A recent war game conducted by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization has revealed how quickly Russia could seize control of the Baltic states if the West fails to respond decisively, highlighting vulnerabilities in alliance decision-making and political resolve.
The simulation focused on the strategic Lithuanian city of Marijampolė, a key transport hub linking Poland, Belarus and Russia’s Kaliningrad enclave. Control of the area would effectively cut off NATO’s main land corridor to the Baltic region, isolating Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia.
How the simulated conflict unfolded
In the exercise, Russia launched what it described as a limited “humanitarian operation,” deploying about 15,000 troops. The advance was swift and carefully calibrated to avoid triggering a major military response.
The United States declined to invoke NATO’s Article 5 collective-defence clause. Germany, despite having troops stationed in Lithuania, chose not to intervene after Russian forces used drones to lay mines near a military base. Poland mobilised its forces but ultimately stopped short of crossing the border.
Within days, the simulation showed Moscow gaining effective control of the Baltic theatre without escalating into a broader conventional war.
Bartłomiej Kot, a Polish security analyst who played the role of Poland’s prime minister, told The Wall Street Journal that Russia achieved its objectives largely through psychological and political pressure.
“The Russians reached most of their goals without deploying many units. Once faced with escalation from Moscow, we instinctively shifted to de-escalation,” he said.
Germany’s caution and Russia’s strategy
The exercise highlighted that Russia’s success depended more on anticipating political hesitation than on superior military force.
Franz-Stefan Gady, a Vienna-based analyst who played Russia’s chief of staff, said deterrence relies not only on capabilities but on perceived resolve.
“In the game, we knew Germany would hesitate. That expectation alone was enough to win,” he said.
A separate public war game by German newspaper Die Welt reached similar conclusions. It showed Berlin responding initially with sanctions, naval measures in the Baltic Sea and civil-protection preparations, while avoiding direct military confrontation. As Russian forces consolidated their position, reversing the situation became increasingly risky and costly for NATO.
Participants and structure
The exercise brought together former senior politicians, retired military officers and NATO officials, including Oana Lungescu and Eberhard Zorn. Participants operated independently, and the scenario was not scripted, allowing decisions to unfold organically.
A broader warning for Europe
The findings come amid rising concern that Russia could pose a more immediate threat to NATO than previously expected. In recent years, repeated incursions by Russian drones and aircraft into alliance airspace have been seen as attempts to test Western responses.
Dutch defence minister Ruben Brekelmans told The Wall Street Journal that his government believes Russia could mobilise large troop formations within a year.
“We see growing strategic stockpiles and an expanded presence along NATO’s borders,” he said.
Reflecting on the simulation, Lungescu warned that a frozen or unfavourable settlement in Ukraine could make Moscow more dangerous, not less.
“After a bad peace, Russia could become even more threatening to NATO. The scenario was, unfortunately, very realistic,” she said.
Not a prediction, but a caution
The organisers stressed that the war game was not intended to predict future events. Instead, it was designed to expose how hesitation, political calculations and alliance dynamics could shape a crisis.
The exercise demonstrated how quickly military realities can overtake diplomatic efforts—and how delays in decision-making could allow Russia to secure major strategic gains before NATO can respond effectively.
