"Why would Russia attack Europe?" I've this question being asked many times recently as the scenario becomes increasingly likelier. Some genuinely don't understand why Russia would do something seemingly so stupid. But others ask it as a propaganda technique. A way to diminish the threat. To either shrug it off as irrelevant or, even worse, to discredit the idea of a European counterattack. So I think it's time to properly answer this question, in as raw and plain terms as possible so that those who don't understand the issue come to understand it, and those who are knowingly or unknowingly helping Russia have no more room to lie. The following read may cause you some anxiety, but it's also a necessary read. When we talk about a Russian attack on Europe, we're not talking about a large scale invasion like WW2 or Ukraine. Not yet. We are talking about smaller scale attacks and limited incursions against Europe. These could be anything ranging from drone or missile strikes on infrastructure to small groups of undercover troops trying to occupy small settlements. Russia has already conducted such attacks to some degree. All across Europe there have been drone incursions, missile threats, bombs planted and critical infrastructure mysteriously blowing up. But because these have largely been ineffective, Putin may feel like he has no choice but to up the ante. The first myth we need to clarify is that Putin and Russia are irrational. That they would attack Europe simply because they are crazy. But while there is madness, there is also logic behind it. And the logic is simple. Russia attacks when it thinks the cost is manageable and the reward is achievable. That's what happened in Ukraine. They thought they could take it and face only limited consequences. But Ukraine proved far stronger than predicted, European support was bigger than expected, global sanctions were heavier than manageable, and the Russian army was worse than imagined. The calculus with Europe is similar. Russia predicts that such an attack against Europe would carry a manageable cost and an achievable reward. But what could that possibly be? If Russia attacks Europe and Europe does not respond, or does not respond in equal measure, NATO will be dead. Europe will be discredited. Support for Ukraine will crash, allowing Russia to win the war. Or at least not lose it. The worst part is that this rationale is logical, even if it is mad. It's possible European governments are bluffing and won't seriously respond. It's possible public outrage at a European response is so big it makes it political untenable. And because it's possible, it might happen. It is no doubt a risky move. Perhaps suicidal. But Russia does not share your risk model. And Russia is in a desperate position: a collapsing economy, catastrophic war losses, dwindling public support. This only makes an attack more likely. The wave of sabotage across Europe has not reduced European support for Ukraine. Political division has not stopped it. The threat of war has not broken European will. In Putin's mind, there might not be another way to prevent defeat. To save himself. Despite surprisingly high support for Ukraine, Putin has also spent years watching the opposite across Europe: slow military expansion, delayed weapons, arguments over every investment, fear of “escalation,” and politicians who treat defence as a budget line instead of a matter of survival. If you tell an adversary for a decade that you are too rich, too comfortable, and too morally complicated to fight, do not be shocked when he treats that as an invitation. Any attack will exploit these problems. The point is not immediate occupation of the continent. The point is to prove that Europe will not act as one, that Article 5 is a slogan, and that Washington may conclude that a limited European war is not worth the cost. This is why the question “Why would Russia attack Europe?” is such a powerful propaganda tool. It is a way to keep Europe from building the only thing that actually deters the attack: military capability and the political will to use it without waiting for permission. If the threat is declared irrational, then preparation looks hysterical. If preparation looks hysterical, Europe stays weak. Weakness is then what Russia exploits. Deterrence can not come from just a speech. It must come as the visible capacity to make the next Russian gamble more expensive and painful than the last one. So the simple answer is this: Russia would attack Europe because it thinks it can get away with a version of an attack that Europe is psychologically and materially unprepared to face. Because it wants a veto over the continent’s future. Because a maximal Europe is the one way to make Russia stop mattering. Those who pretend not to understand this are not confused. They are making the attack more likely.