, and submarines would succeed in striking NATO territory and forces.’
The alliance ‘would defeat Russian ground forces… but NATO could not defeat Russia given its current capabilities without incurring significant cost in terms of casualties, damage, and temporary loss of territorial sovereignty,’ he concluded.
Trump and his supporters have roundly criticised the scale of US military and financial support for Kyiv, and he previously labelled Zelensky ‘the greatest salesman on Earth’
A Ukrainian soldier of an artillery unit fires towards Russian positions outside Bakhmut
120 mm mortar crew fires shells at Russian positions as the war between Russia and Ukraine continues in Chasiv Yar, Ukraine on April 27, 2024
British Army Challenger 2 tanks are seen at the training ground in Nowa Deba on September 21, 2022, in Nowa Deba, Subcarpathian Voivodeship, Poland
Swedish soldier sits on a military boat with a machine gun during the Baltic Operations NATO military drills (Baltops 22) on June 11, 2022
On the face of it, Sir Tony seems to be correct.
Going by the numbers, NATO’s collective military is by far the world’s most formidable fighting force.
The alliance’s 32 countries have a combined military budget of well over $1 trillion, over three million active personnel, around three million reserve personnel and more than 700,000 troops in paramilitary forces.
Besides manpower, NATO countries also have over 14,000 tanks in their arsenals and tens of thousands more combat vehicles, 21,000 military aircraft and almost 2,000 naval vessels.
Three nuclear-armed nations are also members: the US, the UK and France.
Before the the invasion of Ukraine, Russia by comparison had just 350,000 active army soldiers, roughly 1 million active military personnel and about two million in reserve.
But wars are not fought on paper, and the bulk of NATO’s formidable strength comes from having the United States as a member.
With Trump’s return to the White House imminent, many fear that enduring US support for its European allies is not guaranteed.
Ben Hodges, the former Commanding General of US Army Europe, told MailOnline earlier this year that European nations could be left ‘sitting ducks’ by Trump should he make good on his threats of reducing support for his allies on the continent not deemed to be ‘pulling their weight’.
And if the armed forces of US and Canada are removed from the equation, the playing field between Russia and NATO’s European members suddenly looks a lot more balanced, meaning a conventional conflict could devolve into a long, grinding war of attrition.
A Ukrainian soldier is placed in trenches retaken from the Russian army on the Vuhledar front line as the war between Russia and Ukraine continues in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine
Ukrainian soldiers at the artillery position in an unidentified area on the Adiivka frontline prepare to fire the D 30 gun as the war between Russia and Ukraine continues in Adiivka, Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine on March 13, 2024
A resident is seen after shellings in the frontline city of Avdiivka amid Russian-Ukrainian war
Polish soldiers seen before a high-intensity training session using M1A2 Abrams tanks at Nowa Deba training ground, on May 6, 2023
Ukrainian servicemen of the 43rd Separate Artillery Brigade fire a Panzerhaubitze 2000 self-propelled howitzer toward Russian troops, amid Russia’s attack on Ukraine, in Donetsk region, Ukraine May 4, 2024
Again taken as a whole, European NATO states still lead Russia in almost all categories, aside from the number of armoured land vehicles – and, of course, nuclear weapons.
But NATO’s forces have never faced the kind of aggression displayed in Ukraine, and despite extensive military drills are not truly battle-tested.
Conversely, Russia has demonstrated not only a willingness to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of soldiers in meatgrinder tactics, but also impressive capacity to draw upon reserves and shuttle them to the frontlines in short order.
Ukraine instituted conscription almost immediately after the Russian invasion in February 2022, with recent reports of Ukrainian press gangs violently hunting down military-age men.
But Russia has no need to resort to conscription, leaning on its extensive veteran community and swell of volunteers to fight in Ukraine.
More than a million people reach military age in Russia every year, and all men aged 18-30 are liable to perform one year of national service.
This means that Russia would have huge numbers of military-trained and able-bodied fighters in reserve, should it ever come to blows with NATO on the battlefield.
NATO maintains multinational battlegroups in eight nations close to Russia – namely Romania, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Hungary, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland – but these troops form the backbone of the alliance’s so-called ‘deterrence and defence posture’.
But they are meant primarily as a first line of defence to protect against the potential of a Russian invasion beyond Ukraine, rather than as a pro-active force ready to deploy to the front line.
And though it has already been established that NATO’s overall troop numbers far exceed that of Russia, it is highly unlikely that all members of the alliance would be willing to send any great quantity of soldiers into battle unless a NATO country itself is attacked directly by Moscow.
Many European nations are working to scale up their military industries
President Donald Trump, center, sits with retired Army Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg, right
A British soldier looks into a telescopic sight as he holds his sniper rifle during the NATO DRAGON-24 military exercise in Korzeniewo, northern Poland, March 4, 2024
Ukrainian servicemen of the 82nd Separate Air Assault Brigade prepare for combat Challenger 2 tank in an undisclosed location near frontline in Zaporizhzhia region
NATO troops take part in Nordic Response 24 – a phase of the larger NATO exercise Steadfast Defender. The exercise involves air, sea, and land forces, with over 100 fighter jets, 50 ships, and over 20,000 troops practising defensive manoeuvres in cold and harsh weather conditions
Ukrainian servicemen who recently returned from the trenches of Bakhmut walk on a street in Chasiv Yar, Ukraine, Wednesday, March 8, 2023
In February, Emmanuel Macron – who had long been one of the only European leaders intent on maintaining dialogue with Putin – refused to rule out the possibility that Western troops could one day be sent to Ukraine.
At the time, several key NATO allies rushed to dismiss the French President’s statement.
The United States, Germany, Britain, Spain, Poland and the Czech Republic all distanced themselves from any suggestion they might commit ground troops to the Ukraine war, clarifying they would only continue supporting Ukraine financially and materially.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz was particularly emphatic in his denial of Macron’s claims, declaring bluntly: ‘There will be no ground troops, no soldiers on Ukrainian soil sent by European countries or NATO states.’
In recent weeks, however, the prospect of Western troops being stationed in Ukraine looks increasingly likely in the event that the Trump presidency presses on with efforts to force Kyiv and Moscow into a ceasefire deal.
Allies and advisers to Trump have advocated or outlined multiple plans to wind down the Ukraine war, all of which would result in Ukraine ceding large parts of the country to Russia for the foreseeable future.
Trump’s special envoy to Russia and Ukraine, former US Army Lt. Gen Keith Kellogg, sent a proposal to Trump this year that would see battle lines frozen and NATO membership taken off the table in the near term for Ukraine with a demilitarised zone implemented and patrolled by Western troops.
But he has also indicated his proposal was a starting point and that the incoming Trump administration is still working on a definitive plan.
Meanwhile, on Wednesday, Zelensky met with Macron in Brussels where the pair discussed posting French peacekeepers in Ukraine to ‘achieve a stable peace’.
‘We share a common vision: reliable guarantees are essential for a peace that can truly be achieved,’ said Ukraine’s president.
‘We continued working on President Macron’s initiative regarding the presence of forces in Ukraine that could contribute to stabilising the path to peace.’
This comes after a senior NATO official reportedly told Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) earlier this month that talks were taking place between officials in London and Paris to solidify approaches to implementing a ceasefire deal which may see Ukraine squander territory.
One possibility is an Anglo-French contingent patrolling the contact line between Ukraine and Russia, according to the NATO official who spoke on condition of anonymity because he is not authorised to comment publicly on the situation.
Some experts – including former high-ranking Western military officials – have also suggested that EU member states may consider sending military personnel to bolster Ukraine’s defences independent of NATO.
Ukrainian medics transfer a wounded Ukrainian soldier to a stabilisation point in the direction of Siversk-Soledar, 11 May 2024
Ukrainian soldiers unload grad shells in a garage in the direction of Marinka, as the war between Russia and Ukraine continues in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine on May 09, 2024
A soldier of the 58th Mechanized Brigade of the Ukrainian army walks in a muddy road as Russian attacks on the city of Vuhledar continue in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine on December 01, 2023
A Ukrainian artillery position fires in the direction of Bakhmut in Donetsk
A Germany army Leopard 2A6 tank takes part in a NATO military exercise at a training range in Pabrade, Lithuania
Retired US Army Colonel Alexander Crowther, who is also a senior fellow at the Centre for European Policy Analysis (CEPA), said earlier this year that it was ‘time to send EU troops to Ukraine’, provided it can be clearly communicated they would not participate in any offensive operations.
He reasoned that European troops could be deployed to protect Ukraine’s northern border with Belarus and take the weight of major logistics operations, air defence and other roles.
This, he said, would free up tens of thousands of otherwise occupied Ukrainian troops, enabling Kyiv ‘to divert more of its resources and personnel towards the eastern contact line’ while ensuring that no European soldiers are actually involved in frontline operations.
In an interview with Radio Free Europe, Crowther said there are a handful of European countries that would likely be willing to send troops to Ukraine to provide supporting roles in defiance of the messaging from German Chancellor Scholz and others.
‘Ukrainians are running out of soldiers, just like we did in 1944, when in Europe, we took cooks and handed them rifles and said, ‘You are now an infantryman.’ And so Ukraine is at the point where they’re having to do that.
‘Maintenance, logistics, technical [stuff], like running air-defence systems – for every (Western) soldier or civilian that is sent there, that’s a Ukrainian who can get shipped to the front.
‘I think that sending Western troops to Ukraine is a subset of supporting Ukraine vigorously… I could name half a dozen countries right now that would be willing to send people to Ukraine.’
***
Read more at DailyMail.co.uk