Survival Kit 2025: Care or something big is coming?

The recommendation of the European Union (EU) to prepare citizens with a “survival kit” by 2025, which was included in the Union Preparation Strategy presented on March 26, 2025, has generated a real whirlwind of speculations, debates and reactions throughout Europe. This plan, which encourages households to have basic supplies such as water, food, medicine and batteries to survive at least 72 hours without external assistance, arises in a context of growing climate risks and geopolitical tensions. But is this measure just a precaution against an increasingly uncertain world or is it a sign that Europe is preparing for something much more serious? Below is a detailed analysis of alerts, their foundations, possible implications and how to interpret this movement today, March 26, 2025.

Context and origin of alert

The EU Preparation Strategy, which was developed under the leadership of the European Commission and presented by Ursula von der Leyen, includes 30 key actions to improve the EU’s resilience to “scale cross-sectoral crisis”. The survival kit is the most visible and direct measure for citizens, but the document also covers from early warning systems to evacuation and military reinforcement plans. This comprehensive approach is based on an analysis that identifies two major threats:

1. Climate risks:
   Europe is facing a climate change that advances in narrow steps, with 2024 marking the warmest year ever recorded, according to Copernicus. The continent has been hit by extreme events, such as floods in Germany, fires in Greece and droughts in Spain and Italy. In March 2024, the European Climate Risk Assessment (EUCRA) warned about 36 climate risks, of which eight are critical, including extreme heat and food insecurity. The European Environment Agency (EEA) estimates that if we don’t prepare properly, the summer of 2025 could be devastating, with 40% chances of record heat waves being recorded and 25% more forest fires.
2. Warm and geopolitical risks:
   The war in Ukraine, which continues without a solution in 2025, has marked the energy and food security of Europe. The Russian threat, together with the uncertainty about US support following the re-election of Donald Trump (who has questioned NATO), has led leaders such as Polish Radosław Sikorski to warn on March 24 about a possible “Russian aggression before the end of the decade.” In addition, we are seeing an increase in cyberattacks (60 per cent of them attributed to Russian or Chinese actors in 2024, according to ENISA) and tensions in the Middle East that could be intensified.

The 72-hour kit—water (4-6 litres per person), non-perishable food, medicine, flashlight, battery radio and blankets—is based on protocols already implemented in countries such as Sweden, Finland and Norway, which since 2018 and 2022 have promoted citizen autarchy in the face of emergencies.

Caution or preparation for something big?

The tone of the notice has generated divergent interpretations. Let’s analyze both possibilities:

1. Scenario 1: Reasoned caution
   • Arguments: The EU is not anticipating a specific event, but is taking a proactive approach to cumulative risks. The 72-hour deadline is consistent with civil protection standards such as FEMA in the US, which is the estimated time for essential services to resume after an initial crisis. The Commission has emphasized that “it is not about causing alarm, but about empowering,” according to what Von der Leyan said on March 25.
   • Evidence: The Nordic countries have carried out similar campaigns without that meaning that a war is around the corner. For example, the case of Sweden in 2018, entitled “If the crisis or war comes,” was launched at a time of tensions with Russia, but it did not result in a conflict. In addition, the EUCRA emphasizes that 80% of climate risks can be handled with proper preparation.
   • Political context: The measure legitimizes the increase in defense spending (a 20% more in the EU budget 2024-2025) and investments in defense European Green Dealshowing a proactive Europe to the global uncertainty.
2. Scenario 2: Something big is coming
   • Arguments: The language of the report — “deterior of security prospects” and “armed aggression” — is surprisingly direct to what is normally expected in European diplomacy. The coincidence with Russian military maneuvers in the Baltic (which Reuters reported on March 20) and the belligerent tone of leaders like Sikorski suggest that the EU might be aware of specific threats. In addition, the emphasis on cyberattacks and energy supply reflects a fear of a Russian “hybrid war” that mixes sabotage and destabilization.
   • Evidence: NATO, led by Mark Rutte, has been asking since January that we adopt a “mentality of times of war”. In addition, on March 25, Trump signed an executive order that could reduce the U.S. engagement in Europe, leaving the EU more vulnerable. In X, publications like @nando686868 (“Possible War, Cyberattacks, Epidemics”) show that people feel that something serious is about to come.
   • Climate context: The projections of an extreme 2025 summer could collapse infrastructures already strained by energy sanctions, creating a “domino effect” that the EU fears cannot control.

Critical analysis: What can come?

1. Short term (spring-summer 2025):
   • Climate: Copernicus models are forecasting a hot April and a summer with 60% chance of severe droughts in southern Europe. An event similar to the DANA that occurred in Valencia in 2024, but on a larger scale, it could make necessary a kit for water and light cuts.
   • Geopolitics: The meeting to be held between Russia and the USA in Riad on Ukraine on March 25 (according to AP News) it might not come out as expected, which could lead to an increase in sanctions or even Russian sabotage, such as the one that occurred with the Balticconnector pipeline, which was damaged in 2023. In addition, there is a real risk of a massive cyberattack to electric networks, similar to that that which was joined in the Cyber Europe 2024 exercise.
2. In the medium term (2026-2030):
   • Bélico: Sikorski and analysts SIPRI They warn that Russia could rearm and leverage Ukrainian resources for a major conflict by 2028-2030, especially if Trump reduces the presence of NATO.
   • ClimateThe EUCRA projects that, without action, 10% of the European population could be in uninhabitable areas due to heat or floods by 2035, forcing massive migrations that stress stability.

Reactions and perceptions

• Citizenship: In X, the reaction oscillates between alarm (“You’re scaring me”, @MCarmenGC1) and skepticism (“Last gilipollez of the EU”, @pepitorias). Supermarkets in Spain report an increase of 15% in water sales and conserves on March 25 (Confidential), suggesting that many take the alert seriously.
• Governments: María Jesús Montero, Spanish vice president, asked for “tranquility” on March 25 (Antenna 3), but countries like Poland and the Baltics are already distributing similar manuals.
• Press: El País sees a “reasonable strategy” while OKDiario “alarmism to justify remembrance.” Internationally, The Guardian links it to “a world on the brink of chaos.”

Interpretation: What does this mean?

The survival kit is essentially a precautionary measure, but its urgency and tone suggest that the EU is not discarding serious scenarios in the short or medium term. Although there is no public evidence of an imminent event by April 2025, the convergence of risks—climatic, warlike and technological—is creating a “inflection point” that the Commission wants to anticipate. The 72-hour mention indicates an initial crisis approach that can be handled (storms, blackouts and cyberattacks), rather than a total war, although the war background responds to pressure from Eastern Europe and NATO.

• Precaution: It is the most likely explanation. The EU seeks resilience to a 2025 that promises to be tough, but has no concrete data on an immediate catastrophe.
• Something big: It cannot be ruled out. The lack of transparency on specific intelligence (such as Russian maneuvers or cyber threats) leaves room for speculation that the EU knows more than it says.

Conclusion

The 2025 survival kit reflects a constantly changing world, where Europe feels more vulnerable than ever. It is a sensible measure against real risks: the climate is already causing ravages and the war in Ukraine remains unresolved. However, their alarming presentation and geopolitical context fuel the idea that it could be a preparation for something larger. For the average person, having water and food for three days is a practical advice, not a declaration of war. Even so, uncertainty about what “can come” — a disastrous summer, a massive cyberattack or a conflict that escalates — will keep the debate going. For now, Europe is in a delicate balance between caution and paranoia, and only time will tell if this kit was an excess or a successful vision.