"Is Russia's 'Next Target' NATO?" The Warning from Secretary-General Rutte Highlights Europe's Reality

1) "Next, It's Us" — The Weight of Rutte's Statement

Berlin, December 11, 2025. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte chose bold words in his keynote speech at an event related to the Munich Security Conference (MSC).

"We are Russia's next target and already in the danger zone" — he warned, further emphasizing that "the time for action is now," strongly admonishing the member states against any "quiet complacency." NATO

What makes this phrasing more than just a crisis alert is the underlying recognition that "war is becoming the 'norm' rather than the 'exception'." Rutte noted that Russia's war economy and its "shadow offensive" on European society are progressing simultaneously, likening the scale of war NATO should prepare for to the times endured by our grandparents and great-grandparents. NATO

2) Rutte's "Five-Year" Timeline

What drew attention was the assessment that "Russia could be in a position to use force against NATO within five years." NATO

This is not a definitive statement that an invasion is certain. Rather, it is closer to a warning that the risk becomes more tangible when conditions such as ineffective deterrence, delayed preparedness, or alliance fragmentation are met.

In his speech, Rutte mentioned that Russia continues massive drone and missile attacks on Ukraine and maintains a high level of production capacity. He cited specific figures such as "over 46,000 attacks" and a monthly production scale of "2,900 attack drones." NATO

While there is room to scrutinize the accuracy and definitions of these numbers (including the treatment of "decoys"), it is noteworthy that the NATO leader is steering the conversation towards "industrial capability equals military power."

3) It's Not Just "Defense Spending": Military Production and Society's "Preparation"

What Rutte called for was not merely an increase in budget. In his speech, he repeatedly urged the rapid increase in production of the "supply side" supporting deterrence and defense — namely ammunition, equipment, and supplies. He also mentioned the significant increase in European 155mm shell production compared to two years ago, citing Germany's factory plans (annual scale of 350,000 rounds) as an example. NATO

Symbolically, he also referred to the agreement at the NATO summit (The Hague) to "invest 5% of GDP in defense by 2035." If countries seriously steer in this direction, "painful trade-offs" with other policy areas such as social security, education, and infrastructure investment will be unavoidable. Rutte himself explained this as "emergency budgets," "cuts in public spending," and even "economic disruption." NATO

4) "Ukraine's Security is Europe's Security"

Rutte's logic is clear. If Ukraine were to be placed under "occupation" in a manner desired by Russia, the tangent between NATO and Russia would extend, increasing the likelihood of armed conflict. In such a scenario, NATO's permanent forces on the eastern flank and the necessary defense budget would exceed the levels currently anticipated. NATO

In this context, he strongly called for the continuation of support for Ukraine. "Our military must get what it needs to defend, and Ukraine must also get what it needs now," he said. news.ORF.at

The support is not a matter of "goodwill" but a prerequisite for deterrence.

5) The Instability of US-European Relations Amplifies the Sense of Crisis

The warning resonates not only because of the Russian threat. What amplifies the sense of crisis on the European side is the doubt about whether the US commitment to Europe will continue in the same form in the future.

ORF also touched on the "European side's anxiety" regarding the new US national security strategy (Trump administration), depicting the tug-of-war between deterrence and politics, including mentions of "US plans to deploy long-range weapons (such as Tomahawks) to Germany from 2026." news.ORF.at

Rutte himself, in a Q&A session, evaluated the US's involvement in NATO as "committed at the core," while also acknowledging the reality that Europe has been forced to bear an increased burden. NATO

In short, it's not just "fear of Russia," but "fear of a US-European split" that is most alarming. This fear is what propels the use of "strong words" this time.

6) Reactions on Social Media: Agreement, Opposition, and "Distrust of the US"

So how did social media perceive this message? On Reddit's large forum r/worldnews, for instance, a post citing Reuters' report was made, with the comments section branching into several points of discussion. Reddit

(1) "Too Late a Warning" Camp

There are voices sarcastically questioning Europe's delayed crisis awareness, saying, "Didn't you see the assassinations and interference?" and "Are you finally serious?" Some comments referred to past incidents and political climates, interpreting the statement as "saying the 'obvious' only now." Reddit

(2) "Russia Cannot Engage in Full-Scale War with NATO" Camp

Conversely, there is a noticeable view that "given the attrition in Ukraine, it is unrealistic for Russia to continue a multi-front war against all of Europe." Here, Rutte's statement is more often interpreted as a "political message urging preparedness" rather than a "prediction of invasion." Reddit

(3) "The Greatest Uncertainty is the US" Camp

The most fervent discussions revolved around concerns about US involvement. Threads included debates like "the US might relatively downplay NATO" and "Europe should reduce its dependence on the US." Some comments even expanded the conversation to non-military cards like finance, trade, and tech regulations, showing how the topic of "security = the design of the entire society" is spreading. Reddit

(4) There is also Rejection and Ridicule: Criticism of "Provocation" and "Warmongering"

In another German-speaking community, there was backlash dismissing the warning itself as "exaggeration" and "incitement." Even with extreme language, the underlying concerns seem to be fears that "military expansion might destroy society" or "diplomatic exits might be closed." Reddit

Of course, social media is not a microcosm of public opinion. Strong words spread more widely, and extreme positions stand out more. Nonetheless, what emerges from this reaction is the fact that, as much as the "Russian threat," the "unity of Europe," "US-European relations," and "domestic burden acceptance" are becoming points of contention.

7) Ultimately, What Are We Prone to Misjudge?

Rutte's speech is closer to "visualizing costs" than to inciting fear.
War, if it occurs, will be costly. However, preparations for deterrence are also costly. Moreover, it involves taxes and budgets, industrial policy, education and research, immigration and labor, and even the defense of the information space.

The important thing is not to consume words like "five years" or "next target" as predictions of the future. Rather, they should be read as "homework with a deadline" to examine the vulnerabilities Europe currently faces (production capacity, political fragmentation, dependence on the US, resilience to disinformation). NATO

And at the center of this homework is Ukraine. As the phrase "Ukraine's security is our security" indicates, even for countries outside the front lines, war is no longer an "external event."