Why the USSOCOM should establish a Western Balkans’ Denial and Resilience Program
A core challenge in modern great power competition is effectively responding to the ambiguous, non-military forms of activities characterized as part of the “gray zone”. Russia is actively engaging in these operations in critical areas where the West has its shared interest, such as the Western Balkans. Moscow’s goals in this tense region are to diminish European Union and the U.S. influence, reverse Euro-Atlantic integration, and keep the countries of former Yugoslavia in a constant state of turmoil.
Russia’s strategy is built on ambiguity, plausible deniability, and the use of all instruments of national power below the threshold of conventional conflict. To spread its influence in the region, Russia is utilizing sophisticated campaigns of propaganda, disinformation, political subversion, and support for nationalist proxies to push its agenda at little cost. Russia plays a central role in sustaining and empowering “spoiler” actors in Bosnia and Herzegovina, most notably Milorad Dodik, the leader of Republika Srpska, while backing Dodik’s secessionist maneuvers. Moscow’s backing is not subtle or peripheral; it is overt, strategic, and deeply intertwined with Russia’s broader objective of obstructing the Euro-Atlantic integration process for Bosnia-Herzegovina. Moreover, the Kremlin maintains strong ties with the Serbian Government, Serbian Orthodox Church ties to implement its political narratives in the region. This strategy aligns with the concept of private information, in which Russia hides its actual involvement, thereby increasing the “plausible deniability” attribution problem.
For the Western Balkan countries, the current challenge is two-fold. First, the adversary tactics rely on “plausible deniability” and private information, making traditional military deterrence or punishment-based responses (like sanctions or conventional posturing) difficult to implement effectively. The second challenge is the stabilocracy trap. This challenge reflects the ongoing political developments in parts of the region, where governments, such as the Serbian Government, exhibit semi-authoritarian tendencies while presenting themselves as reform-oriented democracies. In doing so, they often secure support from Western partners on the basis of commitments to counter external adversarial influence. At the same time, the European Union shares a degree of responsibility, as the actors facilitating this external influence, particularly those linked to Russia, are well known, yet the EU has not consistently applied pressure or sanctions to address their activities. As a result, current regional responses are uncoordinated and reactive, allowing the adversary to “advance without attacking” by exploiting gaps between neighboring states.
The region requires a transition from a purely reactive defense to a proactive deterrence by denial strategy, raising costs and reducing the likelihood of success for external influence and subversion before it takes root. Currently in the Western Balkans, countries themselves and Western institutions (the EU and NATO) typically respond to crises after they have already been engineered by external actors such as Russia, rather than preventing the conditions for subversion from forming in the first place. The Western security presence functions primarily as a stabilizer of last resort. Clear patterns and examples supporting this argument include previous crises in the region, ongoing challenges, and evidence from the European Union and NATO that these activities are linked to Russia’s subversive tools and mechanisms. For example, for years, the international community has reacted to Milorad Dodik’s secessionist rhetoric with “statements of concern” or targeted sanctions only after he takes a legal step toward dismantling state institutions and continuing his secessionist vision of Republika Srpska in Bosnia-Hercegovina. By tolerating illiberalism for the sake of short-term peace, the West has allowed a “subversion-friendly” environment to persist, thereby making the region structurally vulnerable to Russia’s strategy.
Moreover, the Banjska attack in Northern Kosovo, executed by Serbian terrorists led by a former Serbian politician who had strong ties with the Serbian government, has demonstrated another reactive measure undertaken by both Kosovo’s local authorities and the international community. Following the Banjska attack and the violent riots in Northern Kosovo, Kosovo institutions and NATO (KFOR) responded by increasing their presence with troop numbers and patrolling more heavily. While successful in preventing large-scale tensions, this was a reactive measure to a security breach that had already occurred. It addressed the symptom (violence) rather than denying the means, such as illegal arms smuggling and radicalization of the Serbian local population before the event. Both Kosovo institutions and NATO maintained the “security baseline,” but Russia, whether directly or through proxies, retained the “first-mover advantage,” choosing when and where to spark a crisis.
In late 2022, Montenegro’s government infrastructure was crippled by a massive cyber-attack attributed to Russia. The Western response was to send “investigative teams” from the FBI and France after the systems were already down. This is “reactive defense”, fixing the damage rather than building a “deterrence by denial” architecture (like a regional cyber-shield) that would make the attack fail at the onset.
The region is currently a “soft target” where subversion is cheap and high-reward for Russia because the “cost” of attacking is only realized long after the damage is done.
Proposed Program: The Western Balkan Denial and Resilience Program (BDRP)
The Western Balkan countries, initially including Albania, Croatia, Kosovo, Montenegro, and North Macedonia, in coordination with the European Union and the United States, should establish a Balkan Denial and Resilience Program (BDRP). This would be a regional initiative designed to synchronize irregular warfare (IW) planning and resilience-building among Western Balkan partners, supported by U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) expertise. The existing trilateral agreement among Albania, Croatia, and Kosovo, which focuses on defense-industry synergy, specialized education, and joint training, provides a foundational framework for the broader implementation of the Balkan Denial and Resilience Program (BDRP). This regional initiative would be optimally positioned to extend invitations to Montenegro and North Macedonia, thereby consolidating a coalition of partners with harmonized Euro-Atlantic security objectives.
In the program’s initial phase, participation will be strategically calibrated toward states maintaining high levels of alignment with NATO and EU security frameworks. Consequently, the inclusion of Serbia is not currently feasible, given its “multi-vector” foreign policy and its role as a primary conduit for Russian strategic influence in the region, which would pose significant risks to the BDRP’s operational security and internal cohesion. Similarly, the participation of Bosnia and Herzegovina should be precluded in the initial stages due to the persistent domestic instability and secessionist challenges emanating from the Republika Srpska. These internal fractures prevent the formation of a unified national security consensus necessary to meet the BDRP’s rigorous standards for institutional hardening and resilience.
To overcome the fragmented nature of regional security, the BDRP will establish a dedicated, joint planning space for irregular warfare. This cell would serve as a central hub where Special Operations Forces (SOF) planners from across the Western Balkans collaborate in real-time with U.S. Theater Special Operations Command (TSOC) advisors. By synchronizing intelligence and operational planning, this coordination cell ensures that subversion attempts, which often span multiple borders, are met with a unified regional response rather than isolated national reactions. This shared environment fosters the high-level interoperability needed to identify and neutralize hybrid threats before they can escalate into a crisis.
The program would advocate for the adoption of a “Doctrine of Multilateral Dissuasion,” a unified regional framework specifically designed for the complexities of grey zone operations. Unlike traditional military doctrines that focus on attrition or the threat of kinetic punishment after an attack, this framework would prioritize “deterrence by denial.” The objective is to raise the entry costs for external subversion so high that the likelihood of success is drastically reduced. By prioritizing strategic influence and the hardening of societal structures over traditional military retaliation, the region can effectively signal to adversaries that their non-linear efforts will be consistently identified and defeated at the onset.
Moving beyond their traditional kinetic roles, Special Operations are utilized as lead mentors for “Institutional Hardening” and “Information Environment Defense.” These SOF-enabled operations may involve domestic and regional training focused on identifying and mitigating internal vulnerabilities such as deep-seated corruption and foreign-funded subversion. Furthermore, SOFs spearhead efforts to defend the information environment by training civil and security actors to recognize and counter sophisticated disinformation campaigns. By applying the rigor of special operations to these traditionally “soft” domains, the BDRP creates a robust defense-in-depth that protects the integrity of both government institutions and public perception.
To operationalize the Balkan Denial and Resilience Program (BDRP), a formal request for support should be extended to U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM), specifically through Special Operations Command Europe (SOCEUR). This partnership would be designed to leverage U.S. expertise in coordinating, integrating, and executing a denial-focused resilience framework tailored to the Western Balkans. The primary objective is to engage in SOF-enabled, indirect actions that strengthen the institutional and societal foundations of partner nations, thereby raising the costs and reducing the success rate of Russian grey zone subversion.
A critical pillar of this support would involve the stabilization and defense of the regional information environment. USSOCOM advisors will provide specialized training and advisory services to a broad spectrum of local partners, primarily to the SOFs in this region and later on government agencies, civil society organizations, and independent media outlets. This initiative will focus on developing the technical and cognitive skills of partners that are necessary to identify and neutralize sophisticated disinformation narratives disseminated by aligned Russian outlets. By fostering media literacy and supporting the establishment of robust, government-led fact-checking initiatives, the program helps to build an “informational shield” that prevents foreign propaganda from taking root in the public consciousness.
The program should further emphasize long-term institutional development through targeted technical assistance and the deployment of specialized advisory teams. These teams will work directly with the partner countries’ Special Operations Forces (SOF) to modernize their doctrine, organizational structures, and operational capabilities. This assistance is not merely about tactical training but focuses on “institutional hardening”, ensuring that the security apparatus is resilient against external subversion, bribery, and political interference. By embedding U.S. expertise within local structures, the BDRP ensures that regional SOFs are equipped to act as the vanguard of their nations’ resilience strategies.
Finally, USSOCOM support should be focused in assisting local partners in the development and integration of advanced resilience capabilities designed to resist or immediately mitigate the effects of political subversion. This involves creating synchronized response frameworks that enable a state to absorb a “grey zone” shock, such as a coordinated cyberattack or an engineered political crisis, without systemic failure. By integrating these resilience measures into national security planning, the BDRP transforms the Western Balkans from a series of “soft targets” into a hardened regional coalition capable of denying adversaries the opportunity to exploit domestic instabilities.
Justification for the Change: SOF’s Role in Denial and Resilience
For overcoming the attribution challenge through denial in the gray zone, a strategy of denial through resilience is more effective. SOF and its partners (from the EU and the US) can effectively prosecute subversion and neutralize disinformation; the adversary’s actions fail regardless of whether they can be definitively attributed to the Russian state.
If SOF-enabled support is proactive and focused on resilience-building, the target state from Russia is demonstrably better able to withstand its pressure. Outcomes include the failure of Russian-backed disinformation to shift public opinion away from the West. Thus, these countries would continue their progress toward Euro-Atlantic integration despite Russian opposition.
By aligning with USSOCOM, the Western Balkans would integrate into the “connective tissue” of the broader Joint Force. This would ensure that the region’s irregular operations are synchronized with higher-level theater strategies and gain better access to USSOCOM resourcing, permissions, and “brainpower”. It would allow countries to contribute to the “campaigning” and “denying benefits” concepts outlined in modern strategic doctrine. Through professional military education and unified doctrine, the BDRP will create a shared understanding of warfare as a “void” where conventional conflict is only one small part. By leading this regional effort, the SOFs can help “glue” intergovernmental contributions together, making the entire Western Balkan operational environment inhospitable to Russian gray zone tactics.
Conclusion
Russia’s influence in the Western Balkans isn’t accidental. It’s a coordinated strategy built to exploit the region’s long‑standing political fractures and use the situation to spread its influence and compete with the West. Through its disinformation apparatus, Russia builds a psychological environment that undermines democratic institutions and fades public trust in Western partners, especially in the EU and NATO, portraying Russia as the best choice. These instruments work together to keep the Western Balkans in a state of geopolitical limbo, as the “powder keg” of Europe. As long as these internal levers remain intact, full integration of the Western Balkans into the EU and NATO will remain a distant goal.
In the context of the new U.S. National Defense Strategy, the Department of War increasingly seeks to bolster the resilience of European partners so they can take the lead in securing their own periphery. This strategic shift moves the U.S. away from direct involvement toward an “offshore” enabler role, providing the high-end technical and special-operations support necessary for Balkan partners to deny Russian subversion before it necessitates a transatlantic crisis response.
The establishment of a Balkan Denial and Resilience Program represents a necessary evolution in how the Western Balkans confront the persistent pressures of Russian gray zone activity. By institutionalizing a regional approach to irregular warfare planning, strengthening resilience through SOF-enabled capacity building, and integrating fully with U.S. and EU strategic frameworks, the BDRP positions partner nations to deny adversaries meaningful gains before crises emerge. This initiative would not only enhance the region’s ability to withstand disinformation, subversion, and coercive influence but also reinforces its trajectory toward Euro-Atlantic integration by creating a shared, durable foundation for collective security. With USSOCOM’s support, the Western Balkans can transform from the powder keg of Europe into a cohesive, resilient, and strategically aligned region capable of shaping its own security environment and denying malign actors the ability to exploit its political and informational seams.
The post Why the USSOCOM should establish a Western Balkans’ Denial and Resilience Program appeared first on Small Wars Journal by Arizona State University.