Lured by Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko’s promise of a future in the European Union (EU), thousands of migrants would travel to Belarus leading up to the fall of 2021. Many arrived with no return ticket or personal belongings. However, by November, their experience would turn out far different than they had expected. As thousands of migrants sat in front of barbed wire fences erected at the Polish border in freezing conditions, their role as tools to sow chaos within the EU became apparent as asylum systems were placed under pressure. Overwhelmed by the influx of migration at their borders, Poland, Latvia, and Lithuania responded by declaring states of emergency. Yet, in inciting chaos at their borders and challenging the territorial integrity of these three NATO Members, Belarus did not need to rely on sophisticated technology or its military force. Instead, it leveraged migration, transforming human desperation into a potent weapon.
As an unconventional non-military tactic, weaponized migration has emerged as a new form of hybrid warfare. According to security studies expert Kelly Greenhill, weaponized migration consists of the “manipulation of population movements as strategic means to political and military ends”. By manipulating the flow of migration, nefarious actors can destabilize countries, incite chaos, instrumentalize vulnerable individuals, and fuel social divisions over immigration while operating below the threshold of war. Ultimately, weaponized migration is emerging as a grave security concern for which the NATO alliance must be prepared. In balancing its security interests with humanitarian protection, NATO must equip itself to adequately respond to the manipulation of migration flows reappearing in conflict.
Embedding Weaponized Migration within Ongoing Crises
NATO’s concern for weaponized migration can first be attributed to a growing tendency of adversaries including Russia to worsen ongoing conflicts by intentionally displacing civilians. During the Syrian Civil War, NATO Supreme Commander Philip Breedlove claimed that “together, Russia and the Assad regime [were] deliberately weaponizing migration from Syria, in an attempt to overwhelm European[s].” Indeed, by targeting civilian infrastructure with airstrikes, Putin and Assad conspired to expel refugees towards Europe. Similarly, following its invasion of Ukraine, Russia has continued to employ weaponized migration, bombing civilian infrastructure in an effort to generate waves of migrants bound for neighbouring NATO member states.
The effects are clear: By embedding weaponized migration within larger, ongoing conflicts, adversaries are able to reduce their opponent’s response capacity. Military resources are diverted, border infrastructure is stretched, and sustained pressure is created along critical frontiers. Furthermore, the impacts are not merely operational but political. As Greenhill notes, the victims of weaponized migration are overwhelmingly liberal democracies. Thus, by targeting civilians and driving migration towards these countries, adversaries can exploit rising anti-immigration sentiment by causing a divide as to how governments should respond and diminishing trust in state institutions when the response is deemed inadequate. Consequently, weaponized migration constitutes a serious concern for NATO given its capacity to exhaust material resources, social cohesion, and public trust.
Manufacturing Migration Crises
Beyond weaponized migration being used as a singular tactic embedded with larger conflict, NATO should be concerned by how adversaries are manipulating migration flows to manufacture independent crises as instruments of coercion. In 2021, Belarus simplified its visa process, attracting migrants and refugees from Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan with the promise of entry into Western Europe. Upon their arrival, the Lukashenko government transported them to its borders with three neighbouring NATO countries (Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland) in an attempt to destabilize the area. Poland’s deployment of 20,000 security personnel to its border with Belarus and construction of a 400km border wall that cost 350 million euros illustrate how migration crises – independent of larger conflicts – can be manufactured to disorient the security forces of NATO states.
Yet, as weaponized migration is used to manufacture pressure towards European NATO members, it is also no stranger across the Atlantic. In November of 2021, Nicaragua dropped its visa requirements for Cubans, granting them the ability to travel upwards to the United States by land as opposed to sea. However, the timing of such a measure was not coincidental; Nicaraguan President Ortega introduced the new visa policy directly after the United States cited unfair elections in Nicaragua and imposed sanctions against him. The direct and mass spur of Cuban migration towards the United States indicates that weaponized migration is becoming a routine tool employed to give the user leverage against regional adversaries. The instrumentalization of migrants by Belarus and Nicaragua raises major concerns for NATO as such crises can be manufactured by simple policy changes. By loosening visa requirements and attracting desperate individuals, weaponized migration has proven to be an emerging threat given how inexpensively and rapidly it can be employed.
Navigating Migration Threats
NATO’s response to this new hybrid threat must balance security considerations with humanitarian ones. For instance, the responses of Poland, Latvia, and Lithuania to Belarus’ manufactured migration crises were motivated by fear, panic, and repression. The hasty use of tear gas, water cannons, and physical violence points to unpreparedness and unease as soldiers trained to handle enemy combatants responded to huge civilian flows. Yet, NATO must not forget that migrants used as weapons are human beings. To improve its response, NATO must balance security and humanitarian challenges by offering both preventive and operational support.
Firstly, through intelligence sharing, NATO can work to conduct risk assessments that identify potential migration routes that may be vulnerable to weaponized migration. By predicting where and when migration is likely to be directed by adversaries, NATO can ensure a measured as opposed to hasty or panicked response. Beyond sustained readiness, NATO must continue to emphasize the importance of deployment mobility. As established at the 2016 Warsaw Summit, a key principle of national resilience is the “ability to deal effectively with the uncontrolled movement of people”. Under its Resilience Committee, NATO’s Civil Protection Group addresses ways to ensure this principle is upheld. The creation of this group suggests that NATO is taking the threat of weaponized migration more seriously. Furthermore, by complementing intelligence sharing and readiness with the operational means to absorb, distribute, and respond to irregular migration flows, alliance members can fulfil their obligation under Article 3 of the North Atlantic Treaty to develop the capacity to resist an armed attack through effective help and mutual aid. While weaponized migration may not itself constitute an armed attack, its potential to be embedded within larger conflicts that cross such a threshold illustrates the need for collective operational assistance.
Migration is a process that can enable cultural and economic interconnectivity. But when artificially controlled to manufacture crises at the expense of the vulnerable, it becomes a threat to peace and security. By compounding migration pressures onto existing conflicts and manufacturing entirely new crises, countries continue to use civilian movement as an instrument of coercion. However, by developing risk assessments, intelligence sharing, and operational readiness while ensuring the rights of migrants and refugees are upheld, NATO can respond to weaponized migration in a way that balances security and humanitarian concerns.
Political scientist Mark Leonard warned of governments seeking to turn migrants “into bullets”. Unfortunately, this is increasingly coming to fruition. Evidently, NATO’s efforts to curb weaponized migration must increasingly evolve, so that adversaries cease viewing migrants as weapons of war.
Photo: “Flock of birds migrating with plane and contrail in the bright blue sky” by Vladimir Srajber via Pexels for free use.
Disclaimer: Any views or opinions expressed in articles are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the NATO Association of Canada.
