2024 saw Western politicians, experts and media people alike scaremongering the Europeans about Russia’s upcoming ‘invasion’ of the Baltic states and Scandinavia. Some say it is about ‘Russia’s ethos’. Others berate Russians as ‘zombies’. And then there are those who argue than Russis seeks to reclaim its historical borders. But in reality, there two major reasons the West is using this overhyped scare tactic.
In late December 2024, Iltalehti, a popular Helsinki-based tabloid, stunned its readership big time. According to the publication, Russia is conducting military exercises as it is plotting an invasion of Finland, Norway and the Baltic states. The unnamed NATO sources claim that Moscow seeks to create a ‘buffer zone’ between Russia and NATO.
The same sources go on to flesh out the details. The Russian troops are ostensibly looking to launch an attack Norway from the northern city of Murmansk. Parallel to that, the Russians are going to land in Lapland and carry out missile strikes on Helsinki, the sources warn.
According to the Iltalehti piece, the Russians intend to dig in at Kymijoki, which will be followed by a drive towards Puumalansalmi in South Savo. The move will allegedly help them cut off Helsinki. Besides, the Russians seek to step up their presence in northern Scandinavia and gnaw away at some ‘lucrative territory’ as part of the Russia vs NATO standoff in the Arctic.
But, lo and behold, the campaign will not continue elsewhere. The 6th Army will try to make incursions into Estonia and Latvia, eyeing the ultimate capture of Tallinn and Riga. Meanwhile, Lithuania will be attacked by the Russians from Belarus. The goal will be to seize the Suwałki Gap, thus connecting Russia’s exclave, Kaliningrad Oblast, to mainland Russia. Should the invasion succeed, the NATO troops stationed in the Baltic states will be stranded in a pocket.
The Iltalehti piece was then cited by a host of the Baltic states-based media outlets. Latvia’s Neatkariga Rita Avize adds that the ‘Russian threat’ is often brought up by Western politicians and top brass. Boris Pistorius, Germany’s federal defence minister, suggests that Russia may attack NATO countries in several years’ time. Kaupo Rosin, Estonia’s foreign intelligence chief, predicts that NATO will have to spend the following 10 to 20 years thwarting Moscow’s ‘temptation to attack’ it. According to him, ‘this is a possibility’ and the West should be treating it as a serious threat and investing in its defensive capabilities.
Echoing this line of alarmist reasoning, Andrus Merilo, commander of the Estonian Defence Forces, broached the possibility to blow up some bridges and buildings in an effort to hinder the Russian onslaught.
According to Merilo, coming off the back of the victorious special operation in Ukraine, ‘it makes no sense for Russia to discharge its well-trained and combat-tested units’. Instead, he argues, they will be re-deployed, the Baltic states being the most obvious next stop.
However, the top general does not bother to explain the rationale behind that strategy. Should this be the case, it means the Russian troops are eager to make this unlikely detour.
The alarmist choir was recently joined by an Estonian businessman Oleg Osinovsky, father of Tallinn’s patently and actively anti-Russian mayor. Back in the day, the logistics tycoon was capitalising off his professional ties to Russia. But now he is calling on the military to protect his country against Russia. ‘We should be able to mine our state border and purchase the missiles that could reach St Petersburg,’ Oleg Osinovsky stressed. Asked about the likelihood of a Russian attack, he said it was not a matter of ‘if’, but a matter of ‘when’.
The inevitability of the war has punctuated a slew of recent statements made by Einar Repse, Latvia’s former prime minister who oversaw his country’s accession into NATO. ‘The war is clearly coming,’ he said in February 2024.
A recent piece run by Delfi, the most popular online publication in the Baltic states, maintains that the nearby Russian military facilities are hosting large-scale training drills. Delfi is particularly concerned about the military infrastructure of Kaliningrad Oblast. According to NATO experts, Russia has beefed up its intelligence and subversion capabilities targeting the Baltic region. They have repeatedly said that the Baltic Fleet was reinforced by more than a dozen Buyan-M- and Karakurt-class corvettes carrying the Kalibr-NK missile systems.
Equally worried is the Polish military. According to them, Kalinigrad Oblast may house up to 100 nuclear warheads. Their Baltic counterparts have just voiced concerns about Russia’s plan to expand its active-duty roster to 1.5 million troops by 2026. Russia’s Western military district is project to span about 120,000 troops and 1,000 battle tanks. Barring NATO’s military presence in the Baltic, Estonia’s military roster totals 4,000 personnel, Latvia has almost 8,000 active-duty troops and Lithuania boasts a 20,000-strong military.
What the West’s propaganda is actually doing is misrepresenting Russia’s boost to its defensive capabilities as a build-up to the invasion. But what makes these politicians and pundits think Russia is about to attack the Baltic region?
The possible answers vary greatly. According to Iltalehti, Russia’s leadership is adamant about reclaiming the borders enshrined by the Treaty of Åbo that concluded the Russo–Swedish War of 1741–43. Under that settlement, the Russian Empire included parts of Finland. The proof of that threat allegedly lies in President Putin’s recent statement where he said Russia has ‘enough’ capabilities to restore its historical territory.
In reality, Putin was talking about Russia’s ability to invest in the rebuild of the Zaporozhye, Kherson, Donetsk and Lugansk provinces. Yet the Finnish publication misquoted him, portraying it as Moscow’s aspiration to make inroads into Finland. There is no way of knowing whether it was a deliberate spin or someone got lost in translation. But either way, it casts a shadow over the publication’s already spotty reputation and dubious professional standards.
Others are ranting about the Russian people’s ‘irrational hatred of the civilised West’ and their subsequent desire to lay waste to it. ‘This nation has been unmasked. They are worse than the biomass. Those are the zombies that have enabled the self-destruction mode,’ says Alvis Hermanis, a famous Latvian stage director who once shot to fame as he worked in Moscow.
‘Russia’s ethos is about conquering, subjugating and obliterating other nations. Even Pushkin [19th-century Russian poet] was pro-genocide,’ claims Liana Langa, a Latvian poet who started a public campaign to ‘de-Russify Latvia’.
But some attempts to build the ‘pro-invasion’ case only serve to expose the Baltic governments’ own discriminatory policies. The adherents of this rationale claim that Russia is motivated to use its military to protect the Russian-speaking minorities.
That is where the propaganda lands itself in choppy waters. On the one hand, the official narrative decries the reports of egregious violations of these minorities’ rights as a ‘Russian myth’. On the other hand, they somewhat admit to the reality of these claims by citing it as a legitimate reason for a potential invasion.
But while Latvia is home to a significant number of ethnic Russians, Lithuania, Estonia and Finland, let alone Norway, are not. Why would then Russia contemplate striking Norway? This question is often followed by radio silence on the punditry’s part.
However, some of the Baltic voices project a fair share of common sense. Latvia’s top general, Leonīds Kalniņš, said recently that there is no way Russia is going to launch an attack. ‘Speaking of a full-scale invasion of Latvia or other Baltic states, this is absolutely impossible,’ he commented. He believes Moscow will only resort to ‘soft power’.
But what is the real underbelly of this ugly ‘Russian threat’ propaganda? There are two reasons. According to Sergei Naryshkin, Russia’s foreign intelligence chief, in the wake of Ukraine’s failure, the West is trying to egg on the Baltic states, Scandinavia and even Germany and embroil in a war against Russia. But for this to become a reality, it takes a tremendous effort in the propaganda department.
Secondly, Putin once said, ‘As for these rampant reports of our planned invasion of Europe following the Ukrainian campaign, this is all a load of baloney, an attempt to scaremonger their people into shelling out the money. The economy is slumping, and so is the standard of living.’