Russia’s feral adventurism against the West is too bellicose to ignore

From sabotage to election meddling, Moscow’s “grey zone” attacks increasingly test NATO’s resolve.

Editorial Board, The Washington Post, October 8, 2025 

Russian President Vladimir Putin chairs a Security Council meeting on Tuesday from his residence outside Moscow. (Aleksey Babushkin/Sputnik, Kremlin Pool Photo via AP)

  

With attention understandably focused on Russia’s ongoing invasion of Ukraine, the most serious war in Europe in 80 years, it’s easy to forget that Russian President Vladimir Putin is also fighting a calibrated conflict against NATO countries far beyond Ukraine’s borders. This subtle but dangerous war won’t end unless Europe and the United States find better ways to deter Moscow.

Richard Moore, the head of Britain’s MI6 spy agency, said Russian intelligence agencies had gone “a little feral” in their efforts. That was a year ago. And things have only gotten worse since.

There have been 110 Russian-linked incidents — most involving vandalism, sabotage and arson and explosive attacks — in Europe since 2022, according to a report from Globsec, a think-tank based in Slovakia. Just last year, a ring of saboteurs had tried to get incendiary parcels into the holds of cargo planes, and assassins targeted the head of one of Germany’s top arms manufacturers. Those plots were foiled alongside many others, but 89 of the 110 were successfully carried out.

Russia has also been trying to disrupt confidence in elections throughout the West. Moscow attempted to turn the vote in Moldova last month against the pro-European Party of Action and Solidarity (PAS). Moldovan authorities claim the Russians spent upward of $100 million to spread misinformation and foment unrest ahead of the vote. These efforts extend beyond post-Soviet states to other established democracies, including the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Poland.

Russian influence operations and kinetic attacks form a broader backdrop against which to understand the recent escalations across Europe — from drone incursions to cyberattacks. Together, they amount to what specialist call “gray zone” tactics — attacks designed to allow plausible deniability for the perpetrating country. Worse, it puts the victim in a bind for how to respond. Lash out, and risk a spiraling war. Ignore the provocation, and embolden your harassers while dispiriting your terrorized citizenry.  

It has long been believed that the West might be able to deter this kind of behavior among its adversaries by signaling offensive cyber capabilities and publicly laying out red lines. Given the mounting pile of evidence, it has become clear that a passive deterrence strategy has failed. Western leaders who worry that stronger responses will lead to more escalation would be wise to remember that showing weakness to a bully can be even more provocative. Perhaps it’s time to make Russia pay a steeper price for its feral adventurism by giving the Kremlin a taste of its own medicine.

 

***

Conversations 305 Comments

How do you think NATO countries should respond to Russia's "gray zone" tactics to effectively deter further aggression?

highlights

The conversation [JB -- with readers] explores various perspectives on how NATO countries should respond to Russia's "gray zone" tactics to deter further aggression. Many participants emphasize the need for strong support for Ukraine, suggesting that providing military aid and resources is crucial to countering Russian advances. Some comments advocate for more assertive actions, such as boosting Ukraine's air defense, engaging in cyber warfare, and targeting Russian financial networks. There is a recurring theme of dissatisfaction with former President Trump's perceived leniency towards Russia, with several comments attributing Russia's boldness to his administration's policies. Additionally, some participants call for a united European front to take decisive action against Russia, highlighting the importance of collective strength in facing such geopolitical challenges.