Western intelligence officials say Russia is increasing efforts to target European defense company executives, including leaders of smaller drone manufacturers supplying Ukraine, prompting heightened personal security and warnings of an expanding campaign of sabotage and political intimidation.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
European intelligence agencies have warned defense industry executives that Russian operatives are expanding assassination efforts across the continent, with senior officials and employees at companies supplying weapons and military technology to Ukraine facing increased security threats. The warnings have prompted manufacturers to strengthen protection for executives, monitor suspicious activity and reconsider security arrangements at production facilities as Western governments investigate an alleged escalation in Russian covert operations.
Officials from five European intelligence agencies described the expanding threat in a Financial Times investigation published Sunday, reporting that Russian intelligence services have increasingly identified senior defense industry personnel as potential targets. The officials said the alleged campaign forms part of a broader effort to weaken European support for Ukraine through sabotage, intimidation and potentially lethal attacks.
The reported targets include chief executives and other senior employees at major weapons manufacturers as well as smaller companies producing drones and specialized components used by Ukrainian forces. Intelligence officials said the campaign has become more aggressive as fighting in Ukraine continues and Russia faces economic pressure from the prolonged conflict.
One senior European intelligence official described the change in the security environment.
“The threat level has risen in Europe. To property but also to people,” the official told the Financial Times.
According to the intelligence assessments, the Kremlin has directed an expansion of hybrid operations intended to disrupt European assistance to Kyiv over the coming months. Officials believe attacks against defense executives could interfere with weapons production, discourage companies from entering military contracts and impose additional security costs on businesses involved in supporting Ukraine.
The allegations have not been accompanied by public disclosure of the underlying intelligence, and the identities of most alleged targets remain confidential. The reports nevertheless reflect concerns shared by several European security agencies rather than a warning issued by a single government.
Germany’s domestic intelligence service, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, known as the BfV, has increased contact with defense industry companies and their employees. Officials have recommended additional security precautions, including privately contracted close-protection personnel for executives considered particularly vulnerable.
The warnings followed a public assessment from BfV President Sinan Selen, who told German lawmakers Monday that Russian operations increasingly involved the possibility of violence against individuals.
During an Oct. 5 parliamentary hearing examining threats to Germany’s national security, Selen described changes in the methods used by hostile intelligence services, including reliance on criminal organizations and other intermediaries.
“We are observing a further development of these actions in terms of the targets, the methods and the actors involved, including the use of organised crime structures,” Selen said.
The assessment was consistent with warnings delivered by Germany’s other intelligence chiefs during the parliamentary session. According to the German Bundestag’s official account of the hearing, the heads of the country’s federal intelligence agencies identified Russia as Germany’s principal security challenge and described a worsening threat environment.
Martin Jäger, president of Germany’s foreign intelligence service, the BND, told lawmakers that the deterioration predicted by intelligence officials the previous year had materialized. He said Moscow was increasing pressure on European countries while continuing military operations in Ukraine.
Selen separately warned that activities associated with potential future military confrontations were already appearing in the intelligence and counterintelligence environment.
The warnings have focused attention on Russia’s military intelligence agency, the GRU, which European officials identify as the principal organization associated with the alleged assassination campaign.
According to intelligence sources cited by the Financial Times, the GRU has adapted its methods by making greater use of organized crime networks, intermediaries and individuals operating across national borders.
European officials said the alleged operations increasingly involve dividing responsibilities among separate participants. Surveillance, transportation, logistics, planning and attempted execution may be handled by different individuals rather than a single operative responsible for the entire mission.
The approach can complicate investigations because authorities may identify one participant without immediately establishing the identities or responsibilities of others involved in the alleged operation.
Intelligence officials also described a move away from relying exclusively on individuals recruited through online platforms toward more established criminal networks capable of operating in multiple European countries.
Such networks may already possess contacts, transportation arrangements and methods for moving between jurisdictions, providing potential advantages to intelligence agencies seeking to conceal their involvement.
Western security services have previously accused Russia of using criminal intermediaries to conduct sabotage, surveillance and other hostile activities in Europe. Moscow has rejected accusations that it directs attacks against European civilians and infrastructure.
The alleged assassination operations are known in Russian intelligence terminology as “wet work,” a phrase associated with operations involving the killing of designated targets.
European officials said some suspected plots have been detected and disrupted before an attack could occur. Other investigations have involved suspicious surveillance near executives’ homes and workplaces, with authorities examining whether the activity was connected to broader preparations.
The Financial Times did not identify the number of alleged assassination plots that investigators believe have been prevented, and officials did not disclose the names of most individuals under protection.
Several defense industry executives told the newspaper that they had increased personal security during the past six months following advice from government agencies. Some described using additional protection at their residences and workplaces, while others reported employing close-protection personnel primarily during international travel.
The changes have become particularly important for companies producing drones and components used in Ukraine, according to intelligence officials.
Drone technology plays a substantial role in the war, with both Russian and Ukrainian forces relying on unmanned systems for reconnaissance, artillery targeting and attacks against military equipment.
European companies supplying drone components, electronic systems and other specialized technology have become important participants in Ukraine’s military supply network. Their products can support Ukrainian operations even when the manufacturers themselves are relatively small businesses.
Intelligence officials believe that targeting executives at these companies could create disruption disproportionate to the size of the organizations.
Smaller manufacturers may lack the resources to maintain permanent security teams, secure multiple facilities or provide protective services to employees traveling between countries.
An extended security threat can also affect recruitment, insurance, transportation and business continuity, adding costs to companies already working to meet military production requirements.
One defense executive told the Financial Times that his company had recently relocated a production facility in Western Europe because of threats attributed to Russia.
The executive did not publicly identify the company’s location or provide further details about the alleged threats, citing security concerns.
Other manufacturers have strengthened access controls, reviewed travel procedures and increased coordination with law enforcement agencies.
The security concerns have also reached businesses outside the defense industry.
Consultants working with European companies said they were receiving more inquiries from organizations involved in energy, critical infrastructure and other sectors potentially vulnerable to hostile state operations.
Claudine Fry, a London-based partner at the international risk consultancy Control Risks, said executives were seeking more detailed assessments of the danger and practical measures to protect employees.
“We are seeing increased interest in trying to understand how seriously to take the threat to executives and [how to take] active steps towards managing that threat,” Fry told the Financial Times.
The increase in requests reflects uncertainty about how to distinguish credible threats from suspicious activity that may not lead to an attack.
Security advisers must evaluate the possibility of targeted violence while avoiding unnecessary disruptions to business operations.
The reported threat environment creates additional challenges because intelligence officials believe intimidation may be an objective even when an assassination is never attempted.
One European official described the psychological effects as a central feature of the alleged Russian strategy.
“The main goal from the Russian perspective is still psychological,” the official told the newspaper. “Just by making people feel they might be a target, they are having their effect. They want individuals to think twice before doing business with Ukraine.”
The official’s assessment suggests that the perceived possibility of violence can affect business decisions even when investigators cannot confirm that a specific attack is being prepared.
Executives who believe they are being monitored may reduce travel, avoid public appearances or reconsider commercial relationships involving Ukraine.
Companies may also divert funds from production and research toward private security, surveillance equipment and protective infrastructure.
Those consequences could affect the defense industry without requiring Russian operatives to carry out a successful assassination.
Intelligence officials cautioned, however, that the capabilities of alleged Russian operatives vary.
Some suspected operations have involved relatively inexperienced participants or surveillance methods that authorities identified without extensive difficulty. Other activities have appeared more organized, suggesting greater planning and coordination.
The uncertainty has forced security agencies to treat a wide range of incidents as potentially significant until investigators can establish whether they are connected to hostile intelligence activity.
An incident in Sweden during August illustrated the difficulty of evaluating suspicious behavior near prominent defense industry executives.
Swedish police arrested two young Russian tourists after they established a tent near the property of Micael Johansson, chief executive of Saab, the Swedish aerospace and defense manufacturer.
The two individuals were questioned and subsequently released. Authorities did not publicly establish that they were preparing an attack or acting on behalf of Russian intelligence.
Nevertheless, intelligence officials cited the incident as an example of the types of circumstances that security agencies must examine because of the potential threat to defense industry personnel.
Saab manufactures military aircraft, weapons systems, sensors and other defense equipment used by European armed forces and international customers.
Johansson’s position places him among the senior executives responsible for an industry increasingly involved in European military modernization and assistance to Ukraine.
The Swedish incident has not been publicly linked to an assassination plot, and the detention of the two individuals does not establish criminal responsibility.
The wider concerns surrounding executive security intensified after Western intelligence agencies reported uncovering a suspected Russian plot against Armin Papperger, chief executive of German defense manufacturer Rheinmetall, in 2024.
American and German intelligence officials identified an alleged plan to kill Papperger, whose company had become a significant supplier of military equipment and ammunition to Ukraine.
Rheinmetall produces armored vehicles, artillery ammunition, air defense equipment and other weapons systems used by European militaries.
The company has expanded production in response to increased demand arising from the war in Ukraine, including efforts to improve ammunition supplies and support Ukrainian military capabilities.
Papperger has also publicly advocated continued assistance to Kyiv, making him a prominent representative of Europe’s defense industrial response to Russia’s invasion.
Western intelligence officials believed the alleged operation targeting Papperger was intended to send a warning to other companies supplying Ukraine.
The 2024 assassination plot was reported by CNN, which said American intelligence informed German authorities after detecting Russian preparations.
According to those reports, the alleged operation was part of a wider campaign targeting senior executives in Europe’s defense industry, with the Rheinmetall chief considered a particularly prominent target.
Russia denied responsibility for the alleged plot, and the intelligence underlying the accusations has not been fully released publicly.
Papperger has since described receiving continuous protection from private security personnel and police.
The measures reflect concerns that intelligence officials believe have persisted since the alleged plot became known.
The warnings have emerged against a broader background of suspected sabotage incidents across Europe since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
European governments have investigated warehouse fires, damaged communications infrastructure, attempted arson, cyberattacks and other incidents suspected of involving Russian intelligence services or individuals acting on their behalf.
Some investigations have resulted in arrests and criminal charges, while others remain unresolved or have not established a direct connection to Moscow.
The range of reported incidents has contributed to concerns about what European officials describe as hybrid warfare: efforts to weaken an adversary through intelligence operations, sabotage, cyberattacks, disinformation and other activities below the threshold of conventional military conflict.
Unlike direct military attacks, hybrid operations can be difficult to attribute because they may involve covert agents, criminal intermediaries or individuals whose connection to a government is concealed.
The use of separate operatives for different stages of an alleged plot can also complicate efforts to demonstrate that an attack was directed by a foreign intelligence service.
European authorities have consequently increased cooperation among intelligence agencies, police departments and private companies responsible for critical infrastructure.
Defense manufacturers have become a particular focus because of their importance to military production and the delivery of equipment to Ukraine.
The war has prompted European governments to increase defense spending, expand ammunition production and pursue new contracts for drones, air defense systems and armored vehicles.
Russia has repeatedly warned against Western military assistance to Kyiv, arguing that weapons deliveries prolong the conflict and contribute to escalating tensions between Moscow and NATO.
European governments have rejected that position, maintaining that Ukraine has the right to defend itself against Russia’s invasion and that supplying military assistance is consistent with international law.
The alleged assassination campaign represents a more immediate security concern because it involves possible violence against civilians working in private industry.
Threats to company executives differ from conventional military operations, and any deliberate attacks against civilians would raise serious criminal and international legal questions.
The Financial Times report did not establish that every suspicious incident or threat discussed by intelligence officials was attributable to Russia. Investigators continue evaluating individual cases, and the underlying evidence for many alleged operations remains classified.
Nevertheless, the consistency of warnings from five European intelligence agencies indicates that the threat is receiving sustained attention across multiple governments.
The German intelligence services’ public assessments further demonstrate that authorities are treating the possibility of violence against individuals as part of their broader national security planning.
For defense companies, the immediate consequences include more extensive security procedures, increased protection for senior personnel and additional costs associated with safeguarding production facilities.
For European governments, the challenge involves identifying potentially dangerous operations before attacks occur while preserving the ability of manufacturers to continue supplying military equipment.
The reported reliance on organized crime networks adds another complication because conventional intelligence monitoring may not capture every participant involved in a suspected operation.
The alleged campaign also creates uncertainty for executives whose public roles or commercial activities could make them potential targets.
Intelligence officials believe that uncertainty may be deliberate, with the possibility of violence intended to discourage cooperation with Ukraine even when no attack occurs.
As European manufacturers expand production and governments continue supporting Kyiv, authorities are preparing for the possibility that threats against defense industry personnel will persist.
The latest warnings suggest that protecting executives and employees has become an increasingly important part of Europe’s response to suspected Russian covert operations, extending security concerns beyond military installations and government offices to the civilian businesses producing equipment used in Ukraine’s defense.
Original article
Comments