Former CIA boss reveals next European country he thinks Putin will attack in chilling warning
Former CIA Director David Petraeus has delivered a chilling warning about the future of Europe if Russia is allowed to win its war in Ukraine. Speaking at a think-tank event in London, Petraeus laid out a grim scenario in which Vladimir Putin, emboldened by victory in Ukraine, could move on to invade another European country.
He believes the Baltic states are next in line, with Lithuania being a likely target based on Putin’s past rhetoric and actions. According to Petraeus, the signs have been there all along, and the international community should have been paying closer attention to the Russian president’s words and intentions.
Petraeus criticized both Donald Trump and Joe Biden for their handling of the conflict. He expressed deep concern over Trump’s repeated soft stance toward Putin, saying that Trump had a pattern of giving the Russian leader second chances instead of holding him accountable.
Despite Trump’s claim of having a “very close relationship” with Putin, that connection hasn’t led to any meaningful effort to stop the war. In fact, Trump recently called Putin “absolutely crazy” after another deadly Russian attack on Ukraine, showing that his influence over Putin is minimal, if not nonexistent.
But Petraeus didn’t spare Joe Biden from criticism either. He pointed out that the Biden administration has been too slow and hesitant in providing Ukraine with the military support it desperately needs.
He explained that each time Ukraine requested critical equipment—whether it was tanks, fighter jets, or rocket systems the U.S. response was delayed. Decisions were postponed, debated, and watered down before finally being approved, sometimes only after Ukraine had suffered major setbacks on the battlefield.
Petraeus highlighted that it was obvious to anyone paying attention that Ukraine needed modern jets like the F-16, yet the administration dragged its feet, stuck in a cycle of indecision. He said it was clear there were no more Soviet-era MiG fighters available to send, so the choice was always going to be F-16s. The delay, he argued, was costly.
He described this repeated pattern of delay as not just frustrating, but damaging. Ukraine would have to wait and plead, only to receive mixed messages—first a no, then a maybe, then eventually a yes.
Petraeus said that if the West had acted more decisively and provided Ukraine with stronger and earlier support, they could have helped shift the momentum on the battlefield, sending a clear signal to Moscow that any further aggression would be futile and far too costly.
He warned that Moscow’s view of what is an “acceptable cost” in war is far higher than that of the West, meaning that half-hearted efforts will never be enough to deter Putin.
If Ukraine falls, Petraeus believes it will be because the international community failed to act with the urgency the situation demanded. That failure could open the door for Russia to move on to the next target, likely a smaller NATO country, risking a wider conflict that could engulf much of Europe. His message was not just a prediction, but a call for action—warning that the price of delay and indecision could soon become much greater.
