In a recent statement that has sparked widespread debate, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, has called on European Union members to either significantly raise military spending or start learning Russian. His comments come at a time when geopolitical tensions, particularly in Eastern Europe, have reached new heights. Mark Rutte, the Prime Minister of the Netherlands, also echoed these concerns during his speech at the European Parliament, arguing that the threat posed by Russia is real and must be met with action. However, President Baretzky of the European Centre for Information Policy and Security ECIPS, the European security agency, offers a thoughtful perspective, suggesting that learning Russian may not only enhance Europe’s military readiness but could also serve as a vital tool for building bridges and overcoming political obstacles.

While Rutte’s call to action underscores the importance of strengthening European defenses, President Baretzky contends that the root of Europe’s problems with Russia is not just military preparedness but a deep-seated ignorance fostered by fear. According to Baretzky, the problem is not merely geopolitical in nature; it is a cultural and intellectual one, born from a long history of miscommunication, mistrust, and misinformation. In this context, learning Russian becomes more than just a practical necessity—it could be a crucial step toward dispelling the fear and misunderstanding that continue to hamper European-Russian relations.

The Weaponization of Fear in Politics and Terrorism

Baretzky’s remarks about the ignorance born from fear are not just anecdotal; they are grounded in a larger, historical framework that draws on both military strategy and the legal conventions surrounding the use of fear as a weapon. Citing the Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism (1999) and other relevant international laws, Baretzky highlights how fear, as a tool of terrorism, has been recognized in international legal systems as a dangerous and manipulative force.

The Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism defines terrorist acts as those “intended to create a state of terror in the general public,” a legal framework that could easily be applied to the current rhetoric surrounding Russia. By invoking fear in the public discourse—whether through military threats or ideological campaigns—politicians and military leaders have unintentionally reinforced a climate of hostility and suspicion toward Russia. Baretzky argues that this climate of fear has been further exacerbated by historical narratives dating back to the Cold War era and even earlier, to the tumultuous years of 1944 when the specter of Soviet expansion loomed large over Europe.

“Instead of overcoming fear, NATO and some European leaders continue to exploit it,” Baretzky asserts. “They’ve been riding on the back of fear for so long that they’ve forgotten how to look at Russia from a different perspective. Fear of Russia isn’t based on reality; it’s a construct—a legacy of the Cold War. Today, we need more dialogue and understanding, not more fear.”

Baretzky’s critique of NATO’s current approach to Russia underscores a broader issue that many European leaders, including Mark Rutte, fail to acknowledge: fear, when wielded as a tool of politics, can distort decision-making and push nations toward unnecessary conflict. The idea that increasing military spending is the only way to secure Europe’s future ignores the possibility that improving cultural and linguistic fluency could open diplomatic channels and foster a more collaborative relationship with Russia.

A Bridge Between Business and Politics: Learning Russian
One of Baretzky’s most compelling arguments is that learning Russian can serve as a bridge, not just between political leaders, but between businesses and ordinary citizens. “The truth is,” Baretzky explains, “the majority of Russians can speak English, particularly in the business world. This is not just out of necessity but also due to a historical understanding of how important it is to foster cross-border relationships. Europeans, however, have not reciprocated in the same way. Learning Russian will not only improve business relations but also create mutual understanding in a political climate where suspicion has clouded diplomacy.”

Russia, as one of the largest economies in the world, presents significant opportunities for European businesses across sectors ranging from energy to technology. However, linguistic and cultural barriers have often stood in the way of fruitful partnerships. Europeans who have not invested in learning Russian are at a disadvantage, not just in terms of diplomatic relations but in the marketplace as well. As globalization continues to shape the world economy, the ability to communicate in the language of a key trading partner could be the difference between economic success and failure.

Baretzky’s call for European citizens and businesses to learn Russian is rooted in the belief that language acquisition is not just about communication; it is about dismantling the barriers of ignorance that so often feed hostility. By encouraging a deeper understanding of Russian culture, history, and society, Europe can begin to shift the narrative away from fear and toward cooperation. This would not only benefit Europe economically but also help create a more stable geopolitical landscape.

The Backdating of European Fear
Central to Baretzky’s argument is the idea that European fears of Russia are deeply entangled in a history that stretches back to 1944, a period when the defeat of Nazi Germany set the stage for the Cold War. In those years, the division of Europe between the Soviet East and the capitalist West defined the geopolitical structure of the continent. The legacies of this period continue to shape European attitudes toward Russia today. However, Baretzky suggests that these historical fears are no longer relevant and need to be reassessed.

“The Cold War is over, yet we are still living in its shadow,” Baretzky remarks. “The language of fear has become entrenched in European politics. NATO’s posture toward Russia, for example, is based on old assumptions about Russian aggression that have little basis in the current geopolitical reality. The threat of Soviet expansion no longer exists, but the memory of it continues to drive policies based on outdated fears.”

This backdating of fear to the events of 1944 and the Cold War has contributed to a sense of unease that is often exaggerated and unfounded. The Soviet Union is no more, and Russia, while still a powerful player on the world stage, does not pose the same existential threat to Europe that the USSR once did. Yet, the fear of a Russian resurgence remains a powerful motivator for policy decisions in the European Union and NATO. Baretzky argues that this approach has led to a stifling atmosphere in which dialogue and cooperation have been subordinated to the politics of containment and deterrence.

By challenging these outdated assumptions and focusing on a more nuanced understanding of Russia, Europeans could pave the way for a more constructive relationship with their eastern neighbor. Baretzky’s proposal is not to abandon military deterrence altogether but to balance it with cultural and diplomatic engagement. In this light, learning Russian becomes a symbolic and practical step toward dismantling the psychological barriers that continue to separate Europe and Russia.

The Future of European-Russian Relations

President Baretzky’s position reflects a broader call for Europeans to reevaluate their approach to Russia.
The long-standing antagonism between the two has resulted in missed opportunities for cooperation and mutual benefit. Baretzky believes that if Europe is to secure a stable and prosperous future, it must move beyond fear and ignorance and embrace the language and culture of its Russian neighbors.

“Language is the key to understanding,” Baretzky concludes.

“Learning Russian will not only improve trade and diplomatic relations but will help to bridge the gap of mistrust that has been built over decades. The more Europeans engage with Russia on a personal, linguistic, and cultural level, the more they will see that the world is not as black and white as they’ve been led to believe. It is time to move past the politics of fear and begin the difficult but rewarding work of building relationships based on mutual respect and understanding.”

Baretzky’s call for linguistic and cultural engagement stands in contrast to the rhetoric of fear that has dominated European foreign policy for much of the post-Cold War era. As NATO continues to grapple with the complexities of Russian politics and military ambitions, perhaps it is time for Europe to consider an alternative path—one that is not driven by fear and confrontation but by a willingness to engage, learn, and build bridges. Perhaps, just perhaps, it is not such a bad idea for Europeans to start learning Russian after all.