If your company is headquartered in Western Europe, there is a serious possibility you may be overlooking. Your subsidiaries in Eastern Europe are already planning as if war were no longer unthinkable. Your headquarters probably is not.
This difference in outlook is no longer theoretical. It is shaping real decisions. If the war in Ukraine spreads, it could determine whether parts of your business remain operational or shut down within days.
Since Russia’s full scale invasion of Ukraine, a clear divide has emerged within Europe. In countries close to Russia and Belarus, including Poland and the Baltic states, military escalation is treated as a serious possibility in everyday planning. Governments are revising defence plans. Civil protection systems are being reviewed and tested. Military spending is increasing.
Public opinion reflects this divide. In Poland and the Baltic states, many people believe further Russian aggression is a serious risk. Across much of Western Europe, however, most citizens do not regard a direct military attack as a realistic personal threat.
Businesses absorb the assumptions of the societies around them.
In Western Europe, business continuity planning usually centres on cyberattacks, economic crises, supply chain disruption, or pandemics. These risks deserve attention, but they are different from preparing for mobilisation, damaged infrastructure, or sudden border closures during a military conflict.
In Riga, Warsaw, and Vilnius, managers are asking more difficult questions. What happens if part of our workforce is mobilised? What if employees leave to move their families abroad? What if transport routes are disrupted? What if demand collapses overnight?
For many Western headquarters, these subsidiaries are still viewed as ordinary regional markets, simply another line in the profit and loss statement. From a distance, that may seem reasonable. On the ground, the situation feels very different.
The Question Western Headquarters Need to Ask
The first question is simple but uncomfortable: Should we continue operating if war reaches this country?
The answer will depend on the sector. Companies in energy, food supply, logistics, or healthcare may need to continue operating under almost any circumstances. Others may have no realistic way to do so. These decisions should not be made in the middle of a crisis. They should be discussed in advance.
Ukraine offers important lessons. Companies that survived the first months of the 2022 invasion often had contingency plans, alternative locations, flexible management structures, and backup suppliers. Others did not survive.
The Workforce Blind Spot
One of the greatest blind spots is workforce availability.
During a serious security crisis, normal patterns of employment will not apply. Some employees will relocate. Some will be mobilised. Others will focus on protecting their families. Even without direct physical damage, companies may face severe staff shortages within days or weeks.
Headquarters that assume normal workforce continuity may be caught unprepared. Identifying key roles and training people who can step into them is not an extreme response. It is sound risk management.
Supply Chains and Minimum Operations
Supply chains present another major vulnerability.
Many European companies rely on just in time logistics. The model works well in stable conditions, but it becomes fragile during war. Border congestion, fuel shortages, and infrastructure damage can interrupt deliveries very quickly. Businesses operating in regions with greater exposure need to define the minimum level at which they can continue to function. They must also know whether their suppliers are prepared for serious disruption.
Infrastructure Resilience
Infrastructure resilience matters too. Backup power, alternative communication systems, and the ability to operate remotely are no longer theoretical concerns in parts of Eastern Europe. They are practical business requirements.
Headquarters and Local Management Must Align
The most important issue, however, is alignment between headquarters and local management.
If war risk planning is left entirely to subsidiaries, without clear support from the centre, local leaders must manage extreme exposure without the authority to make strategic decisions about capital, insurance, or temporary closure.
That puts the entire organisation at risk.
Three Questions for Western European Boards
Boards of Western European companies with operations on the EU’s eastern flank should ask three basic questions:
Have we seriously discussed what happens if military escalation affects this country?
Are decision making powers clearly defined if communication with headquarters becomes difficult?
Do we understand whether the business would continue operating, and the reasons for that decision?
Preparing for these scenarios is not a call for panic. NATO’s collective defence framework remains strong. EU countries are increasing defence spending, and deterrence is credible. Yet deterrence cannot eliminate every risk. Responsible governance includes preparation for events that are unlikely but could have severe consequences.
Western Europe’s long period of stability has shaped its corporate culture. Eastern Europe’s proximity to Russia has produced a different outlook. Neither perspective is irrational. The problem appears when companies operate in both environments but plan according to only one of them.
The gap in risk perception has become a business vulnerability.
Closing that gap does not require dramatic action. It calls for frank conversations, joint scenario planning, and a willingness to listen to local managers who operate closer to the threat.
Eastern Europe is not a distant outpost for Western business. It is part of the European Union, part of NATO, and part of Europe’s current security frontier.
Companies that withstand serious shocks are rarely those that assume it will not happen here. They are the ones that have prepared quietly, carefully, and without exaggeration, because the possibility cannot be dismissed.
About the Author
Ojārs Stūre is a crisis management trainer and consultant based in Riga, Latvia. He helps organisations prepare on crisis preparedness, crisis management, business continuity, and resilience. His work pays particular attention to the security environment in the Baltic region.