Gray-zone aggression has surged in recent years, revealing a critical trend: states engaging in this form of coercion are constantly innovating – making defence a moving target. Unlike traditional military aggression, gray-zone tactics exploit economic, technological, and reputational vulnerabilities. This means resilience cannot rest solely with governments; the private sector is increasingly in the crosshairs.
Businesses are becoming more concerned about these risks, yet awareness remains low. Understanding what gray-zone aggression is – and how such events might unfold – is essential. Willis Research Network partner Elisabeth Braw, shares key insights and three new scenarios to help risk leaders take action in 2026.
Organizations must anticipate, adapt, and collaborate to strengthen their defenses and maintain continuity. In WTW’s 2025 Political Risk Survey [1], 77 per cent of executives interviewed expressed concern about the threat of economic retaliation as the method of gray-zone aggression of greatest concern, while 64 per cent were focused on state-sponsored cyber and 44 per cent on attacks on infrastructure. Five years earlier, gray-zone threats barely registered on corporate radars.[2]
To understand gray-zone aggression as an emerging driver of geopolitical risk, the Willis Research Network, have partnered with Elisabeth Braw since 2019 to explore the topic and identify what global businesses can do to manage these threats proactively.
The findings from these discussions are shared in a report providing:
Gray‑zone aggression is an enterprise‑level risk that spans departmental responsibilities; if there are knowledge gaps in the answers to those diagnostic questions, risk and strategy will need to be aligned to act.
01
Review your risks register and strategy for gray-zone threats. Continuous geopolitical monitoring, scenario refresh cycles and intelligence dissemination are essential.
02
Complex interdependencies mean a single chokepoint disruption generates outsize ripple effects. Diversification, route alternatives and friendshoring considerations should be embedded into operational and financial planning.
03
Gray‑zone incidents often resemble accidents until patterns emerge. Organizational resilience will be tested by decision‑making under uncertainty. Where attribution is incomplete, public narratives diverge and regulatory environments shift at speed.
04
Scenarios challenge assumptions and reveal exposure asymmetries. They help leadership teams test investment choices, supply‑chain dependencies, geopolitical footprints and insurance adequacy across a range of plausible futures.
05
As geopolitical tensions rise, gaps can arise in the gray-zone between peace and war. Specialist review of policy language is critical to ensure coverage aligns with the emerging risk environment rather than legacy definitions of conflict.
Alongside this report, WTW clients can also request access to three new gray-zone aggression scenarios designed by Elisabeth Braw as part of the geopolitical risk research programme. The scenarios include:
These scenarios are not predictions, but structured “what if” exercises intended to provoke discussion, raise awareness and support proactive risk management in the face of emerging and interconnected threats.
Complete our form to gain access to the gray-zone overview report today and email wrn to register your interest in receiving access to the full scenarios.
