NATO leaders and European defense ministers are making an effort to make an otherwise depressing January even more depressing. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius stated that, ‘although a Russian attack is not likely at the moment, our experts expect that it could be possible in five to eight years.’ Swedish Chief of Defense, General Micael Bydén, urged Swedes to mentally prepare for war. And NATO Military Committee Chairman Rob Bauer called for ‘the transformation of NATO into an alliance ready for warfare.’
For the business community in Croatia, his call to the public and private sectors in the West ‘to prepare for a period in which anything can happen at any moment, including war’ is particularly interesting.
Even without the message to ‘the private sector in the West,’ entrepreneurs and managers cannot ignore the deterioration of the global security situation and the clattering of weapons all around. Primarily because they cannot help but worry for their families. Successful members of the business community would not be successful if they were not capable of reading signals. And taking them seriously. They do this their entire business lives. They can envision possible macro and micro scenarios.
Even with no one sincerely
Even if the messages sent by leading figures of the NATO pact are intentionally amplified – and, among other things, serve to deter potential hostile attacks – as futurists do, the worst-case scenario should always be elaborated. And in this case, that is a Russian attack on a NATO member. Or an attack by some future ‘axis powers’ on the West.
—
The silver lining for Croatia is that some people still active in the state apparatus and business have experience navigating wartime conditions. With timely selection of quality personnel and advisors and the willingness to play out scenarios and shape plans on paper, it could be defined how to navigate an extraordinary situation, should it occur, as efficiently as possible and with as few casualties as possible.
—
When it comes to the political level, political scientists, psychologists, and sociologists should assess the likelihood of fluctuations in Croatian society’s allegiance to the West, the EU, and NATO if things get tough. It seems there is no doubt about that. Croatia is a member of the EU and NATO. It is known which side we are on. But is it really that straightforward?
It is surprising how often in informal conversations one can recognize the stance that, if things get tough, one should still see which side to align with. Some have nothing against Russian President Vladimir Putin, others look a bit further and think it would be good to align with China. The third would go with the old Dubrovnik saying ‘with no one sincerely’ – so they would want to sit on three chairs at once.
History offers a number of examples where communities that easily transitioned from club to club after just a few years paid a high price. Without going into details. The topic could also be described as the desire of part of the community to always have some powerful force with which to sign a lifelong maintenance contract. The worst would be not to open the question of the transition period as a legitimate topic. Therefore, to prove today, through the force of arguments, and not through the arguments of force tomorrow, what is right and in the best interest of Croatia.
Experience of War Economy
The need for the public and private sectors to prepare for possible wartime events should be a simpler task. The silver lining for Croatia is that some people still active in the state apparatus and business have experience navigating wartime conditions. With timely selection of quality personnel and advisors and the willingness to play out scenarios and shape plans on paper, it could be defined how to navigate an extraordinary situation, should it occur, as efficiently as possible and with as few casualties as possible.
If we head in that direction, hoping that there will be no war after all, the benefit would be that a quality input-output analysis of the Croatian economy could finally be made. It is not just about listing which products we are self-sufficient in. More important is the list of products or services that could be monetized in (semi)war conditions. More precisely, bartered for products produced in allied countries. So the question would be whether, for example, the capacities of the apartmentized coast could be monetized. It would be hard to count on classic tourists, but on refugees from the EU… There are such experiences.
When it comes to the level of companies, owners and managers, once the January blues officially end, should still play out scenarios in February regarding what the expansion of armed conflicts in the European Union would mean for their entrepreneurial ventures. This is not a pleasant thought to engage with, but it could, for better or worse, prove useful at some point. How does it go? We work as if there will be peace for a hundred years, while preparing as if there will be war tomorrow.
