During the ongoing war in Ukraine, Russia has quietly threatened many of its neighbors, gauging their ability to withstand future Kremlin aggression. The battlefield for global influence between NATO and Russia extends far beyond Ukraine. While reports of Russian drone incursions into Poland made it to front pages across the world in September 2025, far fewer people have heard of the struggles for political dominance in the tiny nation of Georgia, or Russia’s campaign of sabotage against Estonia in Northern Europe. While not as violent or destructive as the full-scale war raging in Eastern Ukraine, each struggle plays an important role in the broader conflicts between world powers. Given the strategic advantage that would be afforded to Putin if he achieves success along these smaller fronts, it is vital for NATO to take decisive action and begin taking these challenges more seriously. The most crucial steps for NATO and its allies in their struggle against Russia include an increased military presence in threatened allied countries, a stronger effort towards leveraging soft power and information campaigns within the various political battlegrounds across Eurasia, and a coordinated initiative to ease Baltic policies against the Russian language that feeds Kremlin narratives of marginalization.
One of the most important theatres of Russia’s competition with Western powers lies in the local politics of much smaller nations. Georgia, a nation of nearly four million people located south of Russia, has seen a shift in popular support towards NATO and the EU in the last two decades in defiance of Russian aggression. This strategic victory for the West has begun to deteriorate after Georgia’s request to join the EU was halted in protest of what the EU described as democratic backsliding. More recently the Georgian government passed a controversial foreign agents law, sparking massive protests after critics accused it of mimicking Russian legislation targeting NGOs. Georgia is not the only small country that Russia has been making efforts to win over. Russian officials have been paying friendly visits to Kyrgyzstan to solidify friendly relations, despite the fact that the Kyrgyzstani government has passed laws against the Russian language in their home country. These laws closely resemble similar laws passed in the Baltics, which have ignited outrage from the Kremlin and are used as the justification for increased hostilities and aggressive actions against the tiny EU member states Latvia and Estonia. Altogether, while seemingly distant scenarios, these situations share an opportunity for strategic action by NATO and its allies.
Kyrgyzstani pushback against the degradation of their native tongue represents a perfect opportunity for NATO to leverage the situation to their political advantage. Russian is the second most spoken language in Kyrgyzstan and has been frequently used in broadcasting, business, and governance, leading to legislative pushback seeking to ensure the preservation of Kyrgyz as the dominant language. This effort has gained traction in light of a surge of Russian migrants into Kyrgyzstan due to the invasion of Ukraine, primarily in 2022 and 2023. These migrants are perceived by some locals as a threat. The Kyrgyzstani government passed a law resembling controversial laws in Estonia and Latvia that mandate increased usage of Kyrgyz in broadcasting, government, and the names of various locations. While these laws have sparked Russian outrage against the Baltics, it is interesting to note that Russia has still maintained a cordial relationship with Kyrgyzstan, likely due to Kyrgyzstan’s strategic value to the Russian economy, particularly in its effort to avoid tariffs. Given the fact that some within the Kyrgyz population have voiced frustrations against the prevalence of the Russian language within its borders as well as Russian immigration, this is likely the most effective argument for NATO to convince Kyrgyzstan to expand its relationship with the West. NATO faces an uphill battle to achieve diplomatic wins in a nation bordering Russia, with a high population of ethnic Russians, a significant trade relationship with the Kremlin, and a location isolated from the democratic world, signaling that any potential opportunity cannot be ignored. It would work towards NATO’s benefit to increase public awareness in Kyrgyzstan of this controversial surge of Russian migrants, putting pressure on the Kyrgyz government to become more vocally critical of Russia’s actions. This could be quickly acted upon via American and European state-funded news, NGO funding within Kyrgyzstan, and diplomatic dialogue.
To the Southeast lies the Caucasus, a region divided by the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, home to the ancient nation of Georgia, which is currently balancing a tightrope between Russia and the West. After a decade of growing popular support for membership in the European Union which signaled a political loss for Russia, the Georgian government enacted a controversial law to the dismay of both the European Union itself and supporters for Georgian membership. This “Foreign Agents Registration Act” has stoked massive protests in the capital of Tbilisi, accused of mirroring a similar Russian law. Given that until recently NATO had been gaining ground in the country which harbored anger against Russia due to the military annexation of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, these recent developments have marked a drastic turn of events. By investing in diplomatic and grassroot efforts aiming to swing the advantage back in their favor, Western powers would be taking the first step towards addressing one of the most contentious power struggles in their competition with Putin.
An imminent reinforcement of military strength and capability in Estonia is vital for ensuring European security. Estonia is largely considered to be the most vulnerable EU member state to a Russian attack, and constant Russian aggression has proven that this vulnerability is not one to be ignored. Russia has cut internet cables in the Baltic Sea, flown aircraft in Estonian airspace, and even sent a drone over the border, “Estonia now finds itself in what officials describe as a ‘silent war’—a campaign of hostile actions that stop short of open conflict but aim to destabilize and intimidate.” Despite spending an exorbitant portion of their budget on national defense and announcing plans to increase military spending in the future, Estonia’s active-duty armed forces still number fewer than ten thousand. One counterargument against the case for bolstering troops in Estonia is that it is the least tactically important nation in the Baltics. If Russia chose the most anticipated strategy for invasion, Estonia would be cut off from the rest of Western Europe, and any foreign detachments stationed there would become trapped. Despite the truth of this argument, neglecting to increase NATO’s military presence within the country would jeopardize deterrence efforts. By continuing to bolster its meager number of troops in Estonia, NATO would display a powerful and unwavering commitment to its members not only to Russia, but to the entire world.
While Estonia is more vulnerable to invasion, Latvia and Lithuania are considered the most likely Russian targets for a major offensive against Europe. The Suwalki Gap is a sparsely populated stretch of Lithuanian and Polish land separating Belarus with Kaliningrad, a small Russian enclave within mainland Europe. Many military strategists believe that Russia would target this gap in the case of an invasion, solidifying this location as well as all of Lithuania as a crucial piece of land to defend. As seemingly straightforward as the need to bolster these defenses may be, the effort to do so has been slow moving. By 2026 NATO will have a Brigade size force stationed within Latvia. Germany also made a significant move by pledging to station a full brigade in Lithuania by 2027, but in the case of a full-scale war the Suwalki Gap would likely need a division sized force (15,000-20,000). If EU lawmakers follow through on increasing defense spending in 2026, stationing a larger force in the Baltics is not only feasible, but vital to European security amid ongoing tensions with Russia.
The Baltic states’ approach towards handling the Russian language should be softened and humanized to ease domestic tension and prevent handing the Kremlin free political capital, which will in turn benefit Western powers in the information war. When it comes to winning over hearts and minds, Russia has used the Baltic states to its advantage by attacking their policies against the Russian language as harsh and discriminatory. It is not just the Russian government that has been enraged, but the Russian minority has responded harshly to the Estonian government in Tallinn, especially towards the removal of monuments to Soviet soldiers. This is a similar narrative to the position the Kremlin has taken to justify their invasion of Ukraine launched in 2022. The fact that laws dealing with the Russian language in Kyrgyzstan (a country that has been important to Russia in its efforts to survive tariffs) have not met a similar outcry from the Russian government suggest that accusations against the Baltics and Ukraine of marginalizing their Russian minorities are likely as strategically motivated as they are ideological. Russia will likely use these allegations as a justification for force in the event of a conflict in the Baltics regardless of their truth, yet it nonetheless remains vital to ensure that these narratives lack any truth altogether. Any developments dispersed to an international audience that align with Russian claims work to legitimize Russian claims and degrade NATO’s values of freedom and democracy for all. This leaves proper treatment of the Russian minority in Estonia and adherence to their rights as Estonian citizens of paramount importance, regardless that many native Estonians associate this minority with the harsh memories of a Communist past.
Ukraine is only one sphere of the ongoing struggle between Putin and the West; many smaller post-Soviet countries remain critical in their strategic value. NATO’s position necessitates coordinated and persistent efforts by policymakers, diplomats, and intelligence agencies on behalf of democracies across the world, while also maintaining respect for each nation’s core values and sovereignty. NATO leaders, especially those within mainland Europe, must remember that active efforts towards the defense of member states and the advocation towards Western values of self-determination must be a constant priority to preserve stability. NATO must increase its forces in the Baltics, settle tension with Russian minorities, and capitalize on political opportunity in Georgia and Kyrgyzstan with urgency today to prevent Russia from exploiting vulnerabilities in the future.
Featured/Headline Image Caption and Citation: NATO Headquarters, Image sourced from Flickr | CC License, no changes made