How Cold War 2 could turn into World War 3

Fears of an uncontained escalation spiral are rising after Russia openly threatened attacks on the UK and other European countries amid a surge in suspected sabotage operations. The Kremlin has threatened to target British and German military bases over their support for Ukraine, as tensions edged towards hostilities. President Vladimir Putin said this week that any potential strikes on British military facilities would remain a “military secret”, after the UK agreed to provide Ukraine with missile blueprints capable of striking targets deep within Russia. Shorts Germany then announced that Russia was responsible after explosive-packed drones were found last month near a Ukrainian cargo plane at a German airport. The government described it as part of a “well-established pattern of Russian hybrid operations in Europe”. Russia called the accusation “absurd”. Moscow has waged a covert campaign against its perceived enemies for years, and the UK’s assessment on the threat from Russia has not presently changed, The i Paper understands. Western officials told The i Paper that Russia has a “very clear appetite” to conduct grey-zone attacks on Nato countries – incidents aimed at disrupting or damaging a country below the threshold for all-out war – but stressed that they believed the Kremlin wanted to avoid direct confrontation with the alliance. Political sources said they were unsurprised by Russia’s recent threats, adding that they reiterated previous menacing statements and were designed to scare Nato allies into reducing support for Ukraine and fracture Western unity. However, there has been a recent uptick in suspected attacks, particularly this year, increasing the risk of such an incident resulting in casualties or other major consequences. That has prompted fears that a miscalculation could spark uncontained escalation that could lead to all-out war between Russia and Nato countries. Political sources acknowledged that Europe-Russia relations were at a “very low ebb” and that there was a risk that Russia could miscalculate in its aggression. There are several scenarios that could see Russia’s attacks inadvertently – or deliberately – rise above the threshold for war. Explosion threatening an airport A serious sabotage or arson attack on a Nato country, particularly on a sensitive site such as an airport, could lead to escalation. Russia is already taking steps in this direction. The discovery of an explosive-laden drone at Leipzig airport last month rang alarm bells in Europe, with German authorities blaming Russia. The device failed to explode due to a fault, but is believed to have been one of three Russian drones in or around the airport over the same period. Russia’s military intelligence service is also believed to be behind a series of parcels which exploded in the UK and Europe. One caught fire at Leipzig airport in 2024 just before it was due to be loaded onto an aircraft, with the head of Germany’s domestic intelligence agency saying it was simple luck that the device had not ignited mid-air. Another parcel ignited inside a DPD truck as it was crossing Poland, while another caught fire at a DHL depot near Birmingham. Polish prosecutors have said that the exploding parcels were rehearsals for sabotaging flights to the US and Canada. Investigators found two test packages sent to the US and Canada and two in Amsterdam. Polish authorities are also investigating if foreign intelligence services were involved in a fire at a drone component factory this week. Ed Arnold, a senior associate fellow at the defence think-tank Rusi and a former British Army officer, said that although sabotage had long been part of the Russian playbook, there had been a “shift” in the nature of the attacks and an increased risk in recent months. If a Russian attack succeeded in destroying a plane, potentially with civilian casualties, which was a risk of the incident in Leipzig, then Europe would “really have to respond”, Arnold said. A drone loaded with explosives was found at Leipzig/Halle airport on 4 August, in an attack attributed to Russia (Photo: Axel Schmidt/Reuters) Russia has previously launched deadly attacks on civilian airliners that killed hundreds of passengers. In 2014, Russian-backed forces fired a Buk missile at Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 over eastern Ukraine, killing all 298 people on board. A UN investigation found Russia responsible. After the crash, the EU hit Russia with wide-ranging sanctions. Then in 2024 Azerbaijan Airlines flight 8243 crashed in Kazakhstan after being hit by a Russian surface-to-air missile while approaching Grozny in Chechnya. Of the 67 people on-board, 38 were killed. The crash prompted a crisis in relations between Baku and Moscow. Retaliation for an attack on a European plane or airport would not be in kind, targeting Russian civilians, Arnold said. More probable options would include cyber attacks or assistance for Ukraine to inflict further damage on Russia. Russia could also seek to sabotage military targets, such as ships in a port. “If it’s Kremlin deliberate policy to test Nato and that window of opportunity, according to US intelligence, has already started, then it’s going to start with hybrid attacks,” Arnold said. “You’re going to start with targeting the things that are going to Ukraine. You’re going to start with targeting Nato ships while they’re in port because they’re static. You don’t have to destroy the ship, but if you take out a frigate’s radar, then you basically disable the frigate.” The Nato response to a civilian or military sabotage incident would likely fall below a declaration of war, but could involve steps towards that outcome. In the case of a serious attack, Nato would convene an emergency meeting under Article 4, which allows for emergency consultation whenever a member’s “territorial integrity, political independence or security” is threatened. That could lead to discussions of whether or not an incident is serious enough to invoke Article 5, which states that an attack on one member is considered an attack on all, and is the basis for a collective military response. Drone incursion Russia could also take Europe to the brink of war by flying a drone into the airspace of a Nato country and killing citizens or seriously damaging crucial infrastructure. Putin’s forces have already sent a series of drones into alliance airspace, most seriously when a drone hit an apartment building in Romania in May, injuring two people and sparking a major fire. In September 2025, Poland called an urgent meeting after multiple Russian drones entered its airspace, and in the same month, three Russian fighter jets flew over Estonia. To cause an all-out conflict with Nato, the attack would have to constitute “a meaningful incursion on territorial integrity, and/or accompanied by loss of life”, said Melanie Garson, a professor of international security at UCL. “It would have to be something that was sufficient to trigger a country needing to respond in self defence, like a substantial drone attack,” she said. “Something that sparked an accidental fire, or appeared to be a stray missile, might not meet the threshold and could still come under sabotage. I think it would have to be clear, deliberate, targeted.” Destruction caused by a suspected Russian drone hitting an apartment building in Galati, Romania, in May (Photo: Getty) “That’s why grey-zone conflict works,” she added. “It creates that instability without really triggering the need for kinetic self-defence.” Russia will be trying to keep up that grey-zone conflict without prompting an Article 5 Nato response. If a drone caused significant damage in a Nato country, Russia could deny responsibility, or claim that interference with the drone’s guidance led it to stray off course. To escalate to all-out war, Nato would need to analyse the remains of the drone, including its payload, to draw a conclusion on its origins. But it may also put the burden of proof on Russia to explain the drones – and why it wasn’t warned. “Russia is using precision technologies all the time,” Garson said. “If it wasn’t deliberate and attributable, it would have been on the Russians to give a warning – to say, ‘we’ve lost control of it, but we don’t want this to be construed as an attack,’ and possibly to make a public apology afterwards.” A drone strike that caused serious damage or casualties, with clear evidence pointing to the Kremlin, with no prior warning, could plausibly lead to invocation of Article 5. Land grab While sabotage and drone incursions might not be enough for Nato to attack Russia, an attempt to seize alliance territory would clear the threshold. There are several possible sites that could be vulnerable, including Norway’s Svalbard archipelago, Finland’s Åland islands, and Sweden’s Gotland island. Security analysts have also speculated about a potential incursion into the Baltic states, with a recent visit by CIA director John Ratcliffe to Moscow prompting a wave of speculation about potential Russian plans to target Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania. The most likely target is Lithuania, as part of an attempt to build a land corridor between Russia and Kaliningrad, Arnold suggested. Russia may also now perceive Nato members to be easier prey due to disinterest – and sometimes hostility – from the Trump administration towards Europe, raising doubts over whether the US would come to their aid. Arnold said the Kremlin might see a window of opportunity. “My assessment is that Putin has an opportunity here to defeat Nato because of, ultimately, [Donald] Trump and [Secretary of War Pete] Hegseth. I think he genuinely thinks he’s not going to get a better shot at this,” he said. “Russia understands that it can’t defeat Nato militarily, but they can defeat it politically. And to do that, it has to be a land grab, because if you blow up a commercial airliner, European resolve hardens – it doesn’t weaken.” If Russia made an attempt to seize Nato land and the alliance did not respond forcefully, the concept of collective deterrence would be shattered, Arnold added. “If Europe struggles to react, you expose Article 5 as hollow, and Putin effectively defeats Nato,” he said. But if Nato did enforce the protocol, it would be face-to-face with Russia in a hot war.