Putin Probes NATO's 32 Allies With Sabotage as Deterrence Wavers

Putin is testing NATO indirectly through sabotage of undersea cables, pipelines and shipping rather than direct attack, a risk WSJ opinion writers say is rising as US deterrence under President Donald Trump looks uncertain.

"What the West does need to worry about are Russian attacks against seabed cables, pipelines and shipping in international waters," Terry Smith wrote in a letter to the Wall Street Journal. Possible but less likely, he added, are border incursions into Russian-speaking areas of eastern Estonia and Latvia — moves that would let Putin gauge how effectively NATO powers respond to provocation.

The warnings follow CIA Director John Ratcliffe's unannounced visit to Moscow on Aug. 24, his first direct involvement in diplomatic efforts to end the war in Ukraine. Ratcliffe met Sergei Naryshkin, head of Russia's Foreign Intelligence Service, and FSB Director Alexander Bortnikov, and proposed a trilateral Trump-Putin-Zelensky summit, according to Axios. US officials briefed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on the talks Aug. 28.

The debate cuts to the credibility of NATO's collective-defense guarantee, which rests on the US as its cornerstone across the alliance's 32 members. Smith cautioned the situation "may become alarming in the next few months, especially if the U.S. under President Trump proves to be a broken reed rather than the cornerstone of the NATO alliance."

Not everyone agrees a direct confrontation is plausible. Retired Cmdr. John Fortugno, a former planner at NATO headquarters, argued Russia is already tangling with the alliance through the Ukraine war, which he called "Russian pushback against alliance expansion." Most of Russia's active operational land forces are committed to or rotating through the Ukrainian theater, he wrote, where they are being "chewed up at unsustainable rates." Opening a second front in the Baltics, where the population is on alert and NATO forces are forward-deployed, "would be a disaster for Mr. Putin," Fortugno said.

The two letters respond to a WSJ editorial published Aug. 28 headlined "Would Putin Really Tangle With NATO?" They frame a risk assessment that has moved to the center of European security debate as Washington balances diplomacy with Moscow against continued pressure.

Ratcliffe's trip was partly aimed at assessing whether Russia's intelligence chiefs could persuade Putin to resume US-mediated negotiations, stalled since trilateral talks among Ukraine, the US and Russia were suspended in February 2026 after the war in Iran began. The New York Times reported Ratcliffe delivered a "bleak assessment" of the war to Bortnikov and urged Moscow to reach a deal before its military and economic position worsens. Trump described the visit as "standard business" and denied it was intended to warn Russia against attacking NATO territory. Kyrylo Budanov, Zelensky's chief of staff, said US-mediated talks could resume in September; Zelensky has backed a direct meeting with Putin, who has rejected it.

The scenarios carry market implications even without confirmed events. Attacks on seabed cables and pipelines would raise shipping insurance costs and threaten energy flows across the North Sea and Baltic, while Baltic border provocations would test the Article 5 commitment underpinning European defense spending and regional risk pricing. Putin has responded to Western sanctions and representations by ignoring them or answering with lies and threats, Smith wrote, and the only intervention he takes seriously comes from Beijing — a factor that discounts any tactical nuclear use in Ukraine, since Putin knows Xi Jinping will not tolerate it.

For now the risk remains speculative, with no confirmed sabotage or incursion having triggered a market response. The window for escalation, and for a test of US resolve, is the next few months as negotiations over a September resumption take shape.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.