Will Europe learn to spy on its own? The war in Ukraine is changing the face of intelligence

For years, many European states assumed they could largely depend on the United States for security matters. However, the war in Ukraine has demonstrated how costly such dependence can be. Today, medium-sized nations are investing in the development of their own intelligence services, attempting to prepare for a world where threats from Russia, China, or North Korea are becoming increasingly serious.

As described by The Economist, one of the most symbolic examples of European intelligence failures was the situation of Bruno Kahl, the former head of Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (Bundesnachrichtendienst – BND). On 23 February 2022, Kahl flew to Kyiv, convinced that Russia would not launch a full-scale invasion. He did not even have time to meet with Ukrainian leaders. A few hours later, Russian troops attacked Ukraine, and Kahl had to be evacuated from his hotel with the assistance of allied nations’ services.

Germany was not alone in failing to predict the Russian attack. French services were also unconvinced that an invasion would take place. Following the start of the war, the head of French military intelligence, General Éric Vidaud, lost his position. While warnings of an imminent invasion flowed from the United States and the United Kingdom, European agencies largely lacked the sufficient capabilities to verify them independently.

From dependent states to self-reliant actors

Following the experiences of 2022, the situation began to change. Countries that had neglected the development of their secret services for decades started investing in new capabilities. Japan is building its intelligence services practically from scratch. Sweden is creating a new civilian foreign intelligence agency. Canada is analysing the possibility of establishing a similar institution, and Germany intends to expand the powers of its agents. The Netherlands is also preparing legal changes aimed at making it easier for its services to conduct operations.

As The Economist notes, the goal of these reforms is not only to counter Russian or Chinese espionage. States also want to better manage so-called grey zone activities – operations below the threshold of open warfare. This includes sabotage, cyberattacks, disinformation, and clandestine operations. A prime example is the drone carrying explosives found at Leipzig airport. Such incidents show that threats do not necessarily take the form of classic military operations.

Russia, China, and a new era of competition

The change in the approach of European nations also stems from the broader geopolitical situation. Russia remains a direct threat to European security, while China is rapidly increasing its military and intelligence capabilities. In Asia, North Korea remains an additional problem.

States therefore want to know not only what capabilities their adversaries possess, but also what their intentions are. It was precisely the recognition of intent that proved to be one of the key problems prior to the Russian invasion.

Former Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt points out that intelligence systems are good at measuring an opponent’s capabilities, but it is much harder for them to determine their intentions. For this reason, Sweden is creating a new service intended to utilise both secret and commercial or publicly available sources (OSINT).

The legacy of the Gestapo and the later East German Stasi meant that intelligence activity in Germany was burdened with particularly heavy restrictions for a long time. According to The Economist, for years, the BND had significantly fewer operational capabilities than the services of nations such as the United Kingdom or the United States.

Planned reforms are intended to change this. German intelligence is to receive greater capabilities for conducting foreign operations, including cyber activities. BND chief Martin Jäger argues that the services must be capable not only of observing adversaries but also of actively countering their actions.

Japan begins to build its own intelligence apparatus

Even more far-reaching changes are occurring in Japan. After the Second World War, the Land of the Rising Sun limited its intelligence capabilities, partly due to experiences with the imperial security apparatus. Japanese intelligence services are fragmented, and information is shared between them inefficiently. Tokyo is now attempting to rectify this. Japan has created an Intelligence Council and an Intelligence Office, which are to function as a central hub for managing information from various sources.

The next step is to be the creation of a fully-fledged foreign intelligence service. Japan is also considering adopting new anti-espionage legislation, particularly in the context of growing activity from China, Russia, and North Korea in its region. Cooperation with other nations is crucial in this regard. Japanese experts indicate that partners will primarily expect Tokyo to have the capability to gather information regarding Chinese activity. In the longer term, Japan could become something of a „sixth eye” for the Anglo-Saxon Five Eyes alliance, according to The Economist.

Questions about the adequacy of intelligence capabilities for modern challenges are also increasingly appearing in the public sphere in Canada. Its primary security service, CSIS, focuses mainly on domestic threats and has limited capabilities for conducting intelligence operations abroad. Canadian authorities are therefore analysing the possibility of creating a separate foreign intelligence service. The debate has gained additional significance due to tensions with India and growing uncertainty regarding the future of relations with the United States.

The most important change: cooperation

One of the most significant trends – as The Economist points out – is not merely the increase in the capabilities of individual services, but their increasingly close cooperation. European agencies are beginning to share tasks among themselves. One service may focus on a specific aspect of Russian activity, another on China, and another on cyberspace. The information is then pooled.

The head of French foreign intelligence, Nicolas Lerner, stated that cooperation between European services has reached an unprecedented level. However, this does not mean the creation of a European equivalent of the Five Eyes alliance. The exchange of the most sensitive information remains difficult. Nations have different interests and assess threats differently, and services also fear the counter-intelligence consequences of sharing information too broadly. After all, the more people who have access to a secret, the harder it is to keep.

What if America stops helping us?

The greatest catalyst for change, however, is not only Russia or China, but also the growing uncertainty regarding the future of cooperation with the United States. For European services, American intelligence remains an incredibly important source of information. Washington possesses immense capabilities in satellite reconnaissance, SIGINT, cyber-intelligence, and other forms of data collection.

At the same time, the decision by Donald Trump’s administration to temporarily halt the sharing of intelligence with Ukraine in 2025 showed European nations that access to American data can depend on political decisions. This is prompting some allies to build contingency plans. The aim is not so much to replace the United States entirely as to create their own capabilities that allow for at least partial functioning without US support.

Former American intelligence officer David Gioe notes that if cooperation were to break down, both sides would lose, although the consequences for Europeans would likely be more severe.

Will a European equivalent of the Five Eyes be created?

The idea of creating a more integrated European intelligence apparatus is appearing more frequently. Former Finnish President Sauli Niinistö proposed the creation of a fully-fledged European intelligence cooperation structure in 2024. Similar ideas have emerged in Germany and the Netherlands.

The problem is that the Five Eyes alliance is, in a way, unique. It was established through decades of cooperation between five nations sharing a common language, history, institutions, and experiences from joint operations.

A similar level of cooperation in Europe would be much harder to achieve. As The Economist notes, not all states have the same approach to Russia or China, and some fear that sharing sensitive information increases the risk of it being intercepted. Despite this, cooperation is already deepening. The secret services of selected nations are joining forces to achieve difficult intelligence objectives, mainly related to Russia and China.

And what about spying on America?

The development of European intelligence capabilities raises a more uncomfortable question: what should be done if a major ally becomes a source of threat or at least strategic uncertainty? Formally, allied states should not spy on each other. However, history shows that, in practice, this line is often far more fluid.

In 2013, Edward Snowden revealed information regarding American mass surveillance programmes. It emerged, among other things, that American and British services had monitored the communications of foreign leaders, including the then German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

According to a former American intelligence officer, nations outside the Five Eyes likely conduct intelligence activities targeted at the United States to some extent. During periods of tension, such activities may intensify. This does not mean, however, that European states are able to quickly reconstruct a full picture of American policy. Gaining reliable information about the plans and intentions of leaders often requires many years of work.

A new world for European spies

The war in Ukraine was a wake-up call for European services. It turned out that even geographical proximity, NATO membership, and access to American intelligence information do not guarantee a full understanding of an adversary’s intentions. Therefore, countries such as Germany, Japan, Sweden, and Canada are today investing in capabilities that seemed less necessary only a few years ago.

This does not mean an end to cooperation with the United States. On the contrary – American intelligence remains incredibly important for allies. However, the way of thinking about this cooperation is changing. European states are increasingly assuming that they should be capable of independently gathering information and assessing threats.

According to the analysis by The Economist, modern intelligence is becoming one of the foundations of national security. In a world where Russia is waging war against Ukraine, China is increasing its military capabilities, and transatlantic relations are becoming more unpredictable, European states are increasingly reluctant to be merely recipients of information provided by others.