Close Menu
    Researchers propose ‘rewilding’ Europe’s borderlands to repel enemies - Restoring wild forests, peat bogs and wetlands would establish defensive barriers that are hard to cross for enemy armored units, at a fraction of the cost of concrete anti-tank ditches while bringing environmental benefits
    Europe

    Researchers propose ‘rewilding’ Europe’s borderlands to repel enemies – Restoring wild forests, peat bogs and wetlands would establish defensive barriers that are hard to cross for enemy armored units, at a fraction of the cost of concrete anti-tank ditches while bringing environmental benefits


    Researchers propose ‘rewilding’ Europe’s borderlands to repel enemies – Restoring wild forests, peat bogs and wetlands would establish defensive barriers that are hard to cross for enemy armored units, at a fraction of the cost of concrete anti-tank ditches while bringing environmental benefits

    https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2026/04/09/researchers-propose-rewilding-europes-borderlands-to-repel-enemies/

    Posted by ByGollie

    Share.
    View 33 Comments

    33 Comments

    4. -Against-All-Gods- on

      I still occasionally think of that American officer, during some field exercises in Masuria before the Ukrainian war, who was overflying the area, looking at those countless swamps, lakes, forests and chokepoints, and then concluded that this terrain doesn’t favor the defender.

    5. No_Feature_1184 on

      I hear the ardennes are so densly forested no armoured units could get through.

    6. Intelligent_Bee_2881 on

      So they can do this for war, but not for the people and animals to enjoy.

    11. mightyblackgoose on

      That makes sense. If the next war will happen in 1940.

      But their point stands regardless of war. It just that no one listens to them so they try this argument. Fair game.

    12. DantheMediocre on

      im all for nature restoration, but this isnt an amazing excuse. the ardennes didnt stop the nazi`s either.

    13. morbihann on

      Ok, but this literally is limited to eastern Poland and Finland.

      Everywhere else there are eurofriends.

    16. LookAlderaanPlaces on

      The answer is beavers. Bring a shit ton of beavers to the border areas and give them maps. They will build their damn, build walls out of trees, and flood the area to make it impassable.

    17. bobby_table5 on

      Hear me out: we leave the anti-tank barriers so that the Russians don’t go and kill the cute little frogs, and we put the cute frogs so that Planet Wild can do a special episode on “we build the largest green zone in the world with the help of little green men”. And the whole episode is “spot the Finnish sniper hiding in the snow” and those geo-guesser guys finally loose something.

    18. przemo_li on

      Not just at the fraction of the cost but also at a greater defensive value.

      Mam made obstacles are only speed limits. Which in turn gives more time for defenders to locate and destroy / hamper the attacker. However, that window if opportunity is small if the defender don’t have troops near by.

      Natural obstacles can stretch kilometers, making it much greater the speed limit overall and ease with which a good engineering unit can cross it is negated by the sheet volume of passage to be secured.

    21. ViolettaQueso on

      Perhaps in the US, we could drop Donald’s soiled depends all around our perimeter…

    22. koensch57 on

      For centuries, the Dutch relied on the “Hollandse waterlinie”, untill in 1940 the germans came by airplane…..

    25. ShoulderPast2433 on

      Look at Google map – that’s exactly what russia was doing on their borders. 

    27. Extention_Campaign28 on

      Tanks? Anyone still thinking tanks are a relevant part of an invasion force??

    28. TripleVoid on

      Meanwhile Estonia, the bordering country to Russia is actively doing their very best to erase all forests, including NATURA2000 areas that shelter protected species.

      Local media is doing couple of articles about it, but there is zero reaction. Zero protests. 

      RMK, the organization behind it is also paying lawyers and reputation management agencies to sway the public opinion, as if they are doing something good.

    29. phido3000 on

      You should create a huge canal, the size of the pacific ocean, then fill your borders with record breaking salt water crocodiles, great white and tiger sharks, the deadliest snakes, the deadliest octopus, the deadliest stonefish, the deadliest box jellyfish, invisible jellyfish the size of fingernail that can kill you instantly. Magpies, mosquitos (ross river, Nile, dengi fevers etc), flies, ticks. Impassable mangroves, Impassable Stoney terrain, then impassable soft sand. The the whole region becomes an impassable mud swamp in the wet season, and battered by cyclones and huge storms that can literally rip the deck off an American aircraft carrier.

      Then make a 3000km arid area where it 55+ c and no water. Then all move your population to a delightful temperate zone on the bottom of the continent.

      Then place Japan, Korea, Guam (ie the US), two or three seas, the 4th most populous country, between you and any adversary. With tiny global choke points.

      This then provides you with an air sea gap that can easily be defended while you monitor all traffic with a OTHR that can see B2 bombers land and take off in the continental US.

      Yes, natural barriers would make logical sense. Create a wetland = much harder to cross. a Concrete barrier can be used, but ultimately can be overcome. Russia isn’t going anywhere, so why not invest in defences that will probably last 1000 years.

    30. sonnyempireant on

      We have that in LT, there was even an unfortunate accident involving drowned US soldiers not that long ago.

    32. fromkatain on

      The wild forests will also lure wolfs and bears, the natural protectors of the borders.