Traditional warfare – that is, what we typically think of as armed conflict – is changing so rapidly that we must speak now in terms of irregular warfare. Even this new concept is itself rapidly evolving, by the month, day, hour, minute, and even second. With the expanding use of UAV’s, drones, and imagery, nowhere is traditional warfare giving way to irregular warfare than in the skies. Commercial aviation, once a powerful symbol of global connection and economic prosperity, is the emerging battlefield of irregular warfare.
Irregular warfare thrives on ambiguity and access, exploiting the gaps between convenience and timeliness in that unique place where commerce and security coexist but do not fully integrate. Aviation, with its extensive passenger operations, global cargo networks, and seamless movement, is a perfect example of a desirable target. Supply chains are designed for speed and efficiency, not suspicion, and aircraft and airports are subject to stringent regulations more for safety than for targeting by state and non-state actors. The surrounding logistics infrastructure, encompassing warehouses, trucking hubs, and freight forwarders, is expansive and often unevenly secured or even monitored.
Our commercial carriers have long been a part of our traditional warfare efforts, whether ferrying troops, moving humanitarian aid, or evacuating civilians. We lean on private airlines in emergencies as well. But integration creates exposure. The same systems that give states agility through global reach, flexible routing, and the ability to scale capacity quickly also open doors to exploitation by adversaries operating in the gray zones of conflict.
The recent reporting by VSquare on Russia’s GRU parcel bomb operation illustrates this point. In the summer of 2024 a Russian military intelligence network secretly moved explosive-laden packages across Europe. The bombs were disguised as ordinary consumer goods such as massage pillows and cosmetics and were shipped through normal logistics channels, crossing NATO borders multiple times with little scrutiny. These devices were so volatile that some ignited in warehouses or delivery trucks. Alongside these shipments came acts of arson in Warsaw and Vilnius, all part of a sabotage campaign to destabilize, disrupt, and frighten.
This was not a traditional attack on aviation. Passenger planes were not targeted mid-flight, and there were no efforts to recruit airport workers, airline employees, or flight tower controllers. The plot was simple. It relied on the same infrastructure that keeps aviation rolling, including hubs, sorting centers, ground handlers, customs procedures, and digital tracking systems. It weaponized the very foundations of our global aviation – speed, trust, and cross border fluidity.
It is remarkable how effortlessly hostile actors exploited ambiguity and complacency. The GRU’s operatives used civilian delivery routes to transport lethal material into the core of Europe’s logistics and aviation network. They exploited gaps between jurisdictions and the inherent trust accorded to much of the material handled through airports and warehouses.
The attempts of non-state and state actors to weaponize the skies underscores why aviation can no longer be treated as a fringe or purely civilian concern. The lines between commercial aviation and government have blurred amid the rise of irregular warfare. Airlines and freight companies can no longer be regarded as just businesses. Our security warrants new obligations for airlines, transport companies, and government officials, Everyone involved in our transportation systems must anticipate sabotage, sniff out insider threats, share intelligence, and establish protective redundancies.
This necessitates stronger and deeper ties between governments and the aviation sector. Hardening supply chains, improving anomaly detection, leveraging biometrics and establishing trusted nodes at key transit points must be not only the standard but the norm. This does not imply slowing down or impacting efficiency. Instead of building systems that can handle and adjust to unpredictable pressure, we must focus on creating systems that are both secure enough for commerce to thrive and alert enough to spot and neutralize any threats of irregular warfare.
There is also a psychological and influence aspect dimension to the expanding concept of war. Irregular warfare not only aims to cause damage but also to disrupt and destabilize. Aviation holds significant symbolic value in this regard. The movement of goods and people promotes prosperity and connectivity, locally and internationally. Disrupting this system can have profound economical and psychological impacts well beyond the immediate target. The GRU campaign clearly demonstrates how swiftly an adversary can spread fear across borders through relatively small, meticulously planned actions.
Aviation has historically been a realm of freedom and aspiration. However, in our contemporary conflicts, it is where adversaries attempt to exploit vulnerabilities and introduce low-cost high-impact targeting strategies. Countering these attempts does not necessitate militarizing the skies. Rather, it entails safeguarding the infrastructure that facilitates global connectivity. Failure to integrate aviation into our understanding of irregular warfare invites the targeting of not just warehouses and trucks but also our trains, maritime vessels, and even our roadways.
While our openness can be exploited, it can also serve as our strength if we fortify the systems that support us. Aviation can continue to symbolize the connectivity we value, but only if we recognize it has become one of the frontlines in the new era of irregular warfare.
