More than thirty years after regaining independence, the Baltic states are building the infrastructure that matches their geopolitical reality. Rail Baltica – almost 900-kilometre standard-gauge railway linking Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland – is not just a transport project. It is Europe’s north–south lifeline.
Reorienting the Baltics and Europe’s infrastructure
“Rail Baltica is a project 35 years in the making,” says Professor Christian Leuprecht of the Royal Military College of Canada and Queen’s University. For decades, he notes, “the infrastructure was all oriented towards Moscow.” The collapse of the Soviet Union did not automatically reorient the steel arteries of the region. While road and air links to the West developed rapidly, railways remained locked into the old 1,520mm Russian gauge – a technical and symbolic vestige of dependency.
“By virtue of the reorientation of the Baltic states, and much of Europe, towards Western Europe and the transatlantic community,” Leuprecht argues, “we now need infrastructure that reflects these political, economic, and social orientations.” Rail Baltica, built to the EU’s 1,435mm standard gauge, does precisely that – physically connecting the Baltic states to the rest of the European Union and closing the last infrastructural gap on the North–South axis from Finland to Central Europe.
But this is not merely an exercise in alignment. For Leuprecht, it is also a test of foresight: “We need to make sure that we think ahead, not just in terms of rail or bridge capacity, but also intermodal capacity, when we are moving equipment from rail back onto road.” He cautions that too much of Europe’s infrastructure is “not fit for purpose for the types of equipment we need to move today.” The lesson from Ukraine is clear: the speed, scale, and flexibility of rail transport are decisive in crisis. Rail Baltica, by integrating civilian and military standards, is designed to ensure that Europe does not face the same logistical fragility.
Professor Dr. Julian Lindley-French, Chairman of The Alphen Group, a high-level strategic think tank and leading voice on NATO and Euro-Atlantic security, offers a complementary perspective.
“Twenty years ago this year,” he recalls, “I was a lead writer on a major report for the Bertelsmann Venusberg Group, in which we identified the importance of military mobility. We agreed as a group that military mobility is deterrence. At the centre of that vision was a rail network that can move forces and resources quickly and securely to where they are needed in the defence of Europe.”
“Today we are seeing the realisation of that vision in Rail Baltica – an ambitious project to link not just Estonia, Lithuania, and Latvia together with heavy rail that can carry whatever we need to defend these three great countries, but also link them to the rest of Europe, so that no one can be in any doubt that we are determined to maintain the defence of our alliance. No one can be in any doubt that we collectively are determined to defend a free Europe and the alliance in which we all believe.”
Dual-use logic: from commercial asset to security instrument
That dual-use logic is central to Malwina Talik, Research Associate at the Institute for the Danube Region and Central Europe. “Rail Baltica project is of course very important from the commercial point of view,” she notes, “but there is also a security dimension to it.” For her, the line’s value lies in its ability to serve both peacetime and crisis functions: “It enhances economic and climate security, but also societal resilience and it is vital in enhancing the defence capacities of the Baltic states.”
Talik warns, however, that this duality brings complexity and vulnerability. “Rail Baltica can also become a target of sabotage or hybrid operations.” That risk, she argues, underscores the need for constant coordination with defence ministries across Europe. This is not just a Baltic project, but “a European security project,” requiring “European ownership and civil–military co-ownership.”
Her point echoes the European Commission’s ReArm Europe initiative and the Community of European Railway and Infrastructure Companies (CER) position paper, which identifies rail as the “backbone of military mobility.” The goal is not to militarize transport, but to civilian defence logistics to embed readiness into the normal functioning of Europe’s economy. The same railways that carry trade must be able to carry tanks.
The symbolism of competence
Infrastructure also carries meaning. For Edward Lucas, Senior Fellow at the Centre for European Policy Analysis, Rail Baltica is not just a logistical upgrade but a political achievement. “A successful Rail Baltica, built on time, on budget, and profitable once operational, will be of huge importance as an infrastructure and security project,” he says. “It will also be really important as a symbolic project – a sign that the three Baltic states can actually get together, agree on a plan, and implement it.”
In a region long defined by fragmentation and vulnerability, that symbolism matters. Europe’s deterrence does not rest solely on tanks or treaties; it depends on credibility – the ability to deliver. For Lucas, Rail Baltica’s success would mark a shift from aspiration to capability: a tangible demonstration that the Baltic states can cooperate at scale, manage complex procurement, and anchor themselves in the European core.
Europe’s infrastructure as deterrence
This logic is now taking hold across the EU. The ReArm Europe plan, proposed by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, foresees €800 billion to strengthen European defence capacity. Rail is at the centre of this effort. The IE Centre for Transport Economics calculates that dual-use corridors like Rail Baltica can reduce the transport time for heavy military equipment from one week to just twenty-four hours – a quantum leap in NATO’s capacity to reinforce the eastern flank.
The CER’s position paper goes further, calling for interoperability, redundancy, and cyber resilience as essential standards for the rail network. It advocates harmonizing technical requirements – axle loads, train lengths, loading gauges – with military needs, while maintaining peacetime efficiency. The result would be a European transport system capable of switching seamlessly between civilian and defence modes. In the twenty-first century, logistics is strategy.
For Marko Kivila, CEO of Rail Baltica, this dual-use, pan-European role defines the project’s purpose. “Rail Baltica is the physical expression of Europe’s security and connectivity goals,” he says. “It is being built not only to move passengers and goods faster, but to give Europe strategic depth – the ability to respond, to reinforce, and to recover.”
Kivila emphasises that resilience is as much about governance as engineering. “We are building to NATO standards, to EU interoperability rules, and with a mindset that sees every bridge, tunnel, and terminal as part of a wider European system. That means cybersecurity, redundancy, and coordination with defence ministries are not afterthoughts – they are design principles.”
Europe’s steel arteries
In the end, Rail Baltica’s importance transcends its geography. It embodies a broader European shift – from reactive defence to proactive resilience. Europe’s strategic autonomy will not be achieved through rhetoric alone, but through tangible, interoperable systems that bind the continent together – logistically, economically, and politically. Rail Baltica is one of those systems: a north–south spine of deterrence and development.
As Leuprecht puts it, “We need to think ahead not just for today’s requirements but for tomorrow’s as well.”
At a recent defence and security conference, we spoke with experts about the importance of Rail Baltica for the region and for Europe, especially its role in strengthening defence capabilities and deterrence.