Gray-zone aggression now a material threat for businesses, according to new Willis report

Rhea-AI Summary

Willis (WTW) warns that gray-zone aggression — ambiguous, deniable tactics between peace and war — is now a material business threat as of Feb 25, 2026. The report urges firms to re-evaluate insurance wordings, elevate enterprise risk registers, stress-test supply chains, strengthen crisis management and use scenario planning.

The guidance stresses specialist policy reviews, continuous geopolitical monitoring, diversification and operational readiness to preserve continuity amid ambiguous attacks and shifting attribution.

LONDON, Feb. 25, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Global stability is entering a new phase – one defined not by clear lines of conflict, but by the ambiguous, deniable and strategically choreographed tactics that sit between peace and war – known as ‘gray-zone aggression’. That’s the key finding of a new report from The Willis Research Network and Elisabeth Braw, a senior fellow with the Atlantic Council.

Gray-zone aggression has rapidly evolved into a material threat for businesses; disrupting markets, undermining confidence and creating political leverage. The report, titled “Hidden threats, real impacts: gray-zone aggression”, highlights that five years ago, this challenge barely registered on corporate risk radars and was largely viewed as confined to the aviation and shipping sectors. Today, it is shaping geopolitical risk appetite, testing insurance policy wordings and the resilience strategies of every major sector. In this volatile environment, the private sector is no longer a bystander, the report says. Executives need to anticipate, adapt and collaborate to strengthen corporate defences and maintain business continuity.

The report highlights further findings for risk and insurance leaders:

• Re-evaluate insurance wordings, triggers and limits: as geopolitical tensions rise, gaps can emerge 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.
• Elevate gray-zone aggression as an enterprise-level risk: review risk registers and strategy for gray-zone threats. Continuous geopolitical monitoring, scenario refresh cycles and dissemination of intelligence are essential.
• Stress test supply chain resilience through a geopolitical lens: complex interdependencies mean a single chokepoint disruption can generate outsize ripple effects. Diversification, route alternatives and friendshoring considerations should be embedded into operational and financial planning.
• Strengthen crisis management for ambiguous events: gray-zone incidents often resemble ‘accidents’ until patterns emerge. Organisational resilience will be tested by decision making under uncertainty. Where attribution is incomplete, public narratives diverge and regulatory environments shift at speed.
• Integrate scenario thinking into strategic planning: scenarios challenge assumptions and reveal unexpected exposures. They help leadership teams test investment choices, supply chain dependencies, geopolitical footprints and insurance adequacy across a range of plausible futures.
  
  

Sam Wilkin, Director of Political Risk Analytics at Willis, said: “Our societies are only as resilient to gray-zone attacks as their weakest link. The corporate sector must not be that weak link. The past few months of gray-zone attacks in Europe have shown us that strategic foresight, operational readiness and specialty solutions designed to address ambiguity must be baked into corporate risk management programs across business sectors. I hope companies will use the scenarios to challenge traditional boundaries of risk ownership and identify unexpected connections between risks.”

Elisabeth Braw, Senior Fellow, Atlantic Council, said: “Today’s gray-zone tactics exploit the way our economies are connected - and that puts the private sector directly in the line of fire. Hostile countries are targeting companies precisely because doing so creates disruption and uncertainty while at the same time having two distinct advantages: plausible deniability and minimal risk of retaliation. This research makes clear that treating gray-zone aggression as a temporary nuisance is a mistake. Organisations that fail to recognise gray-zone activity as a material business risk will find themselves reacting too late, with real consequences for business operations, confidence and resilience.”

The complete report can be downloaded here.

About WTW

At WTW (NASDAQ: WTW), we provide data-driven, insight-led solutions in the areas of people, risk and capital. Leveraging the global view and local expertise of our colleagues serving 140 countries and markets, we help organizations sharpen their strategy, enhance organizational resilience, motivate their workforce and maximize performance.

Working shoulder to shoulder with our clients, we uncover opportunities for sustainable success—and provide perspective that moves you.

Learn more at wtwco.com.

Media contact

Jo Barrett
jo.barrett@wtwco.com / +44 7940703911

Lauren David
lauren.david@wtwco.com / +44 7385947619

FAQ

What did Willis (WTW) say about gray-zone aggression on February 25, 2026?

Willis said gray-zone aggression is a material business threat requiring enterprise-level action. According to the company, organizations must update insurance language, strengthen crisis management, and run geopolitical scenarios to protect operations and confidence in volatile environments.

How should WTW investors view the report’s recommendation to re-evaluate insurance wordings?

Re-evaluating policy language is urged to close coverage gaps created by ambiguous conflicts. According to the company, specialist reviews of triggers and limits are critical to align coverage with modern gray-zone risks rather than legacy conflict definitions.

What operational steps does Willis (WTW) recommend for supply chain resilience?

Willis recommends diversification, route alternatives and friendshoring to reduce chokepoint risk. According to the company, stress-testing supply chains through a geopolitical lens helps firms identify critical interdependencies and plan operational and financial contingencies.

How does the report advise companies to handle crisis management for ambiguous events?

Companies should strengthen decision-making under uncertainty and prepare for incomplete attribution. According to the company, ambiguity often masks patterns, so clear crisis playbooks and rapid intelligence sharing are essential to preserve continuity and public narrative control.

What role does scenario thinking play in Willis’s (WTW) recommendations?

Scenario thinking is recommended to reveal hidden exposures and test strategic choices across plausible futures. According to the company, scenarios help leadership evaluate investments, supply-chain dependencies and insurance adequacy against evolving gray-zone threats.

Will the Willis (WTW) report affect corporate risk registers and monitoring practices?

Yes — the report urges elevating gray-zone aggression to enterprise-level risk and continuous monitoring. According to the company, firms should refresh scenarios, disseminate intelligence and integrate geopolitical monitoring into regular risk governance cycles.