The British military’s rapid decision to deploy personnel and equipment to Belgium marks a subtle but significant shift in Europe’s response to a growing grey-zone conflict.
The move comes after a series of drone incursions over Belgian airspace forced the temporary closure of Brussels’ Zaventem airport and interrupted military operations, incidents Belgian authorities believe bear the fingerprints of Russian interference.
Sir Richard Knighton, the newly appointed Chief of the Defence Staff, confirmed the deployment during an interview with the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg, revealing that Belgium’s top general had requested urgent assistance earlier in the week. Britain, he said, was already “sending people and equipment” to help its NATO ally track, analyse and counter the incursions.
He did not confirm whether Moscow was directly responsible, but the qualification that it was “plausible” was pointed enough. In the coded language of military diplomacy, such a word signals genuine concern without committing to public attribution.
A New Front in Hybrid Warfare
For months, European intelligence agencies have quietly warned of an uptick in covert Russian activity—ranging from cyberattacks to sabotage, misinformation, and aerial surveillance. The drone sightings over Belgium fit that broader pattern.
Belgium’s Defence Minister Theo Francken was initially cautious, noting the absence of hard evidence. Yet he acknowledged that the incidents had moved beyond nuisance and now represented “a serious threat affecting civilian infrastructure across multiple European countries.” It was a striking admission from the heart of the European Union’s capital.
The timing, moreover, is unlikely to be accidental. Germany’s Defence Minister Boris Pistorius has suggested that these incursions may be linked to discussions within the EU about using frozen Russian assets—estimated at around €140 billion—to fund Ukraine’s defence through a new loan mechanism. The message from Moscow, if indeed it is responsible, is clear: Europe’s financial and political support for Kyiv will be met with pressure elsewhere.
Britain’s Strategic Role
London’s swift assistance to Brussels fits into a wider strategy that has seen the UK take a leading role in reinforcing NATO’s eastern flank. British Typhoon jets have already been stationed in Poland, while British intelligence assets remain heavily engaged in monitoring Russian activities across the Baltic and North Sea.
The Belgian request for help also reflects an emerging truth: Europe’s smaller militaries, even those well-equipped and modernised, lack the depth to handle hybrid attacks that blur the line between peacetime disruption and wartime aggression. Britain’s radar systems, electronic warfare specialists and counter-drone units are among the most sophisticated in NATO, and their deployment sends both reassurance to allies and a warning to adversaries.
For Sir Richard Knighton, who only recently assumed command of the armed forces, the episode is an early test of leadership. It also echoes the themes of his recent Sunday Telegraph column, published for Remembrance Sunday, in which he warned that “peace is never guaranteed” and must be actively defended, even at considerable cost. That statement now appears prescient.
Civilian Costs and Public Unease
For ordinary Belgians, the first visible consequence came not in military manoeuvres but in grounded flights. About 3,000 Brussels Airlines passengers were affected when Zaventem airport was temporarily closed after drones were spotted nearby. The airline has since complained of “considerable costs” from cancelled and diverted services.
Such disruption carries its own psychological weight. When civil aviation becomes vulnerable to hostile technology—cheap, mobile, and often untraceable—the sense of everyday security begins to erode. Belgium’s experience mirrors that of several Nordic nations where unexplained drone activity has interrupted air traffic and raised fears about the safety of critical infrastructure such as energy terminals and data hubs.
Europe’s Intelligence Dilemma
The broader question is how Europe responds to a campaign that thrives on ambiguity. Moscow’s denials are predictable and, in the absence of conclusive evidence, difficult to disprove. Hybrid warfare, by design, exploits that grey area between overt hostility and technical deniability.
For intelligence agencies, the task is doubly difficult. Proving authorship requires both technical forensics—tracking radio frequencies, identifying drone components—and political will. Publicly naming Russia risks escalation, yet silence invites further tests of resolve.
Belgium’s security services, like those of its neighbours, have improved dramatically since the 2016 Brussels terror attacks, but they remain overstretched. That the government has now turned to Britain underscores the seriousness of the situation and the degree of interdependence within NATO.
Lessons from Ukraine
If Ukraine has demonstrated anything, it is that the modern battlefield is as much about drones, data and perception as it is about tanks and artillery. Russia’s extensive use of unmanned systems in Ukraine offers a chilling preview of how such tactics can spill beyond the warzone into European airspace.
For Western governments, this raises uncomfortable questions. Are they adequately defending their skies? Do they possess the legal authority and technical means to neutralise drones quickly? And how can they reassure citizens without fuelling panic?
A Warning Ignored?
There is a temptation among some European capitals to treat these incidents as isolated acts of nuisance rather than coordinated strategy. That complacency would be dangerous. Hybrid warfare operates precisely on the assumption that its victims will hesitate—seeking proof instead of deterrence, consensus instead of response.
Britain’s intervention, modest though it may appear, signals an awareness that waiting for conclusive evidence before acting risks allowing adversaries to define the tempo of confrontation.
The drones over Belgium may be small, their origin uncertain, their immediate damage limited. Yet their significance lies in what they reveal about the changing nature of European security.
In the shadow of Ukraine, Russia’s challenge to the West no longer plays out only on battlefields but across civilian infrastructure, airspace and public perception. Britain’s decision to stand by Belgium is a reminder that collective defence in the 21st century begins long before the first shot is fired.
Peace, as Sir Richard Knighton warned, “is never guaranteed.” Europe is once again learning, albeit dangerously slowly, what that means.
This Article First Appeared at DEFENCE MATTERS.EU
Click here for more News & Current Affairs at EU Today
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
