Researchers Propose Rewilding Europe's Borders With Wetlands and Forests to Block Armored Invasions at a Fraction of the Cost of Concrete Barriers
A RUSI Journal paper argues that restoring peatlands, wetlands, and forests along Eastern European frontiers could impede mechanized forces while delivering climate and biodiversity benefits at a fraction of the cost of traditional anti-tank defenses.
Overview
A paper published in the RUSI Journal on April 7 proposes that NATO-aligned nations restore wild forests, peatlands, and wetlands along their eastern frontiers to create natural barriers against mechanized invasion forces. The concept, which the authors call “defensive rewilding,” would cost a fraction of conventional fortifications while simultaneously advancing climate and biodiversity goals.
The paper arrives as Eastern European nations from Finland to Romania are investing heavily in border defenses following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Rather than relying solely on concrete anti-tank ditches and dragon’s teeth, the researchers argue that restored ecosystems can channel and impede armored columns just as effectively, while offering environmental returns that static fortifications cannot.
What We Know
The paper was authored by Sam Jelliman of the Sustainability Research Institute at the University of East London, along with Brian Schmidt and Alan Chandler, according to Defense News. It outlines how different restored ecosystems create distinct military obstacles:
- Peatlands have the lowest bearing capacity of any terrain type and become impassable even to light armored vehicles when drainage is blocked. The researchers note that peatlands are also self-repairing, unlike concrete barriers that require maintenance.
- Wetlands create soft ground that cannot support main battle tanks and delay logistics convoys.
- Restored forests obstruct armored movement, disrupt anti-tank missile line-of-sight, and offer protection against loitering munitions.
- River restoration, including re-meandering waterways and softening engineered banks, complicates military bridging operations.
The cost advantage is significant. According to Defense News, establishing a defensive strip of wetland would cost between 90,000 and 540,000 pounds ($120,000 to $724,000) per kilometer, compared to 1 million to 3 million pounds per kilometer for a concrete anti-tank ditch.
The concept draws on historical precedent. As detailed in a Yale Environment 360 investigation, Ukraine’s flooding of the Irpin River valley in early 2022 helped halt the Russian assault on Kyiv, and Russian tanks sank into naturally waterlogged peatlands north of the capital. The article also notes that the Dutch used strategic flooding against Spanish and French forces in the 16th and 17th centuries, and that Soviet commanders timed offensives around frozen or thawed peatland conditions during World War II.
The researchers recommend pilot demonstration projects in Finland, Estonia, and Poland, according to Defense News. They suggest integrating restoration spending within NATO’s 1.5 percent GDP resilience spending targets.
“The nearer you are to Russia, the more they think it’s a good idea,” Jelliman told Defense News, indicating that the concept has drawn more interest from frontline states.
Environmental Co-Benefits
Beyond defense, the proposal would advance conservation and climate objectives. According to Yale Environment 360, a coalition of scientists including Hans Joosten and Franziska Tanneberger of the Greifswald Mire Centre in Germany has estimated that restoring more than 250,000 acres of peatlands and wet forests along Eastern European borders could deliver substantial carbon sequestration. Poland’s drained peatlands alone emit an estimated 5 to 35 million tons of CO2 annually, a figure that rewetting could dramatically reduce.
Wet peatlands bear 75 percent less load from military vehicles than drained areas, according to Yale Environment 360, meaning that restored ecosystems would funnel mechanized forces into predictable corridors where defenders hold the advantage.
The scientists propose a 250 to 500 million euro EU fund to finance the restoration, supplemented by revenue from carbon offset certificate sales, as reported by Yale Environment 360.
What We Don’t Know
Several questions remain unanswered. Natural barriers impede friendly forces as well as adversaries, a concern raised by German military planners who worry about limiting their own troop mobility, according to Yale Environment 360. Landowner resistance in agricultural regions could also slow adoption, as many border-zone farmers and local governments prefer to keep drained land productive.
The U.K. Ministry of Defence has reportedly engaged in discussions about the concept, according to Defense News, but broader military approval remains pending. Ukraine’s defense ministry has not formally engaged with the proposal, likely because the country’s immediate security priorities take precedence over long-term landscape planning.
Whether NATO member states will integrate ecological restoration into formal defense planning, and at what scale, remains to be seen. The paper represents an academic proposal rather than an adopted policy, though its publication in a journal as influential as RUSI’s suggests the idea is gaining traction in defense circles.