[Foreign Policy] NATO's Military Superiority even without the USA - Russia as an Unrealistic Rival
NATO and in particular NATO without the USA is rearming.
There are various explanations for this rearmament.
One can no longer rely on the USA.
From 2029 onward Russia would become a threat to NATO as a result of its own rearmament.
Or after the Ukraine Russia would invade NATO.
Therefore the following will be a comparison of the strengths of both sides.
Defense Spending
Since 2021 before the escalation of the war in Ukraine Russia's defense spending has increased more sharply than that of NATO both with and without the US. But NATO's defense spending both with and without the USA is far higher than that of Russia.
[1]Military Personnel
Measured by the number of active soldiers NATO as a whole far surpasses Russia (factor approximately 2.6). Russia's active soldiers, reservists and all paramilitary units are only roughly the same size as NATO's active soldiers. However Russia has the disadvantage of being an exceptionally large country. The proportion of freely deployable forces without significant gaps is therefore smaller. And NATO doesn't exist only on Russia's border or only in Europe. So even excluding the USA and Canada (approximately 1,500,000 active soldiers) NATO would still numerically surpass Russia (factor of approximately 1.3).
| NATO | Russia | |
|---|---|---|
| Active Soldiers | 3.439.197 | 1.320.000 |
| Reserve Forces | 4.343.065 | 2.000.000 |
| Paramilitary Units | 876.620 | 250.000 |
Air Forces
Measured by the number of air forces Russia is far inferior to the entire NATO alliance.
Specifically NATO numerically surpasses Russia in air-to-ground and fioghter aircrafts (factor of approximately 4 and 1.7 respectively).
Furthermore NATO significantly surpasses Russia in specific capabilities such as transport, reconnaissance and aerial refueling (factor of approximately 3.4, 6.3, and 34).
Air forces can be deployed more quickly than ground forces.
Therefore excluding the USA from the calculation only makes sense if an Article 5 scenario is considered to be triggered without the US meaning a breach of the treaty.
Should this nevertheless be the case then NATO's air-to-ground and fighter aircrafts would have to be reduced to a quarter of their current size without the US to be numerically on par with Russia.
| NATO | Russia | |
|---|---|---|
| Fighters / Interceptors | 3.312 | 833 |
| Ground Attack Aircraft | 1.163 | 689 |
| Transport Aircraft | 1.479 | 456 |
| Special Aircraft (e.g reconnaissance) | 889 | 141 |
| Tanker Aircraft | 658 | 19 |
| Total Helicopters | 9.141 | 1.651 |
| Combat Helicopters | 1.416 | 557 |
| Miscellaneous Air Force | 4.319 | 611 |
Land Forces
Measured by the number of land forces Russia's ratio to NATO varies.
In terms of main battle tanks Russia is inferior to the entire NATO force (factor of approximately 2).
But Russia is superior to the entire NATO force in artillery systems depending on the type (factor of approximately 1.3 to 1.5) and overall (by a factor of approximately 1.4).
With regard to land forces the fact that they cannot be deployed quickly becomes a significant factor.
Therefore excluding the USA and Canada from the calculation makes sense.
However in terms of main battle tanks and infantry fighting vehicles NATO's share excluding the USA and Canada is between two-thirds and three-quarters.
Therefore Russia is still inferior to NATO in terms of main battle tanks and infantry fighting vehicles excluding the USA and Canada.
Furthermore Russia's exceptionally large size is a disadvantage, consequently the proportion of freely deployable forces is lower.
The relationship between land forces in Russia and NATO is of particular importance. Whether and how quickly land forces can be deployed depends primarily on geography. Rivers and mountains are detrimental while flat plains are advantageous. And the East European Plain stretches from Eastern Europe to the depths of Russia.
The East European Plain is bordered to the west by the Carpathian Mountains (Poland, Ukraine, etc.) and to the east by the Ural Mountains (Russia). Geographically speaking a march into Europe from the east is difficult. Conversely a march into the depths of Russia from the west is much easier.
| NATO | Russia | |
|---|---|---|
| Main Battle Tanks | 11.495 | 5.750 |
| Armored Vehicles | 971.280 | 131.527 |
| Self-propelled Artillery | 3.985 | 5.168 |
| Towed Artillery | 6.325 | 8.505 |
| MLR Systems (Multiple Launch Rocket) | 1.977 | 3.005 |
Naval Forces
Measured by the number of naval forces Russia is consistently inferior to NATO as a whole.
Naval forces can be differentiated according to their deployment in inland (brown-water navy) and coastal waters (green-water navy) as well as on the high seas (blue-water navy).
A comparison of the blue-water navies of both sides is expedient here.
A comparison of helicopter and aircraft carriers obviously makes no sense.
And NATO far surpasses Russia in numbers when it comes to destroyers and frigates (factor of approximately 10).
And NATO still surpasses Russia in numbers when it comes to submarines (factor of approximately 2.3).
Despite its deep-sea capabilities a blue-water navy is characterized by its ability to remain operational for extended periods.
Therefore excluding the US only makes sense if a breach of the treaty is assumed if the US's involvement in an attack on Article 5 is considered a breach of the agreement.
Should this nevertheless be the case the blue-water navies of the NATO without the USA would have to shrink to one-tenth of its current size and its submarines to half their current size in order to be numerically on par with Russia.
| NATO | Russia | |
|---|---|---|
| Aircraft Carriers | 16 | 1 |
| Helicopter Carriers | 14 | 0 |
| Destroyers | 101 | 10 |
| Frigates | 128 | 12 |
| Corvettes | 67 | 83 |
| Submarines | 148 | 63 |
| Patrol Boats | 488 | 123 |
| Minesweepers | 181 | 47 |
Nuclear Weapons
A comparison of the nuclear arsenals of both sides makes little sense. Both sides possess so many nuclear weapons that they continue to maintain mutually assured destruction.
[ de] [ en] [1]
Src:
[1] Nato minus USA - Militärstärken in Zahlen: Könnte sich Europa allein gegen Russland verteidigen? 2025-08-03
https://www.rnd.de/politik/nato-gegen-russland-armeen-panzer-atomwaffen-militaerstaerke-im-vergleich-3CWEU5CDX5EWZION2AIFPXRGZM.html
[2de] Vergleich der Militärstärke von NATO und Russland im Jahr 2025
https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/379080/umfrage/vergleich-des-militaers-der-nato-und-russlands/
[2en] Comparison of the military capabilities of NATO and Russia as of 2025
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1293174/nato-russia-military-comparison/
Kommentare
Kommentar veröffentlichen