Russia’s “gray zone” tactics are a manifestation of growing geopolitical risk by sabotaging and disrupting critical systems throughout the communication and supply chain. Companies and suppliers are stepping up mitigation efforts. Richard Gardiner of consultancy S-RM examines how organized crime proxies acting on behalf of Russian intelligence services provide the Kremlin with plausible deniability for unsophisticated attacks.
While propagandist social media posts and drone incursions are a more visible form of attack, at a more covert level, logistics chokepoints and digital infrastructure are among the most vulnerable targets of Russian hybrid warfare.
The likelihood of US companies’ logistics systems or digital networks being targeted rises sharply if they support Ukraine’s war effort or operate in the defense sector, particularly where they contribute to strengthening European security. By sabotaging or disrupting these businesses, Russian actors seek to delay military aid deliveries, weaken supply chains and undermine the broader war effort.
Such attacks are often carried out by organized crime proxies acting on behalf of Russian intelligence services, providing the Kremlin with plausible deniability. As a result, the tactics used are typically unsophisticated, ranging from arson at warehouses to incendiary devices sent to distribution centers and designed to detonate in transit.
Operational and communications threats
Against this backdrop, operations leaders can alert themselves to several early warning signs that proxy-perpetrated instability could affect their production and supply continuity. One sign is the sudden targeting of well-known US companies through mass disinformation campaigns, efforts specifically designed to erode the reputation and stakeholder confidence of iconic brands. Another indicator is a marked rise in cyberattacks, especially those focused on logistical, communications or industrial control networks, with notable spikes in phishing, ransomware or DDoS incidents. A surge in suspicious arson or vandalism at key European facilities — including warehouses, factories, ports and supply hubs — often shows evidence of coordinated covert activity. Finally, disruptions to critical infrastructure, whether outages in telecoms, power grids, underwater cables or transport networks, are signs that further sabotage attempts may come next, with the intent to paralyze infrastructure.
US companies in Europe could also be affected indirectly through Russian hybrid attacks on critical infrastructure. Likely targets include — and we have seen some of these already — energy and telecommunications systems in NATO member states that are strong supporters of Ukraine, such as Poland, Baltic states, the UK, France and Germany. Disruptions of this kind can trigger knock-on effects for private businesses. For example, the sabotage of undersea internet cables could isolate or severely slow connectivity, disrupting data transmission and operations for companies reliant on transcontinental networks. Similarly, cyberattacks or physical assaults on power grids could cause outages that affect data centers, cloud services and network operations, particularly in areas where companies maintain infrastructure or serve clients.
War & Peace: What You Need to Know About the Defense Production Act
Korean War-era law has been applied in array of sectors under administrations of both parties
Read moreDetailsImplications for US companies and diplomatic policy
On a broader geopolitical level, the frequency of hybrid incidents directly reflects strategic shifts. For instance, in the first half of 2025, incidents linked to Russian actors declined; this downturn likely resulted from intensified NATO naval and air patrols in the Baltic Sea and the adaptation of proxy groups as their tactics evolved. It may also reflect a political calculation by the Kremlin: Escalating hybrid activities against US or US-linked companies could undermine its diplomatic leverage with the US, especially in light of Donald Trump’s return to the White House and the ongoing recalibration of US-Russia relations.
If hybrid incidents begin to resurge, there are several plausible triggers for operational disruption. One main risk would be a sharp deterioration in US-Russia relations, for example the collapse of US efforts to broker peace in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Even if unlikely under the current administration’s diplomatic stance, public commitments by Trump to increase military aid to Ukraine could provoke Russia to intensify hybrid actions targeting US business interests to undermine the US government’s position.
Safeguarding supply chains
To mitigate supply chain risks, some companies have responded by mapping their networks to identify suppliers exposed to geographic, customer or digital vulnerabilities. This kind of analysis can help with qualifying alternative partners and structuring contracts for flexibility, which allows for rapid renegotiation if disruptions should occur.
Some companies are considering placing regular trial orders with backup suppliers to help test their readiness and ensure that standards can be met under pressure. This way they would be able to maintain safety stock of critical components at secure, dispersed locations, provided they can manage the additional storage costs this entails.
On the logistics side, companies have found that diversifying transport modes and routes, investing in real-time inventory tracking and leveraging advanced platforms can enhance their visibility and agility. Combined with scenario planning, live exercises that equip staff with the expertise to respond to crises and continuous engagement with logistics providers, industry groups and authorities, companies have taken these measures to assist in creating a more responsive and resilient supply chain.
Richard Gardiner is a senior analyst on the strategic intelligence team of cybersecurity and corporate intelligence firm S-RM. 
