The risks of war in the gray region

Digest opened free editor

Rola Khaleda, FT editor, chooses her favorite stories in this weekly newsletter.

Warnings come thick and fast. Over the course of last week, Fredrich Mirz, the German advisor, said that when it comes to Russia, “We are not in war, but we are also no longer in peace.” “We are now the most difficult situation in Europe since the end of World War II,” Danish Prime Minister Miti Frederksen told FT. “We are running out of time.” Elisa Maningham Buller, former British intelligence chief, hoped that she “may be correct (in saying) we are already in war with Russia.”

The three were responding to a wave of Russian “hybrid war” – aggressive actions that already stop killing people. As Friedrixen Make upIt is “one day drones, Internet attacks the next day, sabotage on the third day.”

European concerns have risen sharply in recent weeks, following Russian drones on Poland and a continuous violation of the Astony air field by Moscow aircraft. Both Copenhagen and Munich airports are temporarily closed in response to drones. It seems that the Danish are sure that Russia was the source of their problem.

But while the hybrid war makes more headlines, it is not new. Last year, Russia was linked to premeditated burning attacks throughout Europe, as well as a plot to put it Parcel bombs On DHL shipping trips. NATO also accused Russia of planning to kill the CEO of Rheinmetall, a German weapons manufacturer. There were many previous Russian incursions into the Estonian airspace, which did not make headlines. The latest was simply longer and more provocative.

A decisive question about the hybrid war is whether it considers it a substitute for the traditional “kinetic” war – or simply provided it with it? This constitutes a discussion on how to respond.

One of the arguments is that resorting to Russia to the hybrid war reflects weakness and uncertainty rather than strength and design. The Russians are angry with Western aid to Ukraine and successfully threaten Kiev missile strikes on energy facilities, which displays a major source of Russian export revenues. Nearly half of the oil refineries in Russia were wounded by drones or Ukrainian missiles.

The Kremlin argues that by providing Ukraine with long -range missiles and vital intelligence, the Western alliance is waging a proxy war on Russia. Western officials have always weighing the possibility that Moscow would respond through amazing targets on NATO – such as the military bases that are used as a starting center for assistance in Ukraine.

However, at the present time, Russia uses subversive hybrid attacks that stop military action against NATO. This relative restriction is evidence that Western deterrence works.

An alternative point of view is that the measures of the hybrid war in Russia achieve the attacks aimed at testing Western responses and dividing the NATO alliance. If this is true, Putin’s current actions may be simply a prelude to the actual kinetic war in Europe.

These views refer to various policy responses. If Kremlin has been successful in staying below the actual war level, it will be wrong for NATO countries to respond strongly. The shooting down of Russian aircraft that violate the airspace of NATO – the threat made by Radosao Sikorsky, the Polish Foreign Minister – will be, in this opinion, an unnecessary and dangerous escalation.

One of the former American officials argues that there is still a “bright red line” between the aggressive Russian actions that kill people – and those who do not do so. His point of view is that the argument that the hybrid and traditional war in a smooth connected series is a mistake. As this former official says: “If he turns into a traditional war, people will soon notice the difference.”

The alternative opinion is that if Putin can continue to increase the bet, without provoking a strong and unified Western response, he may be able to prove that the provisions of collective defense in NATO are empty. The fact that the European Union last week Discussions When creating a drone to confront Russia, there would be decisive and may be observed in the Kremlin. If the Western unit is resolved, the smaller and weakest organs in the alliance can be isolated.

It is possible, of course, that the theory is not completely correct – and that the greatest danger is the accidental struggle caused by Russia’s increasingly reckless use of the “gray zone” tactics.

What if the Russian sabotage of the charging plane, or a deliberate attack, caused mass injuries? DHL parcels are performed not only on shipping aircraft but also on passenger flights. If the Russian sabotage had caused a plane crash on Europe, killing hundreds on the plane, many of them see this as a war.

Putin may think that, even in these circumstances, Europe will be very keen to accept the Kremlin assurances that it was an unfortunate accident. So the current procedures for Russia require a response that makes both clear that there is a price that is paid for the mixed war – and the threshold crosses to a direct fighting.

The best response to the Russian hybrid war may be a western version of the gray region tactics. By its nature, the hybrid war is asymmetric and dependent on imagination. The Western alliance cannot mimic Russian recklessness. Blessed burning attacks outside the list. But both the United States, Britain and France have offensive electronic capabilities. It is assumed that it is there for some reason.

[email protected]