Conference on Russia Papers

This chapter identifies and analyses security challenges posed by Russian para-statal military organisations (PSMOs) to European security interests. It focuses on three challenges: 1) the challenge of Authoritarian Conflict Management (ACM) abroad; 2) the challenge of enacting ACM and related PSMO limitations; and 3) the challenge of subversion at home. The chapter emphasises international power shifts, increasing authoritarian great power activism, and the seeming limitations of the ‘liberal stance’ towards conflict management that point toward a different approach undertaken through Russian PSMOs. Assessed together, the potency of Russian PSMOs rests in offering an alternative to European engagement, the heightening of violence overseas and its repercussions, and the fear of changed PSMO effort on the European continent.

This chapter examines the “human dimension” of European security, focusing on the issue of Ukrainian war refugees and the potential for their repatriation. Pushing people out of Ukraine is becoming one of Russia’s most important strategies for achieving its so-called “special military operation” goals. Cynical attacks on civilian infrastructure in Ukraine, including thermal and electrical generation, combined with information and psychological operations are working towards this goal daily. The consequences of people leaving Ukraine could be painful for both Ukraine’s future and European security. The situation of millions of Ukrainian citizens, who are unable to find fulfilment in the EU and have no place to return home, represents a real catastrophe for the European continent. To avoid this, Ukraine and its allies need to start planning the return of their citizens today, with appropriate adjustments to the state’s socio-economic policy.

Under shifting global power dynamics, Europe faces a dual challenge: Russia’s protracted confrontation with Europe and growing questions over the reliability of US security guarantees. These pressures expose Europe’s vulnerability and demand accelerated defence self-reliance. While recent initiatives have aimed at boosting budgets, industrial modernisation, and procurement, deterrence requires more than resources. The critical gap lies in the capacity to transform investments into deployable capabilities and to engage society across the continent. Two priorities are highlighted: establishing a permanent European multi-domain command-and-control structure to integrate land, maritime, air, space, and cyber components into coherent operational planning, coordinated with political and interagency governance, and strengthening civilian preparedness and resilience; ensuring that governments, private actors, and societies can respond effectively to crises and hybrid attacks. Together with industrial modernisation, these measures provide the foundation of Europe’s strategic autonomy and the most immediate steps towards credible deterrence and resilience in a volatile international environment.