The drones at Leipzig airport: The Russian connection.

This article, by Sarah Rainsford, the BBC Eastern and Southern Europe correspondent, is republished in full from BBC London.

 

As Germany investigates how a drone loaded with explosives reached a runway at Leipzig airport, there is renewed talk in Europe of hybrid war.

The interior minister is warning of a "new level of danger" from an attack that "may involve foreign powers".

There is no proof at this stage to link the flying bomb directly to Russia, which denies any role. But as well as the means and the motive, Moscow does have form.

The BBC has seen details of the investigation into a plot in 2024 in which Russian-linked proxies in Poland and Lithuania not only handled drones and explosives but also delivered them to Germany.

The flying bomb

The quadcopter was discovered at Leipzig airport late on Tuesday night, forcing one runway into lockdown as a bomb disposal robot rolled into action.

On the tarmac close by were several Ukrainian Antonov cargo planes, stripes along their enormous bodies in the blue and yellow of the country's flag. One reads, "Be Brave Like Kherson", the southern city now on the frontline of Russia's invasion.

Pictures published by German media suggest the drone was a relatively small device which airport staff spotted "floating" between the Ukrainian planes.

Around the same time, a DHL cargo plane collided with an "unidentified object" as it pulled up into the sky, unable to land in Leipzig.

Teams are still working to establish whether that was a second drone.

They are also trying to trace who launched the devices and why.

A previous plot

A previous Russian-backed plot involving Leipzig airport could provide clues.

In 2024, a parcel containing a sophisticated incendiary device caught fire at the airport's DHL hub shortly before it was loaded onto a plane. Similar packages then ignited in the UK and Poland, causing extensive damage.

A group of men are currently on trial in both Lithuania and Poland, where prosecutors believe they were part of a substantial network of proxies recruited by Russian military intelligence.

But there was a subplot that has been little discussed before.

Last September, Lithuanian prosecutors said that investigators had also seized RDX explosives meant for "other terrorist attacks". The amount was significant: equivalent to 6kg of TNT.

"Some of the devices were manufactured to intensify the blast," the prosecutor added.

The BBC has since had access to case documents that describe how several of the men on trial were paid to transport those explosives around Europe, concealed in cans of sweetcorn and chopped tomatoes. The detonators were hidden inside headphone sets.

The suspects also handled drone parts and the case talks specifically of attachments, suitable for holding a bomb.

Prosecutors allege that some of the items were brought into the EU from the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad.

Almost two dozen suspects have been charged with terror offences, but with the men's handlers still at large, believed to be in Russia, it is not clear whether the entire network was disbanded or all the hidden material found.

While there is no evidence of a link to the Leipzig drone bomb, the 2024 plot certainly highlights the potential

Vladyslav's story

 

One of the suspects charged in Poland, a Ukrainian called Vladyslav D., described in detail to investigators how he made multiple long car trips in July 2024 following instructions from someone he knew as "Warrior".

He has since pleaded not guilty in court.

One message sent him to the edge of a Lithuanian forest where he found a carrier bag containing "three or four packs of headphones", soggy with rain.

He had already collected two cans of corn "lightly covered with soil" from another location, telling investigators he had no idea what was inside.

He was ordered to leave the headphones many hours' drive away in Poland where he noticed "a guy on a bicycle" collect them from beside the road.

For another assignment he received a pin for a location inside a Lithuanian cemetery and was told to dig beneath some plastic flowers. He quickly uncovered a bin bag wrapped in brown tape.

"Inside were drone components: small plastic propellers, I think four pieces," Vladyslav told investigators.

These items were to be left by a road in central Poland for pick-up.

Finally there was a trip to Germany where he was given the code to access a hostel room in Dusseldorf. He was instructed to leave the drones and other items inside.

The intended targets were never revealed.

Moscow's motive?

In statements to investigators, Vladyslav D. said he was paid more than $2,000 (£1,487) in cryptocurrency for his efforts. His motive was clear.

And what about the Leipzig case?

Few details about the drone bomb are yet public.

Some German sources report that the explosive was Semtex, which contains RDX - the explosive found in the food cans in a Lithuanian cemetery.

We do not know how much the drone found at the airport was carrying and the physical damage may have been limited.

"The drone casing, if it was metal, might have put a hole in the plane but just a blast wave probably would just have dented it unless they put some fragmentation inside," explosives expert Professor Jackie Akhavan of Cranfield University explained.

But if Russia was behind this, its aim was more likely to sow fear.

Andrei Soldatov, an expert on Russia's intelligence agencies, said it "makes sense" to suspect Moscow, pointing to a clear pattern of sabotage and hostile activity, from arson attacks on facilities supporting Ukraine to drones over sensitive sites in Europe.

Germany is one of Kyiv's biggest suppliers of military aid.

"It's a message. You get something like that [bomb] into one of the biggest European airports and you send the message that, 'Guys, we can do that. Remember'," Soldatov explained.

"You hint to the adversary that you might cause a really big problem: that tomorrow might be more serious."

And the potential motive? Moscow is under intense pressure from Ukraine's long-scale drone attacks, he said, and the fact that Russian President Vladimir Putin "has been humiliated, repeatedly".

International response

"We are aware of the incident, which the German authorities continue to investigate," a Nato official told the BBC.

Antonov Airlines has also been cautious so far in its response.

The firm supplies planes for certain Nato operations but declined to say whether that includes military support for Ukraine.

Asked whether the Ukrainian planes might have been targeted, a spokeswoman in Kyiv told the BBC: "We are not making any such assumptions…We don't know what this drone was or why it was there."

But Russia watchers are clear.

"This is Russian interference," said John Lough of the New Eurasian Strategies (NEST) Centre. "It's all part of undermining support for Ukraine by pointing to the dangers of escalation and, frankly, scaring the German authorities."

He sees high potential for a surge in such hybrid attacks now because Ukraine has "changed the balance" of the war.

"My expectation is that such activity will increase quite sharply over the coming months. I think it's a dangerous moment."

 

source: This article, by Sarah Rainsford, the BBC Eastern and Southern Europe correspondent, is republished in full from BBC London.

Latest

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Making peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan was never going to be simple, nor easy, nor quick. It is taking time, writes Dennis Sammut in this Monday Commentary. “There is a sense of realism coming from the leaders of the two countries – President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and prime minister Nikol Pashinyan of Armenia, that frankly, is necessary and welcome”, he writes. At a time when conflicts are raging all over the world – from Ukraine to the Gulf, from Africa to South Asia, the prospect that Armenia and Azerbaijan had finally, after decades of conflict that left thousands of dead and many more displaced, decided on embarking on a journey of peace was welcomed. Peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan can be top-down up to a point. Both leaders have spent political capital preparing for a peace deal. But both are aware that their people are not ready for peace yet. In fact, in Armenia, most of the elite are negative toward a peace deal with Azerbaijan. Pashinyan needs time to persuade his countryfolk. That is why 2031 is realistic. Ilham Aliyev runs a tighter shop, but he is also not immune to public opinion. Every time someone hits a landmine in Karabakh, which unfortunately happens often, peace comes into question. Which is why Aliyev chooses to sound hardline, more often than not. In pursuing the peace agenda, both Aliyev and Pashinyan need to proceed cautiously. But they are right in making peace the central issue in their agenda. It is the main issue, and the one that will define them in history. So forward, cautiously but resolutely! In pursuing the peace agenda, Aliyev and Pashinyan need to be supported clearly and unambiguously. There are too many people in Baku and Yerevan who are sitting on the sides, waiting. The international community is not doing enough. It is time to be counted. Otherwise, the spoilers will win, and the region will go back to its bad habits. (Click the image to read the full commentary).
Editor's choice
News
UN Security Council Presidential Statement on the Role of Diplomacy during Active Hostilities

UN Security Council Presidential Statement on the Role of Diplomacy during Active Hostilities

The United Nations Security Council is today expected to adopt a presidential statement on the role of diplomacy during active hostilities. The draft text, which was authored by Pakistan, underscores the importance of maintaining diplomatic engagement even after the outbreak of armed conflict, with a view to containing escalation, facilitating cessations of hostilities and ceasefires, and creating conditions conducive to peaceful political settlements. Resolution 2788 of 22 July 2025, which was initiated by Pakistan, reaffirmed the Council’s commitment to the peaceful settlement of disputes under Chapter VI of the UN Charter. A year later, on 23 July, the Council convened an open debate to review the resolution’s implementation and examine ways of making more effective use of the peaceful dispute settlement tools available under Chapter VI.   The draft presidential statement builds on previous Council products, such as resolution 2788, but it is the first to focus specifically on the role of diplomacy in containing and de-escalating active hostilities. Since the open debate in July, Council members have continued to call for intensified efforts towards de-escalation and dialogue, although differences persist over how proactively the Council should promote mediation and other peaceful means of dispute settlement, particularly in situations where the consent of the parties is contested. In his statement opening the general debate of the 81st session of the General Assembly on 22 September, Secretary-General António Guterres highlighted the devastating consequences of ongoing conflicts in Ukraine, Sudan, and the Middle East, warning that these and other crises illustrate what happens when “force outpaces diplomacy” and stressing the urgency of sustained diplomatic engagement. The negotiations on the draft presidential statement do not appear to have been particularly contentious, although Council members expressed differing views on some elements of the text. Pakistan circulated the initial draft to Council members on 14 October. Following informal consultations with Council members to address comments on the initial draft, Pakistan circulated a first revised draft on 23 October, incorporating several proposed amendments. On 29 October, Pakistan circulated a second revised draft, which it placed under silence procedure until the following day (30 October). After the US broke silence, a third revised draft was circulated on 3 November and placed under silence procedure until this morning (4 November). The draft subsequently passed silence. The agreed presidential statement emphasises the importance of maintaining direct and indirect channels of communication between parties to armed conflict to reduce the risk of miscalculation and create opportunities for sustained political engagement. (click image to read more)

Popular

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Last week I visited Baku, Azerbaijan. My visit was relatively short, but very intensive, and had many meetings with stakeholders and colleagues. When I arrived in Baku first time in 1996,  Azerbaijan was a different country: weak, poor, and shaken by defeat in war. For thirty year the Karabakh issue dominated the agenda: the political agenda but also the popular mindset. Now, thirty years later, Azerbaijan has returned to Karabakh, and peace with Armenia is on the horizon. It is a new era for Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, for the South Caucasus, but also for Europe.  But we cannot be complacent: the Peace agreement has been initialed but not signed; borders remain closed; TRIPP is ambitious but remains an idea; and there are spoilers who want to turn the clock back. We must not allow them, and in this Europe and Azerbaijan must work together. Europe’ vanguard organization is the European Union – it is a free union of 27 member states; it is a strong global economic force, and increasingly a diplomatic and military force too. But it remains “work in progress” and can often appear dysfunctional. It often lacks collective and institutional memory. In its dealings with Azerbaijan the EU has made many mistakes – not least opening the delegation here late – in 2008. It sometimes appears condescending. Some utterances from the European Parliament and from some quarters in some member states are not understandable even for me. They irritate the Azerbaijanis, but serve no other purpose But Azerbaijan has also not handled relations with the EU well. It has failed to respond when the hand of friendship reached out; and it confused irritating actions, sometimes by well-meaning people; sometimes by outright spoilers, with strategic action. In short, EU-Azerbaijan relations have suffered from a lack of proper dialogue. This dialogue must be frank, honest and multi-faceted involving different segments of society on both sides.   Is Azerbaijan Europe? When Azerbaijan applied to join the Council of Europe in the 1990s, there were some who opposed, saying this was not Europe. I was one of the people who argued that Armenia and Azerbaijan may be on the periphery of the continent geographically, but were European in essence. Certainly their elites. During the discussion on 4 September in Baku, my friend Farhad Mammedov, mentioned that Azerbaijan is not interested in joining the EU, and was now close to the Central Asian countries in the 5 plus 1 format. Neither things mean that Azerbaijan is not Europe. There are several European countries that are not in the EU, and do not want to be, for example Norway and Switzerland. Iceland has recently voted to stay out of the EU. The UK was a member and left. Europe is bigger than the EU, and the holding of the European Political Community summit in Baku in 2027 proves that. Despite all the rhetoric, I never heard the president of Azerbaijan  saying that Azerbaijan is not Europe, nor have I heard any European president say it either. Not wanting to join the EU and forging close relations with neighbouring regions does not make Azerbaijan any less European. It is only logical that when Europeans talk to Azerbaijan they talk like family. The conversation is often frank. It must also be honest, and Europeans need always to remember this too. A frank, honest and multi-faceted dialogue A frank, honest and multifaceted dialogue will contribute to relations between Azerbaijan and the rest of Europe: it will avoid misperception, which unfortunately is very common on both sides; it will provide a forum where problems can be discussed and resolved, and it will increase mutual trust, so that together common problems can be addressed. (click image to read the full Monday Commentary)
Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

There are two early 20th-century tunes that mark foreign attempts to occupy and “pacify” Yemen. The Scottish tune “The barren rocks of Aden” marks the mobilisation of Highland soldiers, enlisted to be deployed to the Yemeni port of Aden, that in 1837 became the last colony to be incorporated into the British Empire. The tune talks of the harshness of the terrain, but is celebratory, It was even played as a farewell tune to Sir William Luce at the parade in Sharjah celebrating his end as “British Viceroy” in the Middle East in 1966. The second tune is an Anatolian lament. As Ilker Sezer reminded us this weekend, in his weekly feature on “Turkiye Today”, it “mourns the tragic fate of Ottoman soldiers dispatched to the harsh, remote deserts of Yemen during the fall of the empire, young men who marched away from their villages and never returned home. Most of their names, and numbers, were never recorded. Yet, their fate left a mark on the Turkish psyche.” Subsequent invaders have discovered that Yemen is a grave that cannot be overcome by the strength of modern technology, and that whilst Yemeni society is splintered and divided, building a reliable alliance with Yemeni factions is difficult. These are the harsh lessons facing Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom faces its biggest challenge in its modern history. The leadership of the Kingdom now has to respond decisively. At stake is their very credibility. This is likely to be a long and messy conflict. Saudi military objectives need to be focused: to box in the Houthis rather than destroy them. This is likely to include: (a) regaining territory lost on the Red Sea coast; (b) control over Bab el Mandeb Strait; (c) some kind of cordon sanitaire on the Saudi-Yemeni border; and if things go well (d) the capture of Sanaa. All this would not eliminate the Houthi problem, but it will contain it. In the end the Saudis will have to continue managing Yemen with a mixture of carrot and stick. For the moment, the stick is likely, but the carrot cannot be forgotten either. (click the image to read the Monday Commentary in full)