Russia Is Already at War with Britain. And the U.S.? Might Not Show Up.

Who’s sounding the alarm ?

Fiona Hill isn’t just some think tank analyst. She’s a former senior director for Europe and Russia on the U.S. National Security Council and a key witness in Donald Trump’s first impeachment trial. She's now advising Britain’s Strategic Defence Review — and her assessment is blunt:

“Russia is at war with the U.K.”
And, she warns, the United States can no longer be counted on as a reliable military ally.

Hill has spent decades analyzing Putin’s moves, and she knows exactly how the Kremlin plays. What she’s describing is a modern war — not fought with tanks in the streets (yet), but with covert sabotage, cyberattacks, psychological operations, disinformation, and strategic chaos. And she’s warning the British government: you’re the target now🎯 What does "at war" look like in 2025?

You won’t see fighter jets over London. You’ll see:

• Assassinations and poisonings, like the 2018 Novichok attack in Salisbury that killed a British citizen and targeted a former Russian spy.

• Infrastructure sabotage, including suspected Russian involvement in attacks on energy pipelines and undersea internet cables.

• Cyberattacks on hospitals, banks, and power grids — already carried out by state-linked Russian hackers.

• Disinformation campaigns, flooding U.K. social media with AI-fueled propaganda designed to divide the public, erode trust in institutions, and push far-right nationalist narratives.

• Economic infiltration, with Russian oligarchs laundering billions through London real estate and finance to influence political decisions.

Put simply: Russia doesn’t need to invade Britain. They’re already inside the walls, targeting everything from public confidence to national infrastructure. It’s war without a declaration — and Britain’s playing defense while pretending it’s peacetime.

WHY DID RUSSIA TARGET BRITAIN?

1. Britain armed and backed Ukraine hard — and early.

From the first days of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the United Kingdom was one of Kyiv’s most aggressive and outspoken supporters. While other NATO countries debated, Britain acted.

• The U.K. sent NLAW anti-tank missiles, drones, heavy armor, and later long-range Storm Shadow missiles.

• Britain trained thousands of Ukrainian troops on British soil.

• It also lobbied other countries (especially the U.S.) to increase their own aid.

To Putin, this wasn’t just support — it was direct involvement in a proxy war against Russia.

He sees Britain not as an ally helping a neighbor, but as a Western military force actively undermining Russian interests and threatening his long-term vision of restoring control over post-Soviet territories.

2. The U.K. has historically challenged Russian influence — especially in Europe.

Britain has been a vocal critic of Russian aggression for over a decade:

• After the 2014 annexation of Crimea, the U.K. imposed harsh sanctions and began isolating Russian oligarchs from London’s financial elite.

• The British press and Parliament heavily investigated Russian interference in its 2016 Brexit vote and domestic elections.

• The U.K. expelled dozens of Russian diplomats after the Skripal poisoning in 2018 and helped expose Russia’s GRU sabotage networks.

This public confrontation embarrassed Putin’s regime, which prefers silent infiltration. Britain became one of the loudest anti-Kremlin voices on the global stage — something Russia doesn’t tolerate quietly.

3. Russia considers hybrid attacks a low-risk way to strike without provoking NATO.

Under NATO’s Article 5, only a clear “armed attack” on one member state triggers a collective military response. Cyberattacks? Disinfo campaigns? Infrastructure sabotage? Those live in the legal gray zone.

Putin understands this. So he’s targeting Britain with tactics that are aggressive but technically deniable:

• Poisonings (like in Salisbury, 2018)

• Attacks on undersea cables (which carry internet and banking data)

• Economic manipulation (via oligarch wealth in London)

• Energy disruptions (targeting pipelines and LNG terminals)

• Coordinated disinformation campaigns (e.g., fueling Brexit division, anti-immigrant fear, and pandemic chaos)

He knows the U.K. will struggle to legally prove the attacks rise to the level of “war,” which gives him cover to bleed Britain slowly without triggering full NATO retaliation.

4. Putin sees Britain as a fractured, vulnerable Western pillar.

Russia targets states it sees as both dangerous and weak. Britain fits that bill:

• It’s a nuclear power and NATO heavyweight, but politically divided post-Brexit.

• It has economic instability, made worse by inflation, energy crises, and Tory-Labour transitions.

• Its media is fragmented, and public trust in government and elections is at historic lows.

• The U.S., its biggest ally, is increasingly unstable — especially under Trump.

From Putin’s perspective, Britain is a powerful force with a crumbling internal foundation — a perfect target for destabilization.

5. Russia wants to weaken NATO by isolating one of its most vocal members.

Strategically, if Russia can rattle Britain, it sends a message to smaller NATO countries:

“Don’t get too involved — or you’re next.”

Targeting Britain is psychological warfare on the entire Western alliance. It discourages bold action from other NATO members, sows doubt in transatlantic unity, and tests how far Russia can push without anyone pulling the trigger.

By attacking Britain in slow motion, Russia is trying to break NATO without firing a single missile.

Where is the battlefield?

This war isn’t limited to Ukraine or Eastern Europe anymore. It’s already inside British borders — just dressed differently.

• Underwater off the U.K. coast, Russian naval vessels have been caught surveilling undersea cables that carry internet and financial data between continents. Damaging them could paralyze everything from the BBC to the Bank of England.

• In British elections, Russian disinfo operations have targeted MPs, boosted fringe candidates, and injected chaos into online political discourse.

• In major cities, ransomware has shut down hospitals and transportation hubs, tied to Russian-affiliated hacker groups.

• Even Parliament itself has faced espionage attempts, cyber-breaches, and direct threats to national security.

This isn’t some future threat — it’s current, coordinated, and escalating.

Why is the U.S. suddenly a wildcard?

Here’s the raw truth: NATO works because of trust. If one member gets attacked, all respond. That’s Article 5. But under Donald Trump, that foundation is cracking. Badly.

• Trump has publicly threatened to withdraw from NATO if countries don’t meet spending targets — treating a defense pact like a transactional invoice.

• In 2025, his administration voted with Russia at the United Nations, aligning against EU positions on humanitarian law and sanctions.

• Trump has repeatedly praised Putin, suggesting the U.S. could forge its own understanding with Russia — without NATO's input.

• His team has gutted key diplomatic posts, stacked military leadership with loyalists, and signaled that Article 5 is conditional — meaning if Britain is attacked, the U.S. might not come.

Hill warns that in this climate, Britain must plan for a future where the U.S. might side with Russia — or stay silent altogether. That’s not a conspiracy. That’s a strategic reassessment shared by multiple NATO members behind closed doors.

How is Britain preparing — and is it enough?

The U.K. is no longer pretending it can count on Washington. Defense plans are shifting from cooperation to self-reliance.

Here’s what they’re doing:

• Boosting defense spending from 2% to 2.5% of GDP by 2027, aiming for 3% by 2030.

• Launching a new generation of nuclear-powered submarines to patrol European waters and counter Russian naval movements.

• Expanding cyber defense units, creating a full national cyber command.

• Stockpiling munitions and reopening weapons manufacturing plants to support NATO and U.K. forces.

• Training civilian resilience teams, anticipating Russian attacks on the power grid, communications, and food infrastructure.

What NATO’s doing — and why it might not be enough

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte just warned that Russia could mount a direct challenge to NATO within five years. He’s calling for a “quantum leap” in readiness — especially now that U.S. loyalty is uncertain.

NATO wants:

• Increased military spending across all member states

• Air and missile defense systems to counter Russia’s growing arsenal

• Decentralized command infrastructure, in case NATO HQs are attacked

• Cyber-coordination centers to repel digital warfare

But NATO is still a U.S.-anchored alliance, and without a consistent Washington, the burden shifts heavily onto European shoulders — especially Britain, Germany, France, and Poland.

The enemy’s not at the gates. They’re inside.

This is modern warfare — and the U.K. is already in it.
The U.S. under Trump? Might not come if called. Might not even pick up the phone.

So Britain is preparing for what it never thought it’d face again: war on its own.

If you’re still reading, ask yourself:

• Why are world leaders suddenly warning of war within five years?

• Why is Britain investing in submarine fleets and ammunition stockpiles instead of just diplomacy?

• Why is Fiona Hill — a seasoned Russia expert — saying this out loud?

Because it’s not a warning.
It’s a status update.