What do you think?
Rate this book
If Russia Wins: A Scenario
**THE INTERNATIONAL BESTSELLER**
March 2028: Russian troops capture the small Estonian town of Narva and the island of Hiiumaa in the Baltic Sea. After victory in Ukraine, Putin's long-mooted encroachment into the Baltic states has begun. Europe's slow rearmament and its compromised military and intelligence capabilities is now clear for its enemies to exploit. Does Article 5 of NATO apply? What will the alliance decide? Will they risk nuclear war?
In If Russia Wins, military expert and Professor of International Relations at the University of Munich, Carlo Masala explores these questions and underlines what is at stake in Ukraine in the starkest possible terms.
For those of us who have only ever known peace, we are accustomed to everything turning out well in the end. But what if it doesn't?
March 2028: Russian troops capture the small Estonian town of Narva and the island of Hiiumaa in the Baltic Sea. After victory in Ukraine, Putin's long-mooted encroachment into the Baltic states has begun. Europe's slow rearmament and its compromised military and intelligence capabilities is now clear for its enemies to exploit. Does Article 5 of NATO apply? What will the alliance decide? Will they risk nuclear war?
In If Russia Wins, military expert and Professor of International Relations at the University of Munich, Carlo Masala explores these questions and underlines what is at stake in Ukraine in the starkest possible terms.
For those of us who have only ever known peace, we are accustomed to everything turning out well in the end. But what if it doesn't?
113 pages, Kindle Edition
First published March 26, 2025
212 people are currently reading
3303 people want to read
About the author
Carlo Masala
20 books33 followersCarlo Masala is a German political scientist, lecturer and researcher. He is currently professor of international politics at the Bundeswehr University Munich, lecturer at the University of Munich, and lecturer as well as member of the senate of the Munich School of Political Science. He has become known to a wider audience through frequent appearances on German television as an expert on the Russian invasion of Ukraine, publishing predictions and hypotheticals on future military operations, like the Narva scenario.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 221 reviews
December 3, 2025
(thank you to Netgalley and Grove Press for providing a copy of this book in exchange for an honest review)
Carlo Masala, a poliscience expert and military analyst, describes a step-by-step scenario of what Russia might do after securing a victory in Ukraine (in short, destabilizing the rules-based world order and security architecture, which might have been an end goal all along), and how the “democratic world” might respond (in short, by rolling over). He does it in a slightly dramatized form, so it reads like a fast-paced military thriller: highly recommend reading it, highly don’t recommend living through it.
It might seem dark, but Masala emphasizes that he is outlining this possibility precisely so that it might be avoided: to encourage Europe to see the threat more clearly and to develop resilience and deterrence capabilities, etc. I don’t think there’s any empirical evidence that anybody’s willing to sacrifice their complacency and short-term comfort to avoid it, so it might be best to read it as a preview of tomorrow’s news, and if you don’t like what you see, vote accordingly/contact your representatives/etc.
(For the record, my pessimism about Europe’s willingness to protect itself is based on the Ukrainian experience. Even after the annexation of Crimea, the occupation of parts of Donbas in 2014 and years of low-intensity war, Ukrainians en masse tended not to take the Russian threat too seriously. We didn't spend those years planning for a full-scale war: normal stuff, like healthcare reforms and other things with more relevance to daily life, took precedence. We elected a president who was very intent on not provoking Russia, not escalating and "meeting them halfway". Too bad Russia sees unwillingness to escalate as a sign of weakness and a reason to attack, and only backs down once it meets real resistance. Anyway, if you can remain very blasé about security even after a war breaks out against your country, there's no way your average European who feels no immediate threat would be persuaded to spend more tax euros on defence until it’s too late, and everybody’s living in a much darker world.)
Anyway, back to Masala’s scenario (he believes that the aggression might come sooner rather than later: Russia cannot keep its economy on war footing indefinitely and won’t risk giving NATO a chance to close capability gaps.). Emboldened by its victory in Ukraine and what it sees as a strategic defeat of the collective democratic west, Russia creates distractions elsewhere and captures the Estonian town of Narva while also orchestrating acts of sabotage across military fields and industries in Europe (something it’s been doing all along, so the hybrid war isn’t exactly new). As a justification, it weaponizes human rights rhetoric (protecting the rights of the Russian minority, etc., you know the drill). This leaves NATO with a choice: are they willing to invoke Article 5 to protect Estonia and risk a war with Russia, which is using nuclear threats again? Or are they willing to show the whole wide world their inability to act, destroying their credibility in the eyes of their every ally and strengthening the axis of non-democratic regimes?
(I think it’s already excessively clear that non-democratic regimes are better allies, btw. North Korea sends its citizens to fight and die for Russia. Meanwhile, Belgium doesn’t want to lose tax income from frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine. Whom would you want on your side if you were a country in the Global South?)
This hypothetical Russian aggression catches Europe at a weak point. The US president “is either a Russian asset or simply confused and haphazard” and insists that “Europe has to pay for its own security,” so Europe cannot rely on the American strategic aviation, cruise missiles and satellite reconnaissance for protection. It has not been developing similar capabilities of its own for defence and deterrence because Russia’s victory in Ukraine gave a boost to populist and far-right parties across Europe, which tend to side with Russia and are often on its payroll. Fear-mongering and peacenik voices came to dominate the discourse with statements of this sort:
(In this scenario, Masala imagines something similar to Obama’s “reset” of relations with Russia under Medvedev after Russia’s war against Georgia: Putin is replaced by a “new face” who is fawned over by foreign diplomats as a “clever, charismatic reformer, whose desire for change is obvious when you meet him in person.”)
Hence, Europe fails to develop capabilities for deterrence or decision-making mechanisms that won’t get bogged down in fruitless discussions and sabotage from within. It cannot mobilize its forces quickly during a potential conflict with Russia, and, threatened into obedience by Russia’s nuclear saber-rattling, lets it have a piece of Estonian land, showing that a defensive alliance is better at sending thoughts&prayers than actual help.
Obviously, the willingness to give in at the first threat is based on the west’s response to Russia’s war against Ukraine:
Oh, and by the way, Ukraine's defeat that Masala is describing here is not an apocalyptic scenario of a Russian military parade in Kyiv. It's what's Ukraine is being pressured to accept right now: a loss of 20% of territory, permanent neutrality, economic and social ruin:
So a scenario when Russia successfully rewrites global security architecture and world order is not some distant imaginary future--we are watching it in real time. Don’t like it? Don’t repeat our mistakes, don’t be complacent, don’t try to be conciliatory. And--adding as a Ukrainian but also as someone with a fondness for democracies and a rule-based world order--support Ukraine, the only thing still standing between you and this scenario.
Carlo Masala, a poliscience expert and military analyst, describes a step-by-step scenario of what Russia might do after securing a victory in Ukraine (in short, destabilizing the rules-based world order and security architecture, which might have been an end goal all along), and how the “democratic world” might respond (in short, by rolling over). He does it in a slightly dramatized form, so it reads like a fast-paced military thriller: highly recommend reading it, highly don’t recommend living through it.
It might seem dark, but Masala emphasizes that he is outlining this possibility precisely so that it might be avoided: to encourage Europe to see the threat more clearly and to develop resilience and deterrence capabilities, etc. I don’t think there’s any empirical evidence that anybody’s willing to sacrifice their complacency and short-term comfort to avoid it, so it might be best to read it as a preview of tomorrow’s news, and if you don’t like what you see, vote accordingly/contact your representatives/etc.
(For the record, my pessimism about Europe’s willingness to protect itself is based on the Ukrainian experience. Even after the annexation of Crimea, the occupation of parts of Donbas in 2014 and years of low-intensity war, Ukrainians en masse tended not to take the Russian threat too seriously. We didn't spend those years planning for a full-scale war: normal stuff, like healthcare reforms and other things with more relevance to daily life, took precedence. We elected a president who was very intent on not provoking Russia, not escalating and "meeting them halfway". Too bad Russia sees unwillingness to escalate as a sign of weakness and a reason to attack, and only backs down once it meets real resistance. Anyway, if you can remain very blasé about security even after a war breaks out against your country, there's no way your average European who feels no immediate threat would be persuaded to spend more tax euros on defence until it’s too late, and everybody’s living in a much darker world.)
Anyway, back to Masala’s scenario (he believes that the aggression might come sooner rather than later: Russia cannot keep its economy on war footing indefinitely and won’t risk giving NATO a chance to close capability gaps.). Emboldened by its victory in Ukraine and what it sees as a strategic defeat of the collective democratic west, Russia creates distractions elsewhere and captures the Estonian town of Narva while also orchestrating acts of sabotage across military fields and industries in Europe (something it’s been doing all along, so the hybrid war isn’t exactly new). As a justification, it weaponizes human rights rhetoric (protecting the rights of the Russian minority, etc., you know the drill). This leaves NATO with a choice: are they willing to invoke Article 5 to protect Estonia and risk a war with Russia, which is using nuclear threats again? Or are they willing to show the whole wide world their inability to act, destroying their credibility in the eyes of their every ally and strengthening the axis of non-democratic regimes?
(I think it’s already excessively clear that non-democratic regimes are better allies, btw. North Korea sends its citizens to fight and die for Russia. Meanwhile, Belgium doesn’t want to lose tax income from frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine. Whom would you want on your side if you were a country in the Global South?)
This hypothetical Russian aggression catches Europe at a weak point. The US president “is either a Russian asset or simply confused and haphazard” and insists that “Europe has to pay for its own security,” so Europe cannot rely on the American strategic aviation, cruise missiles and satellite reconnaissance for protection. It has not been developing similar capabilities of its own for defence and deterrence because Russia’s victory in Ukraine gave a boost to populist and far-right parties across Europe, which tend to side with Russia and are often on its payroll. Fear-mongering and peacenik voices came to dominate the discourse with statements of this sort:
“the new Russian president should be given a chance to credibly demonstrate his new moderate course. An increased build-up of arms in the West would only make it unnecessarily difficult for him to push through domestic reforms in Russia. Scaling up the deterrence policy would only achieve one thing: it would bolster conservative forces in Russia. […] every possible means should be taken to secure peace and to break the logic of military escalation that only ever leads to destruction. There is nothing wrong with self-denial if it helps reach an understanding.”
(In this scenario, Masala imagines something similar to Obama’s “reset” of relations with Russia under Medvedev after Russia’s war against Georgia: Putin is replaced by a “new face” who is fawned over by foreign diplomats as a “clever, charismatic reformer, whose desire for change is obvious when you meet him in person.”)
Hence, Europe fails to develop capabilities for deterrence or decision-making mechanisms that won’t get bogged down in fruitless discussions and sabotage from within. It cannot mobilize its forces quickly during a potential conflict with Russia, and, threatened into obedience by Russia’s nuclear saber-rattling, lets it have a piece of Estonian land, showing that a defensive alliance is better at sending thoughts&prayers than actual help.
Obviously, the willingness to give in at the first threat is based on the west’s response to Russia’s war against Ukraine:
“However, the nuclear threat also led to restrictions being imposed on Ukraine regarding the use of the weapons systems supplied, effectively forcing the country to defend itself with one hand tied behind its back. ... All military aid to Ukraine has been provided under the fearmongering scenario of a possible nuclear escalation. It has always come too late in view of the military situation, and is always too little to enable the country to defend itself successfully against Russia.”
Oh, and by the way, Ukraine's defeat that Masala is describing here is not an apocalyptic scenario of a Russian military parade in Kyiv. It's what's Ukraine is being pressured to accept right now: a loss of 20% of territory, permanent neutrality, economic and social ruin:
“It is not a formal capitulation, but the surrender of over 20 per cent of Ukrainian territory – land for which they have been fighting for years with considerable losses. But now they have neither the manpower or materiel nor the support from the West to continue the fight. President Zelensky held a final meeting with his Western partners only the evening before. He pointed out the catastrophic consequences of a Russian victory for European security and asked for a substantial increase in aid in order to keep fighting. But the mood had shifted. It’s been far too long since there was any progress, argued the US president.”
So a scenario when Russia successfully rewrites global security architecture and world order is not some distant imaginary future--we are watching it in real time. Don’t like it? Don’t repeat our mistakes, don’t be complacent, don’t try to be conciliatory. And--adding as a Ukrainian but also as someone with a fondness for democracies and a rule-based world order--support Ukraine, the only thing still standing between you and this scenario.
May 12, 2025
English: If Russia Wins: A Scenario
How fragile is NATO, the central alliance founded to defend European peace? Masala is an expert for armed conflicts teaching at the University of the Bundeswehr (Bundeswehr being the German military), and he's also in a high demand as a public intellectual, because he is very skilled when it comes to explaining complicated international security dynamics (fun fact: he wrote his dissertation with Werner Link as his supervisor, whose neo-realist theories about the European order after the fall of the Berlin wall were the focus of one of my A-level concentrations). In this short book, Masala imagines what might happen when Russia attacks NATO - will the alliance fulfill the promise it is founded on, the clause of collective defense, and retaliate together, or will it immediately fall apart?
In a world in which Russia beats Ukraine and attacks NATO member Estonia (that Russia will attack a Baltic state next if it decides to progress seems pretty certain), Masala illustrates the reasoning in Moscow, Brussels, Washington, and several other NATO member states, and he uses an easy to understand, sometimes thriller-esque language that also ventures into showing the consequences for average citizens. But sure, Masala is a political scientist, it's not like he's now trying his hand at literary fiction. Rather, this set-up is clearly meant to make his warning as clear as possible to as many people as possible: Our peace on the continent is fragile, and it's up to every single one of us to not support forces that gamble with the European order, for instance by hyping up dictators (looking at you Alice Weidel, Marine Le Pen, Donald J. Trump, Sahra Wagenknecht etc. pp.) or by encouraging complacency.
So this is not some literary highlight, but very impactful when it comes to pondering where our current situation might lead, and what we can do to prevent that. Masala is just great, love this guy.
How fragile is NATO, the central alliance founded to defend European peace? Masala is an expert for armed conflicts teaching at the University of the Bundeswehr (Bundeswehr being the German military), and he's also in a high demand as a public intellectual, because he is very skilled when it comes to explaining complicated international security dynamics (fun fact: he wrote his dissertation with Werner Link as his supervisor, whose neo-realist theories about the European order after the fall of the Berlin wall were the focus of one of my A-level concentrations). In this short book, Masala imagines what might happen when Russia attacks NATO - will the alliance fulfill the promise it is founded on, the clause of collective defense, and retaliate together, or will it immediately fall apart?
In a world in which Russia beats Ukraine and attacks NATO member Estonia (that Russia will attack a Baltic state next if it decides to progress seems pretty certain), Masala illustrates the reasoning in Moscow, Brussels, Washington, and several other NATO member states, and he uses an easy to understand, sometimes thriller-esque language that also ventures into showing the consequences for average citizens. But sure, Masala is a political scientist, it's not like he's now trying his hand at literary fiction. Rather, this set-up is clearly meant to make his warning as clear as possible to as many people as possible: Our peace on the continent is fragile, and it's up to every single one of us to not support forces that gamble with the European order, for instance by hyping up dictators (looking at you Alice Weidel, Marine Le Pen, Donald J. Trump, Sahra Wagenknecht etc. pp.) or by encouraging complacency.
So this is not some literary highlight, but very impactful when it comes to pondering where our current situation might lead, and what we can do to prevent that. Masala is just great, love this guy.
November 19, 2025
A sobering and realistic take on how the West could end up after fumbling their support to Ukraine. Imagining an incursion into Estonia, the scenario is scarily plausible with train tracks being sabotaged in Poland yesterday.
If NATO doesn’t respond, Russia has won.
Imagining a 2028 where Ukraine has capitulated and Putin is replaced by a younger, seemingly more modern (UK educated and EY trained) president. Russia is moving into Estonia to “protect” the Russian community there, while also blockading the sea access to the Baltics. Fermenting a refugee crisis by exploiting European weakness in Africa and using mercenaries, leading to restricted maritime resources being deployed in the Mediterranean instead of the Baltic sea. Imagining an unfolding hybrid war, with explosions at nuclear submarine bases and assassinations on CEOs in the defence industry. The sliding scale of But let me be clear: I’m not going to risk World War III over some small town in Estonia.
More thoughts to follow but this was an addictive read that is very sobering as well.
If NATO doesn’t respond, Russia has won.
Imagining a 2028 where Ukraine has capitulated and Putin is replaced by a younger, seemingly more modern (UK educated and EY trained) president. Russia is moving into Estonia to “protect” the Russian community there, while also blockading the sea access to the Baltics. Fermenting a refugee crisis by exploiting European weakness in Africa and using mercenaries, leading to restricted maritime resources being deployed in the Mediterranean instead of the Baltic sea. Imagining an unfolding hybrid war, with explosions at nuclear submarine bases and assassinations on CEOs in the defence industry. The sliding scale of But let me be clear: I’m not going to risk World War III over some small town in Estonia.
More thoughts to follow but this was an addictive read that is very sobering as well.
March 20, 2025
Gutes Buch, ich hab jetzt Magengeschwüre.
December 6, 2025
Slecht geschreven maar plausible scenario hoe Rusland de NAVO uitspeelt, de oorlog in Ukraine wint en met partners China en India de wereldorde gaat bepalen. Lijkt met het tevredenstellen van de aggressor wel veel op het ontstaan van WO2. Realistischer geworden met de zojuist bekend geworden nieuwe Amerikaanse veiligheidsstrategie, die hiermee hun dominantie verliezen. Wat in zichzelf niet verkeerd is. De vraag is hoe de Europese landen hun eigen territoriale gronden gaan verdedigen en in hoeverre zij bereid zijn één blok te blijven vormen. En voor elkaar te strijden door van het begin af aan een krachtig halt toe te roepen aan Russische én Amerikaanse agressie.
September 8, 2025
Na ciência, mas também no planeamento político e militar, a criação estimulada de situações potenciais é um método graças ao qual é possível criar cenários futuros a partir das tendências das situações actuais – a prospectiva.
Carlo Masala é um académico alemão que constrói neste ensaio hipóteses para um cenário possível, já não do desenlace da guerra causada pela invasão russa da Ucrânia, que dá como perdida, mas do que se passará em seguida. Nos próximos anos, com os actuais inquilinos da Casa Branca e do Kremlin, quais poderão ser, numa projecção de cenários os desafios e os riscos para o nosso modo de vida, para as democracias europeias como as conhecemos para o futuro da EU?
As democracias são vulneráveis, a sua resiliência social é frágil.
Hollywoodesco, arrepiante tremendamente “lógico” e “credível” arrepiante.
Carlo Masala é um académico alemão que constrói neste ensaio hipóteses para um cenário possível, já não do desenlace da guerra causada pela invasão russa da Ucrânia, que dá como perdida, mas do que se passará em seguida. Nos próximos anos, com os actuais inquilinos da Casa Branca e do Kremlin, quais poderão ser, numa projecção de cenários os desafios e os riscos para o nosso modo de vida, para as democracias europeias como as conhecemos para o futuro da EU?
As democracias são vulneráveis, a sua resiliência social é frágil.
Hollywoodesco, arrepiante tremendamente “lógico” e “credível” arrepiante.
April 30, 2025
Beangstigend scenario dat helemaal niet zo onrealistisch lijkt als het voor de meesten misschien nu nog lijkt. Wat doen “we�� als Rusland inderdaad een “onbenullig” stukje Estland inneemt “ter bescherming van de Russische minderheid”? Hopelijk hebben we van Chamberlain geleerd dat appeasement politiek niet het antwoord is, maar na het lezen van dit boekje houd ik me hart vast als Rusland na Oekraïne verder trekt en ook NAVO grondgebied aanvalt.
October 2, 2025
Pirmas sakinys: 2028 m. kovo 27 d. Estija, Narva.
Labiau didesnės apimties straipsnis nei detali ar kiek išsamesnė analitinė knyga – perskaityti neužtruko valandos. Tačiau tai nemenkina jo/jos vertės.
Galimas ateities scenarijus, kas laukia NATO ir Vakarų, jeigu bus reaguojama taip, kaip buvo iki šiol (knyga išleista 2025 m. pradžioje).
"Mano scenarijus paremtas tikrais faktais, mokslo žiniomis ir diskusijomis, kuriose pastaruosius dvejus metus dalyvavau su daugeliu bendradarbių, taip pat su žmonėmis, kurie ministerijose ir ginkluotųjų pajėgų būstinėse gvildena klausimą, kokių padarinių saugumo politikos raidai gali turėti Rusijos karas Ukrainoje. Pasinaudojau išvadomis iš karo žaidimų (angl. War Games), kuriuose turėjau galimybę dalyvauti tiek aktyviai, tiek kaip stebėtojas. Tačiau šį scenarijų sukūriau pats. <...> tai nėra griežtai mokslinis scenarijus, nors buvo kuriamas remiantis moksliniais standartais. <....> Kad būtų lengviau, <...> susitelkiau į reikšmingiausius įvykius." (9-10 p.).
Liūdna, bet scenarijus įtikinantis.
Carlo Masala (g. 1968 m.) yra vokiečių politologas, platesnei auditorijai tapo žinomas pasirodydamas Vokietijos televizijoje kaip ekspertas Rusijos invazijos į Ukrainą klausimais. Šioje knygoje išdėstytas požiūris nenustebins valstybių, turinčių ar turėjusių sienas su rusija, skeptikų: nei suomių, nei moldavų. Tačiau buvo įdomu pasižiūrėti, kokią ir kaip vakarų europietis transliuoja žinią savo piliečiams apie karą Ukrainoje.
P. S. Yra ir optimistiškesnių scenarijų: Edwardas Lucasas "Rizikingas statymas už Lietuvą".
4.0/5✰
Labiau didesnės apimties straipsnis nei detali ar kiek išsamesnė analitinė knyga – perskaityti neužtruko valandos. Tačiau tai nemenkina jo/jos vertės.
Galimas ateities scenarijus, kas laukia NATO ir Vakarų, jeigu bus reaguojama taip, kaip buvo iki šiol (knyga išleista 2025 m. pradžioje).
"Mano scenarijus paremtas tikrais faktais, mokslo žiniomis ir diskusijomis, kuriose pastaruosius dvejus metus dalyvavau su daugeliu bendradarbių, taip pat su žmonėmis, kurie ministerijose ir ginkluotųjų pajėgų būstinėse gvildena klausimą, kokių padarinių saugumo politikos raidai gali turėti Rusijos karas Ukrainoje. Pasinaudojau išvadomis iš karo žaidimų (angl. War Games), kuriuose turėjau galimybę dalyvauti tiek aktyviai, tiek kaip stebėtojas. Tačiau šį scenarijų sukūriau pats. <...> tai nėra griežtai mokslinis scenarijus, nors buvo kuriamas remiantis moksliniais standartais. <....> Kad būtų lengviau, <...> susitelkiau į reikšmingiausius įvykius." (9-10 p.).
Liūdna, bet scenarijus įtikinantis.
Carlo Masala (g. 1968 m.) yra vokiečių politologas, platesnei auditorijai tapo žinomas pasirodydamas Vokietijos televizijoje kaip ekspertas Rusijos invazijos į Ukrainą klausimais. Šioje knygoje išdėstytas požiūris nenustebins valstybių, turinčių ar turėjusių sienas su rusija, skeptikų: nei suomių, nei moldavų. Tačiau buvo įdomu pasižiūrėti, kokią ir kaip vakarų europietis transliuoja žinią savo piliečiams apie karą Ukrainoje.
P. S. Yra ir optimistiškesnių scenarijų: Edwardas Lucasas "Rizikingas statymas už Lietuvą".
4.0/5✰
Read
July 13, 2025Read in German, English edition should be coming out August 2025.
A very short but sobering read in which a potential scenario is envisioned. It is March 2028. Ukraine has been forced to give into pressure to surrender the oblasts claimed by Russia, and the rest of Ukraine is in a very bad way indeed. NATO "allies" don't appear to have a huge problem with this. Putin has stepped down and is replaced by a new president who everyone is optimistic about, but who goes ahead and invades Estonia anyway using the exact same pretext as the 2014 Ukraine invasion.
Then comes the scariest part: everyone downplays even their own territory being attacked, let alone Estonia's. Nobody cares when Russian forces breach a Canadian/Danish island in the Arctic, not even when they down a plane carrying the top executive of a big German arms producer or carry out a direct attack on British military infrastructure.
As other reviewers have noted, it's written in a bit of a "thriller" style, which can be a bit cheesy, but I kind of see it as a necessity in order to make this topic accessible. I can see why some might call this book scaremongering, but the scenario presented by Masala is one he has put together based on observation and analysis of patterns over the last few decades, and seems mostly plausible to me.
And frankly: it's easy to dismiss something when you aren't currently in the firing line...
A very short but sobering read in which a potential scenario is envisioned. It is March 2028. Ukraine has been forced to give into pressure to surrender the oblasts claimed by Russia, and the rest of Ukraine is in a very bad way indeed. NATO "allies" don't appear to have a huge problem with this. Putin has stepped down and is replaced by a new president who everyone is optimistic about, but who goes ahead and invades Estonia anyway using the exact same pretext as the 2014 Ukraine invasion.
Then comes the scariest part: everyone downplays even their own territory being attacked, let alone Estonia's. Nobody cares when Russian forces breach a Canadian/Danish island in the Arctic, not even when they down a plane carrying the top executive of a big German arms producer or carry out a direct attack on British military infrastructure.
As other reviewers have noted, it's written in a bit of a "thriller" style, which can be a bit cheesy, but I kind of see it as a necessity in order to make this topic accessible. I can see why some might call this book scaremongering, but the scenario presented by Masala is one he has put together based on observation and analysis of patterns over the last few decades, and seems mostly plausible to me.
And frankly: it's easy to dismiss something when you aren't currently in the firing line...
December 16, 2025
Gitzwart, treffend scenario dat met urgentie de strategische kwetsbaarheden van NAVO uiteenzet, maar dat tegelijkertijd teveel wegheeft van een tekst die ook de basis van simulatie in een Model-NATO voor middelbare scholieren of een Clingendael training had kunnen zijn.
May 4, 2025
Carlo Masala ist Politikwissenschaftler und Dozent an der Hochschule der Bundeswehr und spätestens seit dem Angriff Russlands auf die Ukraine ein gern gesehener Talkshowgast. Er setzt sich ziemlich klar für eine Abwehrbereitschaft der Bundeswehr und eine geeignete und starke Nato-Position gegenüber Russland ein.
Dies transportiert er auch in seinem schmalen Buch, in dem er ein Szenario skizziert, in dem ein Diktatfrieden in der Ukraine die russische Position nicht schwächt, sodass Russland in einigen Jahren mit gezielten Provokationen die Treue des NATO-Bündnisses in Frage stellt: Russland besetzt die estnische Stadt Narwa und eine strategisch wichtige kleine Ostseeinsel. Will die NATO dafür in den Krieg ziehen?
Das Szenario ist interessant und als Planspiel geostrategisch sicherlich relevant. Masalas Intention ist klar: Er will die Wachsamkeit aufrechterhalten und die westlichen Staaten dazu anhalten, bei einem möglichen Frieden in der Ukraine Russlands weitere Ambitionen nicht zu unterschätzen. Was mich allerdings ein wenig gestört hat, war die Form, denn Masala trägt es weniger essayistisch vor, sondern eher als Thrillerautor mit fiktiven Dialogen beteiligter Personen. Das können andere sicher besser und machen den Text verdaulicher, als er für meinen Geschmack sein sollte.
Dies transportiert er auch in seinem schmalen Buch, in dem er ein Szenario skizziert, in dem ein Diktatfrieden in der Ukraine die russische Position nicht schwächt, sodass Russland in einigen Jahren mit gezielten Provokationen die Treue des NATO-Bündnisses in Frage stellt: Russland besetzt die estnische Stadt Narwa und eine strategisch wichtige kleine Ostseeinsel. Will die NATO dafür in den Krieg ziehen?
Das Szenario ist interessant und als Planspiel geostrategisch sicherlich relevant. Masalas Intention ist klar: Er will die Wachsamkeit aufrechterhalten und die westlichen Staaten dazu anhalten, bei einem möglichen Frieden in der Ukraine Russlands weitere Ambitionen nicht zu unterschätzen. Was mich allerdings ein wenig gestört hat, war die Form, denn Masala trägt es weniger essayistisch vor, sondern eher als Thrillerautor mit fiktiven Dialogen beteiligter Personen. Das können andere sicher besser und machen den Text verdaulicher, als er für meinen Geschmack sein sollte.
September 9, 2025
Plausible (and therefore depressing) scenario that explores how the isolationism of the US and the anaemic disfunction of Europe could further embolden Russia, and result in the end of NATO.
April 29, 2025
Ein (Horror)Szenario, das aufgrund seiner Realität Angst macht und zum Handeln mahnen sollte.
Ich teile nicht alle Einschätzungen, aber sehe das Szenario in seinen Grundlagen als plausibel an.
Leider wurden mir einige aufgeworfene Teilszenarien zu wenig in der Entscheidungsfndung der NATO berücksichtigt, wodurch eine Singularität entsteht, die Aspekte des Gesamtbildes ignorieren.
Es ist ein wirklich lesenswertes Buch.
Ich teile nicht alle Einschätzungen, aber sehe das Szenario in seinen Grundlagen als plausibel an.
Leider wurden mir einige aufgeworfene Teilszenarien zu wenig in der Entscheidungsfndung der NATO berücksichtigt, wodurch eine Singularität entsteht, die Aspekte des Gesamtbildes ignorieren.
Es ist ein wirklich lesenswertes Buch.
November 26, 2025
Lachwekkend slecht. Als er iets is wat Als Rusland wint NIET is, is het realistisch. Zo wel, dan eet ik mijn pet op. Eerlijk waar. Na het lezen van dit stuk wist ik eigenlijk al genoeg. In werkelijkheid zou Ruslands plan veel te doorzichtig zijn, en zoveel lijken op dat van Hitler toentertijd dat ze keihard door de mand zouden vallen. Vooral bij Duitsland.
"Maar (de Russische president) laat ook doorschemeren bereid te zijn met Oekraïne over normalisering van de betrekkingen te spreken. Over wat hij daarmee precies bedoelt, zwijgt hij, maar hij bedient zich van een beroemde formule om de toekomstige relatie tussen Rusland en Oekraïne te beschrijven: de door Willy Brandt in zijn inaugurele rede als bondskanselier in 1968 gebruikte woorden over de betrekkingen tussen de Bondsrepubliek Duitsland en de DDR: ‘twee staten in één natie’.
In de Bondsrepubliek Duitsland zorgt deze formule voor opwinding. In grote delen van de Duitse sociaaldemocratie valt de toespeling erg goed."
Geloof je het zelf?
"Maar (de Russische president) laat ook doorschemeren bereid te zijn met Oekraïne over normalisering van de betrekkingen te spreken. Over wat hij daarmee precies bedoelt, zwijgt hij, maar hij bedient zich van een beroemde formule om de toekomstige relatie tussen Rusland en Oekraïne te beschrijven: de door Willy Brandt in zijn inaugurele rede als bondskanselier in 1968 gebruikte woorden over de betrekkingen tussen de Bondsrepubliek Duitsland en de DDR: ‘twee staten in één natie’.
In de Bondsrepubliek Duitsland zorgt deze formule voor opwinding. In grote delen van de Duitse sociaaldemocratie valt de toespeling erg goed."
Geloof je het zelf?
November 28, 2025
Interesting short book. I am not an expert in politics in any way nor have I ever studied some kind of political topic. That to be said, I am not really able to assess the scenario he depicts. Nevertheless, the outlines were very clear for me beforehand, for instance that the US is not reliable anymore for the EU and at the moment we can’t really secure ourselves without help. Anyway anyhow the story was actually very good to read, filled with some elements more connected to a fictional story or thriller than to a non fictional book. On one hand it makes it easier to access the message of the author to the basic reader on the other hand it seems too fictional and takes away some kind of seriousness.
The author claims his scenario is scientifically proven, but how can such a detailed scenario be scientifically proven? That left me a bit sceptical.
But above that, I just feel like the author wants to get awareness on the topic and to make it very clear that the EU and the NATO need to change, to be more prepared, there need to be more plans, more communication… and in that case I think he achieved his means.
The author claims his scenario is scientifically proven, but how can such a detailed scenario be scientifically proven? That left me a bit sceptical.
But above that, I just feel like the author wants to get awareness on the topic and to make it very clear that the EU and the NATO need to change, to be more prepared, there need to be more plans, more communication… and in that case I think he achieved his means.
September 6, 2025
Absolut perfekte Ergänzung zum Seminar was ich gerade habe und ich bin der Meinung, dass diese 120 Seiten jede:r lesen sollte, vor allem die Menschen denen noch nicht ganz klar ist, was der russische Angriffskrieg für uns bedeutet. Spannendes und leider nicht unwahrscheinliches Szenario, das uns Carlo Masala präsentiert.
April 5, 2025
Was wäre wenn...
Dieses kurze aber durchaus plausible Szenario verdeutlicht, wie schnell der Krieg in der Ukraine auch andere Länder direkt betreffen kann. Der Politikwissenschaftler Carlo Masala zeigt auf eindrucksvolle Weise, wie stark die europäische Gemeinschaft tatsächlich bedroht ist bzw. wie schnell sich die Sicherheitslage ändern könnte. In Summe lässt einen das Buch sprachlos zurück und zeigt, was auf dem Spiel steht.
Dieses kurze aber durchaus plausible Szenario verdeutlicht, wie schnell der Krieg in der Ukraine auch andere Länder direkt betreffen kann. Der Politikwissenschaftler Carlo Masala zeigt auf eindrucksvolle Weise, wie stark die europäische Gemeinschaft tatsächlich bedroht ist bzw. wie schnell sich die Sicherheitslage ändern könnte. In Summe lässt einen das Buch sprachlos zurück und zeigt, was auf dem Spiel steht.
June 13, 2025
3.5 niet wat ik normaal lees, maar wel erg interessant. Qua leesbaarheid was het wat minder, er zater soms erg lange zinnen in waardoor je de draad van het verhaal kwijtraakte. Het geschetste scenario zette je wel aan het denken en het nawoord wat de link legt met de huidige ontwikkelingen was erg inzichtelijk
March 21, 2025
Das schmale Buch ist spannend genug, um es in einem Rutsch zu lesen. Das von Masala entwickelte Szenario ist fundiert und wirkt zu jeder Zeit realistisch, gerade auch wegen der detailliert geschilderten Szenen von Gipfeltreffen oder konspirativen Gesprächen. Große Empfehlung!
April 30, 2025
Ein sehr erschreckendes Szenario und ein Wachrüttler für jeden!!
August 4, 2025
Nežinau kodėl tai turėjo būti knyga, o ne ilgesnis straipsnis. Predikcija reali, moralas aiškus - velniop JAV, darom viską patys. RAWWWWW LET’S GOOOOOOO
September 30, 2025
“Brüssel, 5. Februar 2028: Der Köder wird geschluckt
Die neuerliche Flüchtlingswelle, die von der südlichen Seite des Mittelmeerraumes auf Europa zurollt, bleibt nicht lange unbemerkt. Täglich gelangen bis zu 500 Menschen entweder nach Malta oder auf eine der Kanarischen Inseln. Es ist eine Ausweichroute, denn die Insel Lampedusa ist von der italienischen Marine und Polizei mittlerweile zu gut geschützt.
Zugleich berichten diverse Nachrichtendienste, ihre Quellen im Mitleren und Nahen Osten würden erneut beobachten, wie russische und weißrussische Botschaften massenhaft Visa an Syrer, Afghanen, Iraker und Sudanesen ausgeben - und dass diese für relativ geringe Summen Tickets für Flüge nach dass diese für relativ geringe Summen Tickets für Flüge nach Moskau und Minsk erhalten. Die Erinnerungen an 2020, als Belarus versuchte, mehrere Tausend Flüchtlinge nach Polen einzuschleusen, werden wach.”
Die neuerliche Flüchtlingswelle, die von der südlichen Seite des Mittelmeerraumes auf Europa zurollt, bleibt nicht lange unbemerkt. Täglich gelangen bis zu 500 Menschen entweder nach Malta oder auf eine der Kanarischen Inseln. Es ist eine Ausweichroute, denn die Insel Lampedusa ist von der italienischen Marine und Polizei mittlerweile zu gut geschützt.
Zugleich berichten diverse Nachrichtendienste, ihre Quellen im Mitleren und Nahen Osten würden erneut beobachten, wie russische und weißrussische Botschaften massenhaft Visa an Syrer, Afghanen, Iraker und Sudanesen ausgeben - und dass diese für relativ geringe Summen Tickets für Flüge nach dass diese für relativ geringe Summen Tickets für Flüge nach Moskau und Minsk erhalten. Die Erinnerungen an 2020, als Belarus versuchte, mehrere Tausend Flüchtlinge nach Polen einzuschleusen, werden wach.”
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 26, 2025
Realistisch en beangstigend. Zet aan het denken over de rol en slagkracht van de EU en het westen.
July 14, 2025
Belangrijk boek. Het leest als een Frederick Forsyth thriller, met als belangrijkste verschil dat dit scenario wel eens werkelijkheid zou kunnen worden. Verplichte kost voor politici en beleidsmakers.
July 23, 2025
Carlo Mashallah
June 23, 2025
Een wel erg eng realistisch dystopisch scenario voor Europa en de wereld in het kader van de geopolitieke spanningen en de NAVO.
April 15, 2025
Sprachlich und szenisch auf dem Niveau eines Schulaufsatzes der elften Klasse Gymnasium, versucht Masala einem Verzweifelten gleich, seine Thesen, die er seit Beginn des Ukraine Krieges in jede Kamera und jedes Mikro postuliert, zu erklären. Elfte Klasse *berufliches* Gymnasium.
Ist der erste Buchteil noch eine fiktionale Geschichte mit dem einen oder anderen pubertären Seitenhieb auf aktuelle politische Akteure versucht der Autor im zweiten Teil zu erklären, wieso der erste Teil ganz bestimmt wahr werden wird. Da es aber noch nicht soweit ist, nennt er es „Szenario“. Dieser Schelm. Und das ein paar hundert mal. Szenario Szenario Szenario.
Masalas sich über das Buch ziehende Grundthese ist, dass man sich von atomarer Bedrohung nicht beeindrucken lassen soll. Man möchte ihm antworten: „Ach so. Na dann. Wenn das so ist.“
Aber, das Buch hat auch was tolles. Es ist eigentlich ein Heftchen. Somit schön dünn. Und damit schnell gelesen.
Ist der erste Buchteil noch eine fiktionale Geschichte mit dem einen oder anderen pubertären Seitenhieb auf aktuelle politische Akteure versucht der Autor im zweiten Teil zu erklären, wieso der erste Teil ganz bestimmt wahr werden wird. Da es aber noch nicht soweit ist, nennt er es „Szenario“. Dieser Schelm. Und das ein paar hundert mal. Szenario Szenario Szenario.
Masalas sich über das Buch ziehende Grundthese ist, dass man sich von atomarer Bedrohung nicht beeindrucken lassen soll. Man möchte ihm antworten: „Ach so. Na dann. Wenn das so ist.“
Aber, das Buch hat auch was tolles. Es ist eigentlich ein Heftchen. Somit schön dünn. Und damit schnell gelesen.
September 3, 2025
Hilfreiches Vorwort, um das Prinzip Szenario einzuordnen; sehr gut lesbar - manchmal etwas hochgestochene Sprache; gut verfolgbare Handlung; manchmal kommt mir Deutschland etwas zu herausgenommen positiv bei weg; lässt einen ein wenig fragend zurück, weil es scheint, dass man selbst wirklich wenig tun kann, um den Lauf der Dinge auf dieser Ebene zu beeinflussen.
July 2, 2025
te banaal, te voor de hand liggend, slechte dialogen. 1 scenario is als borrelpraat. veel interessanter is om verschillende scenarios te bespreken, en als een zich lijkt te ontvouwen welke kanten het dan op kan. Maar dit boek voegt weinig toe aan wat we al (kunnen) weten.
August 22, 2025
Verplichte kost voor eenieder die na 29 oktober dan ook aan zou schuiven aan de formatietafel
Displaying 1 - 30 of 221 reviews