Europe’s arms executives tighten security over Russian threats

Officials from five European intelligence services told the Financial Times that Russia is stepping up efforts to kill chief executives and senior staff at European defence companies, in an investigation published on 11 October (Financial Times). Executives say the warnings have changed how they protect themselves, and small drone and component makers are on the list alongside the big arms groups. Public evidence does not show that any of this has slowed deliveries to Ukraine.

What the warning says

The officials attributed much of the planning to the GRU, Russia's military intelligence service. They described plots split across borders, with surveillance, logistics and the attack handled by different people in different countries. If that account is accurate, detection becomes harder, because each national police force may see only a fragment that looks harmless on its own.

The FT did not name the services or publish the intelligence. One official said fear itself serves Moscow's purpose. Companies might think twice about working with Ukraine even if no attack ever happens.

Germany offers the clearest independent backing for an official sense of rising danger. In a written reply to parliament on 2 September, Berlin rated threats to the defence industry as high (Bundestag reply). The reply singled out firms cooperating with Ukraine and said attacks on individual leaders could not be ruled out.

Sinan Selen heads the BfV, Germany's domestic intelligence agency. At a hearing on 5 October, he warned lawmakers that Russia was ready to carry out sabotage and killings (Bundestag). That is a government threat assessment. It does not confirm the specific plans the FT describes.

An earlier plot and a spying case

Armin Papperger runs Rheinmetall, one of Ukraine's biggest arms suppliers. In July 2024, US media reported intelligence about a Russian plan to kill him, and Berlin said it took the reports seriously, while Rheinmetall did not directly confirm the plot (Reuters). Papperger told the FT he now has police and private protection.

The clearest court-tested evidence of Russian interest in defence executives comes from Bavaria. On 24 March 2026, Germany's federal prosecutor announced the arrest of two suspects accused of spying for a foreign intelligence service since December 2025 (Federal prosecutor). Their alleged target was a person supplying drones from Germany to Ukraine.

German media identified that person as Stefan Thumann, chief executive of the drone maker Donaustahl. He has since skipped some trade fairs and stepped up his protection. The case shows surveillance of a supplier, not a murder plan, and ZEIT reported that the arrest warrants contain no assassination allegation (ZEIT).

Who pays for protection

Companies are paying to protect their own people, and small suppliers have less room to absorb that cost. Several executives told the FT they had increased personal security over the past six months on government advice, and the BfV has urged firms to hire private close-protection teams (Financial Times).

The EU offers little direct help here. Europol, the bloc's police agency, can analyse and share intelligence across borders, but bodyguards and arrests stay with national authorities (EUR-Lex). A threat organised across several countries therefore lands on companies one government at a time.

That arrangement weighs unevenly. A group the size of Rheinmetall can fund police liaison and private guards. A specialist drone or component maker faces the same kind of bill with far less revenue to spread it across, and much of Europe's arms production for Ukraine runs through such firms in several countries.

One executive told the paper that a company had moved a production site in Western Europe because of Russian threats. The executive did not name the firm, the site or any lost output.

By the executives' own account, the warnings have changed how they travel, how they guard themselves and, in one unnamed case, where they build. No public record yet shows a weapon, component or delivery to Ukraine lost to these threats. Berlin has issued the most detailed public warnings, so it is best placed to say whether any incident has cost output, and it has not done so publicly.