Se ci arrendiamo adesso a Putin, sarà lui a modellare la sicurezza dell’Europa negli anni a venire

The UK and its European allies are facing a wave of Russian hybrid attacks and provocations on a scale not seen since the Cold War.

In recent weeks, the Royal Navy and Nato partners were forced to [shadow a Russian military submarine](https://inews.co.uk/news/world/russian-threat-sea-growing-britain-isnt-ready-4096180?ico=in-line_link) transiting the English Channel. The Russian spy ship *Yantar* has aimed lasers at RAF aircraft north of Scotland. There have been drone incursions into Romanian airspace, alongside allegations of cyberattacks on critical infrastructure in Belgium and Germany.  

At the same time, [hostile Russian rhetoric towards Europe, and especially the UK, continues to rise](https://nestcentre.org/war-with-the-anglo-saxons/#h-executive-summary). Britain is now routinely described as an “eternal enemy” and cast as the Kremlin’s principal adversary.

These actions are often described as [“hybrid” activities](https://inews.co.uk/opinion/little-green-men-ghost-fleets-russia-war-2030-4085827?ico=in-line_link). In simple terms, this means pressure that stops short of open war, but still creates risk, disruption and anxiety. Submarines, cyberattacks, sabotage, GPS jamming and aggressive rhetoric all fall into this category. 

This escalation goes beyond sabre-rattling, and it should not be dismissed as aggression for its own sake. Rather, the Kremlin believes it has identified a strategic opening: a chance both to press its advantage in Ukraine and to reshape Europe’s long-term security order in its own favour.

As I write, European leaders are engaged in high-stakes talks with their US counterparts. Securing a just peace for Ukraine is at the top of the agenda. Yet these discussions also carry wider implications. They could either constrain the Kremlin’s ambitions or help realise them, with [consequences for the security architecture of the entire continent](https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/chief-defence-staff-russia-wants-attack-nato-4108959?ico=in-line_link).

Moscow wants to influence the outcome of these talks. By increasing military pressure and tension, [Russia](https://inews.co.uk/topic/russia?srsltid=AfmBOorh8aGxW4ae-kdb1lo4DP02chn_wrJPFuiybHAD_qJdkecJ2DXe&ico=in-line_link) hopes to make European governments more cautious, more divided, and more focused on avoiding short-term risks rather than on Ukraine’s long-term security.

The Kremlin has clear immediate aims from these talks, which are worth reiterating here.

First, it wants to force additional concessions from the Ukrainians – especially regarding territory and the future size of their military – that they would not accept with a united Western bloc behind them.  

I got a quiz for you chat

Some think that the immutable Russian policy of expansionism has a very precise historical component, can you name it in two words?

You cannot reason with a tiger when your head is in its mouth

Is Europe trying to pump itself up with these analyses to get itself mentally ready or something? I mean it’s pretty obvious that if Putin thinks you’re weak you will be pushed around.

The biggest issue is Europe and allies by large feared Ukraine would win too much during the early counter offensive and waited far too long for Russia to reorganize and restructure their tactics, reacting two steps behind is a massife error only serving to prolong the conflict.

Europe and russia have different motivations. Russia is thinking about expansion and is willing to sacrifice anything for that, EU is thinking about financial safety and continued undisturbed lifestyles of its citizens. And this is the leverage russia has been using successfully so far.

What’s this “we” shit?