In recent years, the European Union has increasingly relied on targeted sanctions against individuals. What was originally intended as a political tool to exert pressure on national leaderships now increasingly affects private citizens, consultants, and journalists.

Traditionally, there is a clear distinction: either a country is at peace (in which case the Basic Law, the European Convention on Human Rights, and full protection of civil rights apply) or at war (in which case states of emergency and martial law apply).

The term “hybrid war” completely removes this limit. If anything can be declared a theater of war, a social media post, a journalistic report, a demonstration, a critical opinion, then a society is in a state of permanent, invisible war.

The result is that the state can at any time—under the pretext of having to defend against “hybrid warfare”—employ methods and mindsets actually intended for a state of war (such as freezing assets without judicial proceedings).

Why this concerns us all

One need not share the views of sanctioned individuals to defend their rights. If we accept that the EU bureaucracy can financially and socially destroy people without a judicial ruling, we are creating an instrument of arbitrariness.

A right that does not also apply to those who are inconvenient ultimately protects no one.