Berlin. It couldn't be said more clearly: "Russia is waging a shadow war against us," said Federal Intelligence Service chief Martin Jäger at a public hearing before the Parliamentary Control Committee in the Bundestag at the beginning of October. The army inspector, Lieutenant General Christian Freuding, agreed that the threat was “real”: “I find this description very accurate.”
Not only is the openness remarkable for a top military and intelligence chief, but also the public. Since it can be assumed that neither of them used the term “shadow war” without coordination with the Chancellery, a signal should be sent here: But which one? So far, only Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt (CSU) has spoken of “shadow war” in the government; Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul (CDU) avoided this and called the drone attacks at Leipzig-Halle Airport part of a “hybrid war”.
The term “hybrid” trivializes danger
The difference is not just a semantic one, as political scientist Carlo Masala explains in an interview with Background Security & Defense: “I can understand that politicians like to talk about hybrid because that describes a legal dimension.” This is “below the threshold where one could take direct countermeasures within the meaning of Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, which declares the alliance, or Article 51 of the UN Charter (right to self-defense)”.
However, in his view, the term “hybrid war” obscures the real threats posed by Russia’s escalation campaign, “which includes everything from disinformation to targeted killing.” The term is “trivial to one’s own population because normal people cannot imagine what is hybrid about this war.” According to Masala, not everyone is aware of the dimensions that Russian behavior has taken on: "They are waging a war against us. They are just waging it in secret."
The CDU foreign politician Roderich Kiesewetter also objects to the term “hybrid war”. This formulation would “misunderstand the seriousness of the threat”. It has long been clear that modern war is not only waged conventionally, but also in the form of “state terrorism,” as can be observed in Russia.
Russia's behavior amounts to state terrorism
Ralf Stegner (SPD), member of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Bundestag, warns against the concept of war “because it helps to trivialize what war actually is.” Together with left-wing SPD members like Gernot Erler and Ralf Mützenich, Stegner called for more diplomatic relations with countries like Russia in a book at the end of September.
However, he also speaks to Background Security & Defense of “state terrorism, especially where it is clear that Russia is behind it.” This term “does not trivialize anything” and must also be clearly stated to Russia. Especially in the course of the planned reform of the intelligence services, they would soon have more options.
The 700-page federal government bill, which the Bundestag has been dealing with since October, provides for a series of so-called “annex powers” for the Federal Intelligence Service, which allow “active measures” such as “targeted penetration into IT systems” or “shutting down servers of state hacker groups”.
But what follows from the use of “shadow war”? More and more politicians - across the party landscape - are demanding visible consequences, "because Russia is forcing this confrontation on us," says Marc Henrichmann (CDU), chairman of the Parliamentary Control Committee (PKGr). Ideally, the secret services would also have to be able to “paralyze and disable the attack drone in Russia or the factory that produces it” before it becomes a threat to the German population.
Intelligence services should be able to use more options
However, “it must remain clear that this is not a hot war in the military and international law sense,” says Konstantin von Notz (Greens), the deputy chairman of the PKGr. Like Henrichmann, he relies on the operational powers of the intelligence services, as provided for in the reform. The deputy green group leader believes it is right that the intelligence services “also receive operational powers in the area of shadow war”.
For Sara Nanni, the security policy spokeswoman for the Greens in the Bundestag, even more far-reaching measures are needed in the “shadow war”: “Decommission the shadow fleet and make it more difficult for Russian citizens to obtain Schengen visas.” We have to learn from the past: “Russia will always interpret behavior that is intended to be de-escalatory as weakness and will continue to escalate.”
Political scientist Masala sees a much more active role for the intelligence services in the “shadow war” that Russia is pursuing: “Why not create a situation where people in certain parts of the city in Moscow or Saint Petersburg cannot withdraw money from their ATMs for a few days?” It's about showing the Russian side: "Children, we can do something too."
The left is explicitly against the use of “shadow war”. Your defense policy spokesman Ulrich Thoden says the term “implies an already existing de facto state of war with Russia, which we are not in and which we should not encourage with escalative rhetoric.”
