It is everyone’s right to know how to prepare for and survive crisis and war when the unthinkable happens. As former Finnish President Sauli Niinistö’s report “Safer Together” asserts, “Security is the foundation of everything.” Yet, civil preparedness remains the cornerstone of citizens’ rights—a pillar that underpins our ability to endure and overcome adversity.

Europe and NATO have faced a steady onslaught of crises and an ongoing undeclared war with Russia. The region has been ravaged by Russia’s war on Ukraine, cyberattacks, infrastructure sabotage, forced migration, election interference, and the proliferation of disinformation—not to mention the compounding effects of wildfires, floods, pandemics, and supply chain vulnerabilities. In late 2024, NATO issued an urgent call to adopt a “wartime mindset” as critical infrastructure across NATO and EU member states came under attack in the Baltic Sea for the third time in four weeks.

Some national security experts in the UK, Poland, and Germany warn that outright war with Russia could erupt in several years. For now, however, Europe and NATO remain embroiled in a multi-front, undeclared war. Despite progress in resilience-building, neither national governments nor international institutions like NATO and the EU can completely shield citizens from these threats—a reality that demands a reckoning for three reasons.

First, while strides have been made to strengthen resilience, the inability of national authorities, the EU, and NATO to fully deter attacks has allowed crises to proliferate, further fueling the war in Ukraine. Should 2025 bring a ceasefire instead of a decisive victory, Russia’s hybrid war could escalate, with fundamental values and human rights buried in the rubble of conflict.

Second, experience shows that when security and political stability are imperiled, institutions themselves must be defended—a task that requires resilient, risk-informed societies. Sauli Niinistö’s report underscores the necessity of civil participation to sustain vital societal and institutional functions in crises, including armed aggression. Citizens must be informed and equipped to face every eventuality, and this work cannot wait.

Third, the targets of hybrid attacks are not just infrastructure or information networks; European lives and freedoms are at stake. NATO has warned of the possibility of Russia’s hybrid attacks causing “substantial” casualties and “very substantial” economic damage. Beyond general knowledge of civil preparedness, citizens need tangible guidance on how readiness applies to their daily lives, ensuring the continuity of essential services and the protection of their rights.

Unfortunately, Europe’s overall preparedness remains alarmingly inadequate. Many EU and NATO member states are only beginning to realize the importance of civil preparedness, while others delay action.

For instance, Belgian Justice Minister Paul Van Tigchelt recently argued that preparing the population for emergencies such as war is “premature” without first addressing security investments. However, security and preparedness are not mutually exclusive; civil preparedness is an investment in security and should be integrated into Belgium’s civil-military defense spending.

Germany’s approach is similarly flawed. Chancellor Olaf Scholz has embraced a “risk of escalation” narrative while engaging with Russian President Vladimir Putin, a move criticized as undermining the Euro-Atlantic war effort and reflecting weak leadership. Worryingly, data reveals that nearly 50% of Germans either agree with or are indifferent to the notion that NATO provoked Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, highlighting the disinformation-driven misperceptions that plague the German populace.

Europe’s vulnerabilities make it a prime target for adversaries. To counteract this, leaders across Europe, NATO, and the EU must take specific actions to integrate civil preparedness into future security initiatives. Civil preparedness must be established as a basic right enshrined in national, European, and international law alongside rights to freedom, property, education, and asylum. Preparedness needs must be reflected in civil-military defense expenditures, with dedicated funding included in the EU’s 2028-2034 Multiannual Financial Framework.

Engaging citizens is essential. Leaders must foster active dialogue about Europe’s threats, explaining what is being done to address them and outlining what more is required at all governance levels. Citizens should also be educated on their emergency rights and duties. Accessible preparedness guides must be created, and partnerships with civil organizations, local communities, and private-sector entities must promote a whole-of-society approach.

Preparedness must also be demonstrated in practice. Citizens need training on how to endure crises, such as surviving days without electricity, heat, water, or food. This readiness should not be seen as alarmist but as an essential part of societal resilience. Military-supported civil training exercises should simulate crisis scenarios, applying lessons learned from Ukraine and involving businesses and communities.

Preparedness education should begin early, with schools equipping young people with critical thinking skills and practical knowledge about crisis readiness. Tailored measures must prioritize vulnerable populations, including the elderly, disabled, children, pregnant women, single parents, and migrants.

Civil preparedness is not a luxury—it is a necessity. To build a resilient Europe, leaders and citizens alike must embrace the uncomfortable truths about the threats we face. Readiness is not just about survival; it is a fundamental right that empowers societies to thrive in the face of adversity.