Threat

Vladimir Putin remains convinced that his army can continue seizing territory and has no intention of stopping the war. According to the annual U.S. Intelligence Community threat assessment, Moscow remains confident in achieving a battlefield victory and forcing a peace agreement on its own terms. Intelligence officials warn that the continuation of the war increases the risk of escalation into a broader conflict with NATO, posing an existential threat to the United States. Although the Russian army advanced at its slowest pace in over 100 years last year (averaging just 15 meters per day), the Kremlin sees no reason to de-escalate as long as it maintains an advantage. The report highlights that Moscow’s nuclear rhetoric and use of dual-capable ballistic missiles create an “escalation spiral” that could lead to direct kinetic conflict with NATO forces, potentially involving nuclear weapons. Analytical summary: In March 2026, U.S. intelligence assessments point to a dangerous phase of the conflict where Russia’s tactical gains, however slow, fuel the Kremlin’s strategic illusion of being able to dictate terms to the entire West. For EU nations, this reinforces the necessity of long-term strengthening of the eastern flank and transitioning to a defense-oriented economy. The threat of “deliberate escalation” by Moscow transforms a regional war into a global security challenge, where the risk of direct conflict with NATO is becoming a calculated tool of Russian political pressure.

Presidential aide and head of the Maritime Board Nikolai Patrushev announced that Russia is preparing military measures to protect its commercial vessels. In an interview with Kommersant, he claimed that an “unprecedented campaign” is being waged against the Russian fleet, prompting the authorities to consider placing mobile firing groups and specialized defense systems on board ships. A key element of this strategy will be the direct escorting of merchant vessels by Russian Navy warships. Patrushev noted that the risk of maritime sabotage remains consistently high, citing the attack on the Arctic Metagaz LNG tanker in the Mediterranean on March 3, 2026, which Moscow attributes to drone strikes launched from the Libyan coast. Analytical summary: The shift to military convoy tactics in March 2026 highlights the critical vulnerability of Russia’s logistics chains amid global isolation. However, the effectiveness of such measures remains questionable: the presence of warships does not guarantee immunity, as evidenced by recent cases where Russian tankers were detained despite having armed guards. For the international community, the militarization of trade routes creates additional risks to maritime safety, turning civilian exports into a legitimate zone of military confrontation and forcing global insurers to further hike premiums for vessels handling Russian cargo.

Kirill Dmitriev, the Russian President’s special envoy for investment cooperation, has launched a sharp critique of Washington’s European allies. Following the EU and UK’s refusal to assist in the military operation against Iran, the head of the RDIF called on Donald Trump to impose sanctions on Europe while simultaneously lifting restrictions on Russia to “support global energy markets.” Dmitriev highlighted the friction within NATO, claiming that allies support Ukraine but ignore U.S. interests in the Iranian conflict. He echoed Donald Trump’s own rhetoric, citing the president’s description of NATO’s refusal to help unblock the Strait of Hormuz as a “very stupid mistake.” In exchange for lifting sanctions, Moscow is promising the U.S. access to joint projects valued at over $14 trillion, claiming the current restrictions have cost Washington over $300 billion. Analytical summary: Dmitriev’s proposal in March 2026 exposes Moscow’s attempt to seize the initiative during a moment of transatlantic crisis. The Kremlin is openly offering Trump a deal: abandoning “ungrateful” European allies in favor of a pragmatic partnership with Russia. Despite the colossal $14 trillion figure—which functions more as a propaganda tool than a realistic economic offer—this rhetoric appeals to certain segments of the public weary of protracted conflicts.

Despite mass expulsions of Russian diplomats from other EU countries, Austria remains a “safe haven” for espionage. According to the Financial Times, around 500 Russian diplomats continue to work in Vienna, with Western intelligence estimating that approximately one-third are engaged in espionage. Over the past two years, numerous new antennas and electronic surveillance systems have appeared on the roofs of Russian-owned buildings, including the Russencity residential complex. The specific nature of Austrian law is that it only allows prosecution for espionage if it directly harms Austria itself. This makes Vienna an ideal base for electronic intelligence against international organizations (UN, OSCE, IAEA, OPEC) and for intercepting data from major European satellite stations located east of the city. Satellite espionage under diplomatic cover Western intelligence agencies have noted suspicious activity involving Russian antennas: they are used not for communication with Moscow, but for targeting various satellites depending on the political agenda. For instance, during the Munich Security Conference in February, one of the largest antennas was reoriented toward the relevant sector, returning to its original position after the event ended. Experts from the NomenNescio collective note that Russencity’s location on the banks of the Danube allows for the effective interception of signals from key European communication hubs. Meanwhile, the number of accredited diplomats at the embassy remains anomalously high—over 180 people—providing reliable cover for technical intelligence specialists. Analytical summary: Vienna’s continued status as Russia’s primary intelligence hub in March 2026 demonstrates a critical flaw in the European Union’s collective security system. Austria’s use of legal loopholes allows the Kremlin to maintain technological capabilities for electronic interception and coordination of hybrid operations in the heart of Europe, compensating for the loss of agent networks in other countries of the region.

In March 2026, a coordinated campaign appeared in the Estonian segment of social media (TikTok, VKontakte, Telegram) promoting the idea of seceding the city of Narva and the Ida-Viru region from Estonia. According to the monitoring project Propastop, the goal of these info-dumps is to create a so-called “Narva People’s Republic.” Posts are accompanied by hashtags such as #WaitingForRussia and calls to protect “Russian identity.” Propaganda materials actively use separatist symbols (a green-black-white flag) and militaristic imagery. The technology of creating “people’s republics” completely mirrors the scenarios used by Russia in 2014 in Donetsk and Luhansk, indicating a direct continuity of hybrid aggression methods. Information operation as a tool for destabilization A representative of the Estonian Internal Security Service (Kapo), Marta Tuule, characterized the events as a classic information operation. According to the agency, the campaign’s task is to sow chaos, undermine social cohesion, and intimidate the population. Experts note that this is a “simple and cheap way” to keep the internal politics of an EU and NATO member state under tension. Despite the marginal nature of the content, the mass scale of the leaks suggests attempts to probe “pain points” in regions with high concentrations of Russian-speaking populations. Amid ongoing confrontation with the West, the Kremlin is returning to proven tools of territorial blackmail. Analytical summary: The activation of the “Narva Republic” project in 2026 signals a return to the strategy of creating social tension zones on the borders of the EU and NATO. The campaign does not aim for immediate territorial seizure but works toward internal division within Estonia, forcing European security institutions to divert resources toward localizing hybrid threats rather than long-term external support planning.

The Prime Minister of Belgium, Bart De Wever, has issued a resonant statement on the need to normalize relations with Russia. In an interview with L’Echo, the politician emphasized that the European Union should reach an agreement with Vladimir Putin to achieve peace and regain access to low-priced oil and gas. According to the Belgian head of government, the current strategy of supporting Ukraine militarily while simultaneously attempting to undermine the Russian economy is ineffective without massive assistance from the USA. De Wever described the return to purchasing Russian energy resources as “common sense,” noting that European leaders agree with his position in private conversations but fear speaking it aloud. The Prime Minister urged an end to the conflict in Europe’s interest, while formally warning against being “naive” towards the Kremlin. Split within the EU over the negotiation issue The Belgian leader’s statement has exposed deep divisions within the EU. Currently, a bloc of countries favoring direct negotiations with Russia has formed, including Belgium, France (Emmanuel Macron), Italy (Giorgia Meloni), and Hungary (Viktor Orbán). This group is opposed by a faction of states holding an uncompromising stance: Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia. These countries categorically reject the possibility of a deal with the Kremlin, viewing it as a capitulation and a threat to the region’s long-term security. Analytical summary: The Belgian Prime Minister’s public call for a deal with Russia marks a critical fatigue within “Old Europe” regarding economic pressure and resource deficits. In 2026, this trend could lead to political paralysis within the EU, where the desire for cheap energy will enter into direct conflict with commitments to support Ukraine, ultimately shattering the unity of the Western coalition.

Emmanuel Macron’s advisors, Emmanuel Bonne and Bertrand Buchwalter, faced a harsh and profane rejection from the Kremlin during a February trip to Moscow regarding Europe’s involvement in Ukraine negotiations. According to Financial Times sources, the French envoys stated that the EU would not support a ceasefire agreement if it were not involved in the discussions, as the security of the entire region is at stake. However, Yuri Ushakov, an aide to the Russian President, reportedly rejected the overtures using vulgar language, telling them to “go f*** themselves.” The European diplomats insisted that without direct participation from Brussels, any ceasefire agreement would lack EU backing. In response, a senior European diplomat claimed Ushakov’s reply made it clear that Moscow had no interest in negotiating with European structures. The Kremlin’s stance and the lack of common ground Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov confirmed the lack of common ground to the publication, stating that the French representatives “brought no positive signals.” According to Moscow’s version, European countries do not demonstrate a desire to facilitate a real peace process, which, from the Kremlin’s perspective, makes their participation in negotiations meaningless. This diplomatic escalation comes amid France’s attempts to position itself as a key mediator in Europe. However, the Kremlin’s sharp reaction confirms Moscow’s course toward negotiating exclusively with the US, ignoring European capitals as independent political players in matters of global security. Analytical summary: The Kremlin’s public diplomatic demarche marks a final breakdown of dialogue with the EU as an institution. In 2026, this will lead to even greater consolidation of European countries around military support for Ukraine, as political avenues for influencing Moscow have been completely blocked.