European capitals are considering new collective measures to counter Russia’s escalating campaign of hybrid warfare, as recent attacks have raised concerns about the effectiveness of existing deterrence mechanisms. European Union defence ministers met in Brussels this week to discuss a proposal from the European Commission for an Emergency Security Protocol designed to coordinate a collective response to Russian acts of sabotage and destabilization below the threshold of an armed attack.
The proposed protocol would function similarly to NATO’s Article 4 consultations, which can be invoked when a member country feels its security is threatened, though some diplomats expressed reservations about the potential for overlapping decision-making with NATO mechanisms. A majority of EU countries, however, support revisiting current approaches to ensure a more unified and timely reaction to Russia’s persistent actions, which have included cyberattacks, drone incursions, and sabotage such as arson attacks and railway explosives.
Andrius Kubilius, the EU’s defence commissioner, emphasized the need for a “hybrid defence” matching the scale and impact of Russia’s hybrid threats, asserting that any response should be sufficiently "painful" to deter further aggression. Incidents cited include the attempted armed drone attack on a Ukrainian cargo plane at Leipzig/Halle airport in Germany last August and the recent drone strike on a train near the Ukraine-Poland border, which followed a passing train carrying European officials, including former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
European officials and intelligence agencies, including Denmark’s, have warned of a potential further escalation by Moscow, with a “low but growing” risk that Russia might launch a limited military attack against a NATO member country. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk suggested that Russia could carry out missile or drone strikes on alliance members, possibly under the guise of accidents, as a way to test NATO’s collective defence framework.
Opinions vary among experts on the likelihood of such a direct military attack, with some cautioning against overstating the threat. They argue that Russian President Vladimir Putin may be reluctant to provoke NATO’s Article 5 response, which treats an armed attack on one member as an attack on all. Nonetheless, analysts agree that Moscow seeks to increase the political and strategic costs for European nations supporting Ukraine, while potentially aiming to weaken NATO’s unity and destabilize European security.
Several European countries have taken measures against Moscow in response to specific incidents, including Germany’s closure of a Russian consulate and the expulsion of diplomats. Officials stressed the importance of timely attribution and a robust response to Russian provocations, noting the challenge posed by Moscow’s use of deniable tactics often involving proxy actors.
Participants in the Brussels discussions highlighted the need to coordinate sanctions, intelligence sharing, law enforcement actions, and military postures more effectively, potentially through joint rapid-response mechanisms. However, some diplomats cautioned against creating bureaucratic redundancies that could slow decision-making or duplicate NATO’s efforts.
The evolving situation underscores a broader debate within Europe on how best to deter and respond to Moscow’s “grey zone” tactics without escalating to full-scale conflict, while maintaining a united front in support of Ukraine and the security of alliance members.