ABSTRACT
This chapter assesses NATO's response to Russian exercises (including a study of Zapad 2017), and Russia's response to NATO's exercises, highlighting a distinction between Russian and NATO understanding of threat in relation to exercises. NATO frequently commented on large-scale no-notice Russian exercises, focusing on the lack of engagement with the CSBMs rather than the lack of warning, increasing the perception that NATO was under immediate threat. This did not lead to a lack of understanding of Russian capability or raise uncertainty about specific aspects of intent. Ultimately, the absence of notification was seen as bad faith. This perception of rule-breaking highlighted deviation from NATO's transparency and was seen as part of Russia's “revisionist” approach to security in which rules that were not of direct strategic benefit were ignored.
For Russia, NATO's exercises were viewed through the lens of relative capability and concern about their near abroad. By highlighting the alliance's strength, Russia's strategic options were seen to be reduced. Consequently, even small-scale exercises taking place close to Russia, especially when involving a large number of NATO allies, generated concern. Russia used NATO exercises to justify military enhancement, but exercises in isolation did not increase Russia's perception of NATO harbouring malign intent.
