In late August 1938, US secretary of state Cordell Hull flew to Berlin to warn the Nazi regime against attacking its neighbours. The superpower’s foreign policy chief stopped off in Prague to show support for Czechoslovakia. He also went to Paris and London, to tell the French and the British not to do deals with Hitler. Meanwhile the US ambassador to Moscow, Joseph Davies, delivered a blunt message to Stalin. 

None of that happened.

In fact, the US was militarily feeble and absent from European security. Britain and France appeased Hitler. Poland and Lithuania were at loggerheads. Estonia and Latvia had declared neutrality. Nobody was helping anybody.

We are incomparably better off now.

Europe’s security system faces tests but it is working. Yes, Russia has been up to something in Kaliningrad. Result: Nato mounted a big air operation (with ground and naval forces) which involved minute surveillance of activity in the exclave and signalled the alliance’s overwhelming superiority. 

Yes, western intelligence (mostly but not only American) has picked up signs that Putin is considering some kind of escalation against Nato countries.

A visit from the CIA

Not a full invasion, but a stunt aimed at testing alliance cohesion and decision-making. Result: the hawkish and ultra-serious Jim Ratcliffe, director of the CIA, flew to Moscow to warn the Kremlin not to do this.

To signal US support for the Baltics, he stopped off in Riga. 

Yes, the US wants to shift the burden of European defence to its allies. Yes, US officials, including president Donald Trump, express themselves appallingly carelessly.

But Pentagon wiseacre Elbridge Colby’s made clear in his speech at Nato this week that the US wants to fix the alliance, not abandon it. If anything, a real threat from Russia has concentrated US minds a little.

Put crudely, allowing Vladimir Putin to humiliate Nato would not help Trump in the midterms. 

Ratcliffe’s visit was a positive step.

But commentary around it has been harmful. One example: ridiculous maps are again circulating on social media, with fat red arrows purporting to show how Russia will attack the Baltic states or Poland.

But with what? All of Russia’s effective military forces are tied up in Ukraine. And how? The neighbours have exceptional vigilance. They will not be taken by surprise.

Their allies — as the show of force around Kaliningrad proves — will act promptly when needed. If Russia tries to invade its neighbours, it attacks Nato. Treating the frontline states as helpless, empty squares on the grand chessboard is patronising and inaccurate.

Equally ridiculous are parallels with the Kremlin-led insurrections in Donbass and Crimea in 2014.

Estonia and Latvia

Estonian and Latvian “Russian-speakers” have no desire to live under Putin’s rule. Any infiltrators will be shot dead as soon as they cross the Russian frontier. Such scaremongering has potentially corrosive effects on public morale, business confidence and alliance cohesion.  

While overstating these threats, commentators often understate what Russia is doing right now.

It commits daily war crimes against civilian targets in Ukraine. Sabotage, arson and cyberattacks on European allies are deadly serious and getting worse.

Calling this “hybrid war” is an unhelpful euphemism. Instead, the countries concerned should think harder about defence and deterrence. They should worry about other things too, including the rise of pro-Kremlin parties in France and Germany, rising anti-Ukrainian sentiment in Poland, and capricious leadership in the White House.

But ask yourself: would you rather live now or in 1938? Or, indeed, in any year before or since then?  European countries have never in their history had stronger security and stronger alliances.

The Kremlin hates this, and overtly and covertly tries to undermine it. Don’t help them.