Will Russia attack NATO? A comparison of military forces and weaponry.

New Defense Spending for NATO Countries and the American "Nuclear Arsenal" in Europe

In his first major international address after returning to the White House at the World Economic Forum in Davos, U.S. President Donald Trump emphasized the need for all NATO member countries to increase military spending to 5% of their GDP. However, in 2024, some NATO members are unlikely to reach even 2%. Meanwhile, NATO's Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, General Christopher Cavoli, once again urged not to ignore the threat.

"Russia's intentions go beyond the conflict with Ukraine," Cavoli stated.

In his view, there are at least three components to this belief. First, it is what the Russian government says, routinely announcing threats to other countries, including NATO allies. Second, they constantly express dissatisfaction with the world order and their desire to replace NATO.

Although NATO has repeatedly stated that it would not intervene directly in the war that Russia is waging against Ukraine to avoid a direct conflict between Moscow and NATO, this has not prevented the U.S. from deploying modified B61-12 gravity bombs in the UK over the past year, as stated by Jill Hruby, administrator of the U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration.

"The new B61-12 gravity bombs are fully deployed," Hruby confirmed. The yield of such bombs is up to 50 kilotons—three times that of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima.

Apparently, this was a response to the actions of Russia and its allies. According to Hruby, Russia has frequently resorted to nuclear saber-rattling, has deployed tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus, withdrawn from the nuclear test ban treaty, revised its nuclear doctrine to lower the threshold for nuclear weapon use, and seems to be exploring space-based nuclear weapons as a new pillar of its nuclear forces.

Comparison of Armies

However, nuclear weapons alone cannot win a war. In the event of a global conflict, much will depend on traditional types of armaments. In this regard, NATO significantly outperforms Russia in several indicators, including the size of its military and financial capabilities.

For instance, the military budget of the United States alone in 2025 is set at $895 billion, while Russia's military expenditures for this year are planned at $145 billion. Additionally, the total number of military personnel in NATO countries is approximately twice that of Russia. According to Statista, NATO's total military personnel is around 7.6 million, including 3.4 million soldiers on active duty, not including reservists. Russia has an army of about 1.5 million individuals, with the total personnel of the Russian army around 3.5 million.

For a more detailed comparison of NATO and Russian armies, see the infographic.

What NATO and Russia Fight With

To better understand the balance of power between potential adversaries, we compared not only quantitative indicators but also the characteristics of the main models of military equipment used by NATO and Russia. While Russia is ahead in quantity in some areas, the technological advantage lies with NATO.

Artillery — Quantity vs. Quality

It is no secret that artillery plays a key role on the battlefield in Ukraine. Unfortunately, the disparity in artillery numbers is significant. According to Global FirePower 2025, NATO's total number of self-propelled artillery units is about 1,200. In comparison, Russia has nearly 5,000. The ratio is roughly 1 to 2 in the number of towed artillery as well. However, NATO has an advantage: virtually all Western artillery systems outperform their Russian counterparts.

The main difference lies in the caliber. NATO systems use a 155 mm caliber, while the Soviet Union and Russia use 152 mm. At first glance, this difference seems minimal. However, it actually results in approximately a 10% difference in range and power due to the larger shell size. This significantly impacts the effectiveness of these systems on the battlefield. But the primary superiority, as experts note, lies in the technology. Moreover, each individual piece of equipment has its own unique features.

"If we take a standard high-explosive shell, Western artillery outperforms Soviet artillery in terms of accuracy and range. In Soviet or Russian artillery, the range tops out at 28 km for a 152 mm shell, whereas Western artillery starts at 30 km," says Oleg Zhdanov, a retired colonel of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and military analyst, in an interview with Novini.LIVE.

Beyond a certain point, increasing range is impractical because accuracy sharply declines due to shell dispersion. Therefore, long-range shells must be guided. For example, the M982 Excalibur or SMArt shells are guided in the terminal phase. With a special charge and an active-reactive engine, these shells can travel up to 74 km. "The technology of barrels and the ballistics of NATO shells are significantly better than those of Soviet shells used by Russia," the expert explains. They hit precisely because they are guided. However, there is a downside—they are very expensive, and you cannot produce them in large quantities on the assembly line.

As for Russia, their "Giatsint," Msta-S, and Msta-B, produced in the 1980s, also lag in terms of process automation. Take, for example, loading automation. The 2S5 Giatsint and 2S19 Msta-S are semi-automatic, requiring manual transfer of ammunition.

Russia May Run Out of Tanks

A similar situation exists with armored vehicles. One of the numerous NATO models that have been tested in combat against Russian equipment is the Bradley armored vehicle. "I would like to quote a Ukrainian military officer who expressed surprise at how the USSR ever planned to fight NATO. If we compare the Bradley and BMP, it's like night and day. The Bradley can withstand a tank hit and still maintain its mobility and the crew's safety. I have yet to see Soviet or Russian equivalents like the BMP or BMD withstand a tank hit. This is a clear comparison. There are also examples where Western models save soldiers' lives even when hitting a mine," Zhdanov tells Novini.LIVE.

Regarding tanks, NATO also significantly outpaces the Soviet models currently in service. "Even the modern Russian tanks retain the chassis and main components from the T-72 and T-80 — these are their main tanks. The T-90 is merely a deep modernization. They cannot even develop a modern engine and still rely on the engine concept that was installed on the T-34. Moreover, as the battlefield has shown, our fighters with FPV drones actively target their T-90s. The superiority of the 'Leopard 2' tanks is also evident, as they are actively used in Ukraine as the primary means of firepower on the front lines. They often engage in direct duels with enemy tanks. Therefore, Russia now primarily uses its tanks from concealed positions, just as we did at the beginning of the war," Zhdanov explains.

Interestingly, in 2023, Ukrainian forces captured a presumably new T-90M, but later discovered that its cannon was manufactured back in 1992. The British International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), analyzing the number of Russian tanks, concluded that about 85% were simply taken out of storage and "refurbished." According to analysts, this primarily involved Soviet T-72s, as well as T-62s and even a few T-55s.

As Zhdanov tells us, Russia's production of new tanks does not exceed 200-220 units annually. Meanwhile, Ukrainian forces destroy between 150 and 300 tanks each month. At this rate, analysts at the Stockholm Centre for Eastern European Studies (SCEEUS) predict that the stocks of Russian tanks and infantry fighting vehicles available for restoration will reach a "critical depletion point" by the second half of 2025.

Who is Stronger in the Sky

Aviation remains one of the few types of weaponry where Western and Soviet technology have yet to clash in combat on Ukrainian territory. First, Ukraine has only a limited number of Western aircraft. Second, the F-16s that have been delivered are operating "in air defense mode."

And quite successfully, too. As the press service of the Ukrainian Air Force recently reported, at the end of December, during a massive missile attack on Ukraine, a Ukrainian F-16 pilot shot down six missiles in one combat sortie, two of which were taken down with an aircraft cannon, setting a world record.