Uses NATO Article 5 against hybrid attacks

Since 2016, NATO has revealed that hybrid attacks on member states could lead to the call of Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.

Also, at the Alliance’s 2023 summit in Vilnius, NATO leaders agreed that malicious cyber activity could cause articles on a case-by-case basis, leading to a collective response. I did.

But under what circumstances and in what hybrid threats will the alliance hold consultations beyond the provisions of Article 4 and activate Article 5 for the second time in history? And how is it implemented?

Previous responses from democratic governments to date hybrid Russian attacks, including infrastructure obstruction, democratic processes intervention, and cyberattacks have been inadequate and often merely a mild disapproval. A comprehensive hybrid warfare tool weapon is urgently needed to stop future Russian fraud.

However, if such measures prove insufficient, NATO must be prepared to stimulate the self-defense of the group in situations that are closely similar to armed conflict.

The alliance has long prioritized preparation, deterrence and defense for forced political, economic, energy and information tactics by states and non-state groups, including Russia and China, which sets the threshold for open war. It’s below.

However, these preparations need to be strengthened as the use of hybrid tactics in strategic competition and grey zone conflicts are likely to intensify and worsen already.

Following the interference with submarine cables, the recent decision to increase patrols in the Baltic region has led many to counter the major changes in NATO’s long-term approach to subclass threats and the shadow of Russia. was seen as a powerful addition to existing efforts. fleet.

This solid stance is certainly admirable, but despite its strengthening presence, another cable connecting Latvia to Sweden’s island of Gotland suffered damage in January. A total of 11 cables have been hampered in the region since October 2023.

NATO’s Baltic Sentry Operation is extremely important, but it remains primarily reactive and deals with incidents after it occurs. Given the growing complexity of hybrid threats, NATO should have a more aggressive and assertive policy.

One element needs to be more clear about what triggers a collective response. For example, if an enemy intentionally cuts off all energy cables to NATO members, would it be perceived as an offensive act that satisfies the threshold?

Without a clear attitude, we believe that the enemy can exploit uncertainty and act without consequences. NATO must move away from this possibility by updating its strategic guidelines, strengthening member states’ preparations to counter hybrid warfare, and clarifying its position in Article 5 in high-risk scenarios. yeah.

It also requires protocols for coordinated responses to cyberattacks, disinformation, and secret jamming that integrate military, economic and cybertools to enhance collective defense.

In July 2022, NATO leaders supported further prevention and response options, approved expansion of air and missile defense systems, prioritizing energy security, and strengthening intelligence and surveillance. The alliance also supports updating the legal framework and works with partners such as the European Union on coordinated sanctions and measures.

To enhance deterrence, NATO continues to pre-locate troops, perform SNAP exercises that simulate hybrid attacks, and explore new technologies such as AI and big data.

Although certain measurements vary based on the situation, the following are examples of potential Article 5 responses for each case.

Serious cyberattacks. Attacks that cripple critical infrastructure, such as the power grid, financial systems, or military networks. Cyber ​​defense forces of individual allies may engage in counter operations, such as disabling or destroying servers used by states or non-state groups behind the attack. This could include coordinated efforts between allies to contain and neutralize the threat. Disruption of critical infrastructure. Destruction or destruction of assets such as submarine cables, pipelines, and transportation networks, particularly when it has a significant impact on national security. For example, in early February, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania were separated from Soviet-era power grids, linking them to Russia and Belarus, increasing their dependence on external power cables. NATO may impose security measures such as halting and inspecting foreign vessels, verifying the validity of insurance documents, and detaining suspected vessels. In extreme cases, NATO can implement naval blockades to prevent further interference. Adjusted hybrid operation. Several forms of attacks (e.g., disinformation, economic coercion, cyber attacks) were carried out simultaneously, destabilizing the NATO country. Alliances may deploy both traditional and unconventional forces to restore stability, protect critical infrastructure and provide deterrence against further attacks. Hybrid action with clear attribution. Hybrid threats resulting from state-supported countries or non-state groups (contested attributions can complicate collective defense decisions). NATO is responsible for ensuring the threats are intelligent. Emergency response forces can be deployed, including communications agencies and security units. The alliance may also deploy troops to affected countries to stop further attacks and demonstrate a unified response. A threat to NATO military operations. Attacks on NATO’s operational infrastructure, such as bases and communication systems, even by non-traditional means. NATO may formally declare that such unconventional measures are subject to Article 5, ensuring that attacks on the operation, regardless of the method, encourage collective and political responses. You can do it. This includes cyber defense measures, an increase in military presence and retaliatory strikes. A direct threat to sovereignty. A hybrid tactic aimed at undermining the sovereignty of NATO countries by destabilizing the government or manipulating elections. The alliance may deploy traditional troops and intelligence reporting troops to help secure elections and government agencies. Measures include strengthening cybersecurity and media infrastructure to counteract the dispensing and operations.

These scenarios highlight the urgent need for NATO to establish clear protocols. Effective responses must be tailored to evolving circumstances, and alliances must allow member states to defend stability and sovereignty against attacks that blur the boundaries of peace and conflict. yeah.

Activating Article 5 in this context will grant NATO the authority to deploy all necessary measures, including military force, counter and prevent further aggression. It remains a last resort and only does it if all other options are exhausted, and its implementation requires full agreement of all NATO members.

Eitvydas Bajarūnas is an ambassador to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Lithuania and is currently a visiting researcher at the European Centre for Policy Analysis (CEPA). The evaluations and views expressed in the article are those of the authors and should not be treated as the official position of the MFA of the Republic of Lithuania.

The Edge of Europe is CEPA’s online journal covering key topics related to the foreign policy dockets in Europe and North America. All opinions are the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily represent the position or view of the institutions they represent or the European Centre for Policy Analysis.

Comprehensive Report

CEPA International Leadership Council

CEPA’s International Leadership Council outlines key ideas that US and European policymakers should consider, as new leadership will begin to shape policy after Ukraine.

February 10, 2025

learn more