Analytical breakdown of Putin’s historical framing of the Cold War and his belief that he is winning

Vladimir Putin’s persistent Cold War framing continues to underpin Russia’s costly, attrition-driven hybrid warfare campaign in Ukraine, yet recent developments reveal a rapidly shifting strategic landscape. Rooted in zero-sum existential struggle assumptions, Moscow’s strategy relies heavily on deep fires, missile and drone barrages, electronic warfare (EW), and harsh domestic repression—all premised on Kremlin beliefs that NATO is fracturing, technologically lagging, and unwilling to sustain a protracted multidomain conflict. However, NATO’s accelerating multidomain modernization, industrial scaling, and integration of advanced AI and electromagnetic warfare initiatives are steadily dismantling Russian asymmetric advantages, challenging Kremlin assumptions and reshaping the trajectory of the war and broader European security dynamics.

---

Putin’s Cold War Narrative: The Ideological Backbone of Russia’s Hybrid Warfare

Putin’s worldview remains firmly anchored in Cold War-era zero-sum thinking, framing Russia as a beleaguered fortress under siege by a hostile West. This narrative justifies a hybrid warfare campaign aimed at grinding down Ukrainian resistance and Western resolve through:

• Deep Fires Campaigns: The Sarma 300mm multiple launch rocket system (MLRS) persistently targets Ukrainian logistical hubs and infrastructure far behind the front lines, designed to degrade Kyiv’s operational sustainability.
• Missile and Drone Barrages: Moscow employs relentless missile strikes combined with UAV swarm attacks to overwhelm Ukrainian air defenses and sow doubt within Western capitals over continued arms support.
• Electronic Warfare and Cyberattacks: Russian EW and cyber operations disrupt Ukrainian command and control networks and civilian infrastructure, maintaining an asymmetric edge.
• Domestic Repression: Intensified crackdowns on dissent and economic sacrifices are framed as existential imperatives to sustain the war effort, reinforcing Kremlin control.

These efforts are predicated on Kremlin assumptions that NATO is politically divided, technologically inferior, and unwilling to endure a sustained multidomain conflict—a calculation increasingly challenged by unfolding realities.

---

Russia’s Enduring Capabilities Amid Growing Operational Strain

Despite significant manpower losses and logistical difficulties, Russia retains key legacy and emergent capabilities that enable continued hybrid operations:

• The Sarma MLRS remains a potent deep strike platform, complicating Ukrainian counterbattery efforts.
• The early 2024 unveiling of the Ursa Major HAVOC hypersonic missile, developed with private-sector involvement, signals Moscow’s ambition to restore deep strike and missile defense penetration capabilities, though actual deployment remains uncertain.
• Continued investment in UAVs and EW platforms sustains Russian asymmetric warfare advantages, especially in contested regions such as the Arctic.
• However, mounting operational strains—exacerbated by NATO’s growing electromagnetic warfare (EMW) and counter-drone capabilities—are progressively blunting Russian effectiveness.

Putin’s strategy persists despite escalating strategic risks, reflecting Kremlin’s entrenched belief in a zero-sum Cold War framework.

---

NATO’s Multidomain Modernization: Undermining Russian Assumptions and Capabilities

Contrary to Kremlin expectations of Western decline, NATO is rapidly advancing multidomain modernization, industrial resilience, and alliance-wide interoperability—systematically eroding Russian asymmetric advantages across air, EM, maritime, and Arctic domains.

Electromagnetic Warfare and Counter-Drone Breakthroughs

• The U.S. Navy’s $50 million Blackbeard hypersonic missile contract aims to deliver scalable hypersonic strike capabilities by 2027, enhancing NATO’s ability to penetrate Russian defenses at long range.
• NATO’s deployment of the MEROPS counter-drone system along the eastern flank significantly improves detection and neutralization of Russian UAV threats.
• Upgraded AH-64 Apache helicopters, equipped with explosive 30mm rounds, provide rapid and lethal counter-UAV responses.
• The U.S. Air Force’s successful testing of electromagnetic attack pods mounted on drones enables non-kinetic disruption of Russian communications and drone networks, reducing reliance on costly kinetic strikes.
• The RADHAZ (Radiofrequency Hazard) team’s naval EM warfare sustainment efforts ensure allied shipboard sensor and weapon system survivability amid intense electromagnetic environments.
• NATO’s “Safe Skies” drone training mission enhances alliance-wide drone operation proficiency and air policing capabilities, improving overall airspace security and response.

Manned-Unmanned Teaming and Autonomous Platforms

• The YFQ-48A autonomous loyal wingman prototype has demonstrated AI-enabled collaboration with manned fighters, multiplying combat power and survivability in contested airspace.
• Honeywell’s contract for affordable, expendable small drone engines rapidly scales deployment of autonomous wingmen and drone swarms, key to saturating contested environments.
• General Atomics’ MQ-9 Reaper conversions to long-range cruise missile carriers enable saturation strikes deep within contested airspace.
• Integration exercises pairing F-22 Raptors with MQ-20 unmanned drones have showcased enhanced situational awareness and lethality via manned-unmanned teaming.
• These advances mark a strategic shift toward drone swarm tactics and autonomy, providing unprecedented operational flexibility against Russian forces.

Arctic and High North Security Initiatives

• NATO’s JPMRC 26 exercise demonstrated precision raid capabilities under extreme Arctic conditions, challenging Russian dominance in the Northern Fleet’s operational areas.
• The newly announced NATO Arctic security initiative aims to bolster deterrence and stability in the High North.
• Russia maintains advantages in drone warfare and EW in Arctic environments, leveraging established drone networks and sophisticated jamming.
• NATO is fast-tracking development of specialized Arctic drone platforms and countermeasures, while the “Arctic Sentry” operation involving U.S. Navy and NATO explosive ordnance disposal teams underscores commitment to cold-weather operational readiness.
• However, NATO faces a critical shortage of icebreaker vessels, as highlighted by Norwegian officials, limiting mobility, logistics, and rapid response capabilities in this strategically vital region.

Maritime Power Projection and Undersea Warfare Enhancements

• Exercise Dynamic Manta 26 reaffirmed multinational interoperability in undersea warfare, critical for countering Russian submarine threats.
• Integration of Raytheon’s StormBreaker smart weapon on F/A-18E/F fighters enhances precision strike flexibility across maritime and land domains.
• The U.S. Navy’s Flight III destroyer program, delivering the fleet’s most powerful destroyers by 2026, will significantly improve air defense and missile capabilities.
• The UK’s Type 31 frigate shipbuilding milestone highlights strengthening European naval industrial capacity.
• The First Sea Lord’s call for increased Royal Navy readiness reflects heightened awareness of maritime threats and the imperative for rapid adaptation.

Forward Command Posts and Multinational Burden-Sharing

• The establishment of a permanent NATO Land Forces Headquarters in Rovaniemi, Finland enhances Arctic-Baltic command and control integration.
• Multinational deployments, including the U.S. Marines in Cold Response 2026 and augmented Turkish forces in the Baltics, bolster interoperability and deterrence.
• The U.S. Marine Corps’ integration of uncrewed Naval Strike Missile launchers on expeditionary platforms enhances littoral strike capabilities and unmanned-missile synergy.

---

Industrial Scaling, Training, and AI Governance: Sustaining Momentum

Sustained technological superiority depends on industrial capacity, training innovation, and responsible AI integration:

• The U.S. Army’s $217 million contract to Vantor to transition the One World Terrain (OWT) system into production marks a significant enhancement in allied virtual terrain training and operational readiness. OWT provides high-fidelity 3D terrain data essential for realistic training and mission planning, critical in complex multidomain operations.
• Calls for increased F-35 aggressor assets underscore the urgency of modern air combat training. As highlighted in recent analyses, enhanced aggressor squadrons equipped with F-35s are vital to prepare pilots for increasingly sophisticated Russian air defenses and electronic attack environments.
• L3Harris Technologies’ advanced 3D printing reduces hypersonic component production times by 90%, accelerating allied procurement of critical weapons.
• Lockheed Martin’s integration of AI into the F-35 platform improves enemy air defense detection and pilot survivability.
• Honeywell’s expendable drone engine contracts enable scalable deployment of unmanned systems vital for swarm tactics.
• Cybersecurity cooperation between the U.S. Army and Coast Guard strengthens defenses against hybrid cyber/EW threats.
• Canada’s new defense industrial strategy focuses on sovereign production and allied supply chain resilience.
• The U.S. Marine Corps’ new 30mm cannon production plant signals commitment to sustaining lethality enhancements.
• Pentagon initiatives to develop drone-savvy troops highlight the critical human element in unmanned system employment.
• The rapid rise of AI in defense—spanning sensors, autonomy, command and control, and decision support—is reshaping allied technological competition with Russia, though political debates over lethal AI weapon limits create ongoing complexity.

---

AI Governance Spotlight: Navigating the Anthropic–Pentagon Standoff

A recent high-profile standoff between the Pentagon and Anthropic, a leading AI safety company, underscores tensions between rapid military AI adoption and ethical governance:

• Anthropic advocates a cautious approach prioritizing safety, ethical use, and escalation risk mitigation.
• Pentagon officials emphasize the urgency of rapid AI deployment to maintain technological superiority.
• This impasse illustrates NATO’s delicate balance between accelerating AI-enabled capabilities and preventing unintended escalation.
• The appointment of Colonel (Ret.) Joel Babbitt as VP Army and SOCOM Programs at Seekr—a firm specializing in decision-ready, explainable AI tools for warfighters—reflects growing investment in transparent, operational AI that enhances soldier decision-making while addressing governance concerns.
• Political and industrial debates around lethal AI weapons risk slowing or complicating allied adoption of autonomous systems, potentially impacting NATO’s competitive edge.

---

Renewed Geopolitical Pressures and Strategic Context

At the United Nations Security Council, the U.S. publicly condemned China as a “decisive enabler” of Russia’s war effort, intensifying diplomatic pressure on Beijing:

• This rhetoric aims to isolate Russia further and dissuade third parties from providing material or diplomatic support.
• It underscores the global dimensions of the Ukraine conflict and the challenge posed by countries indirectly sustaining Kremlin military capabilities.
• NATO allies must therefore coordinate battlefield, technological, diplomatic, and economic efforts to constrain Kremlin support networks.

---

Persistent Gaps and Challenges

Despite considerable progress, NATO faces enduring challenges that could constrain sustained high-intensity operations:

• European military capability shortfalls, particularly in heavy equipment and munitions stocks, remain acute.
• The critical shortage of icebreaker vessels limits Arctic mobility, logistics, and rapid response.
• Political and ethical disputes over lethal AI governance create uncertainty around autonomous weapons deployment.
• Industrial and budgetary pressures compete with broader economic constraints, impacting alliance cohesion and procurement agility.

---

Strategic Implications: Sustaining Momentum and Closing Critical Gaps

Putin’s Cold War-driven hybrid warfare strategy—premised on flawed assumptions of Western decline—is increasingly undermined by NATO’s multidomain modernization, industrial mobilization, and alliance cohesion:

• Advanced counter-drone and electromagnetic warfare capabilities—including RADHAZ-enhanced shipboard survivability and the emerging Blackbeard hypersonic missile—effectively blunt Russian UAV and EW advantages.
• Arctic security initiatives and specialized drone developments gradually chip away at Russian dominance despite icebreaker shortages.
• Generational leaps in manned-unmanned teaming and autonomous platforms multiply allied combat power and adaptability.
• Maritime and undersea warfare modernization reinforce NATO’s sea control and power projection.
• Forward command posts and expanded multinational deployments strengthen alliance cohesion and burden-sharing.
• Accelerated industrial scaling, AI integration, and cybersecurity resilience ensure sustained technological edge.
• The evolving role of explainable, decision-ready AI—embodied in initiatives like Seekr’s leadership appointments—signals a maturing approach to AI operationalization.
• Persistent challenges—European capability gaps, Arctic access limitations, AI governance debates, and industrial/budget pressures—require urgent, coordinated attention.

---

Conclusion

Vladimir Putin’s Cold War framing remains the ideological anchor of Russia’s costly hybrid warfare campaign in Ukraine, driving an attrition-centric strategy premised on flawed assumptions about NATO’s decline and fragmentation. Nonetheless, NATO’s decisive multidomain modernization—including electromagnetic warfare breakthroughs, Arctic security initiatives, advanced manned-unmanned teaming, autonomous platforms, maritime and undersea upgrades, rapid industrial innovation, and enhanced cybersecurity—is steadily dismantling Kremlin asymmetric advantages.

Recent developments such as the U.S. Navy’s Blackbeard hypersonic missile contract, the RADHAZ team’s electromagnetic warfare sustainment efforts, the Army’s $217 million One World Terrain production contract, and Seekr’s investment in explainable AI for warfighters underscore NATO’s growing technological, operational, and ethical sophistication. Coupled with intensified diplomatic pressure on Russia’s external backers and ongoing organizational innovation debates, these trends highlight NATO’s expanding edge.

As the conflict evolves, the dynamic interplay between Putin’s attrition-driven hybrid strategy and NATO’s accelerating multidomain adaptation will decisively shape both the war’s outcome and the post-conflict European security order. Sustaining allied industrial momentum, closing drone/EW and Arctic gaps, innovating organizationally, and governing AI adoption responsibly remain essential to counter Kremlin exploitation and ensure durable strategic stability.