NATO Supreme Commander sets out block, blunt and break plan at Warsaw forum

NATO's Supreme Commander of Forces in Europe, Alex Grynkewich, used the Warsaw Security Forum to set out a theory of victory for deterrence and defence, after warnings about a variety of threats from Russia.

In his speech, Grynkewich said NATO's core strength is that it brings 32 nations together. He argued the alliance has a decision advantage because it gathers intelligence from multiple sources, uses advanced algorithms to make sense of large amounts of data, and builds a deep understanding of the strategic and operational environment. That, he said, makes it unlikely NATO will be caught by surprise. The alliance should see an attack coming, giving it time to assess the threat and move forces quickly. Those moves are meant to deter, but they also prepare NATO to deny any attack, including one intended to seize and hold alliance territory as a fait accompli.

Grynkewich described the theory of victory as more than a military plan. It is a common vision and commander's intent for winning in deterrence and defence, based on a clear view of current threats and on lessons from modern warfare in Ukraine and the Middle East.

The theory has three main parts.

Block: Land forces would move to dominate any enemy assault at the point of contact. Through manoeuvre, they would fix enemy formations and deny the seizure of alliance territory. Land-based forces would attack and destroy advancing forces, while air, naval, space and cyber forces worked to gain freedom of manoeuvre. Once air and maritime superiority is secured, those forces would bring mass and precision to bear and deny the enemy the ability to hold ground.

Blunt: If the attack continues or is followed by more offensives, NATO would use advanced sensors, autonomous systems and multi-domain forces to deny the attacker momentum or the initiative. Synchronised effects down to the tactical level would overwhelm enemy formations and cause any advance to falter.

Break: If the adversary presses the attack or commits reserves, NATO would break the warfighting system facing it. That means targeting not just the attacking force but everything that supports, sustains or controls it. Grynkewich said NATO would layer high-end and highly effective precision munitions with an overpowering mass of affordable and scalable systems. It would apply constant kinetic and non-kinetic pressure across land, air, sea, space and cyberspace. The aim would be to starve enemy formations of replenishment, stop enemy commanders controlling their forces, and reduce or destroy enemy support capabilities.

He stressed that NATO is not seeking to impose a strategic defeat on its adversary. The alliance only needs to stop an attack and deny the ability to seize and hold NATO territory. That requires the tactical and operational defeat of the forces used against NATO, but no more. Breaking the attacking warfighting system would render it unable to continue or force it to culminate, as Clausewitz put it. Because NATO would only attack the system attacking it, and only to prevent it from achieving its goals, Grynkewich argued the alliance has no need or incentive to escalate. He linked this to a denial defence approach, or DDA, that he said keeps NATO in a favourable position on escalation. The burden of escalation would rest with the aggressor. If an adversary threatened or chose escalation, he said, it would not fracture NATO but bind it more tightly. NATO could match any move up the escalation ladder, which should make adversaries pause.

Grynkewich said the alliance is now working to turn the theory into practice. Forces are being made ready to fight tonight, but NATO is not complacent and will keep preparing and rehearsing. Demonstrating readiness is central both to defending and to preventing conflict. Forward land forces on the eastern flank will exercise their ability to block. Air and maritime forces will practise gaining and maintaining freedom of manoeuvre and delivering multi-domain effects. NATO will invest in high-end and affordable long-range precision strike, sensor networks and a warfighting cloud.

He said deterrence remains the first goal and NATO does not seek war with anyone. As the overall commander of NATO's operational forces, he said implementing the theory could require him to issue orders he hopes never to give. The alliance exists to preserve peace, he added, but if war comes, NATO will block, blunt and break.