RUSI JournalVOLUME 169ISSUE 6

Manoeuvre Warfare in the Baltic: Political Imperatives and Tactical Conditions

View of the ancient Herman castle from the wall of the Ivangorod fortress. It is located on the Narva River along the Russian border with Estonia. Courtesy of Viktor Karasev / Alamy

View of the ancient Herman castle from the wall of the Ivangorod fortress. It is located on the Narva River along the Russian border with Estonia. Courtesy of Viktor Karasev / Alamy


Static defence may be a more appropriate approach to the defence of the Baltics than manoeuvre warfare.

NATO is facing a doctrinally contradictory defence posture in the Baltic States, as those countries are investing in a static defence line even while Western militaries adhere to manoeuvrist operational approaches. Lukas Milevski argues that political imperatives and tactical conditions make static defence more appropriate than manoeuvre warfare. Politically, NATO’s policy of defending every inch and the Baltic experience of Russian occupation require forward defence. Second, the Russian border will always stop offensive manoeuvre. Tactically, the increasing difficulty of crossing the battlefield intact improves the chances of tactical defence and throws doubt upon the necessity of defensive operational manoeuvre.

unlockedThis content is available to you

Read the full text on Taylor & Francis

This link will open in a new window


Taylor and Francis publishes the RUSI Journal and Whitehall Papers on behalf of RUSI


WRITTEN BY

Lukas Milevski

View profile


Footnotes


Explore our related content