DEEP DIVE - Russia’s drone barrage against Poland early Wednesday was an unprecedented incident in Moscow’s three-and-a-half-year war against Ukraine, bringing Europe to what Poland’s Prime Minister refers to as the country’s most dangerous moment in decades.
“It’s incomparably more dangerous than before,” Prime Minister Donald Tusk told members of Poland’s parliament. “This situation brings us the closest we have been to open conflict since World War II.”
Many of the 19 drones that crossed into Polish territory early Wednesday were shot down but the incursion was enough to prompt Warsaw to invoke NATO’s Article 4 – in a rare direct military engagement between NATO and Russia – the first since Russia’s 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
The Russian Defense Ministry said it was an accident, and that the drones were never intended to enter Poland. Polish, Ukrainian and other Western officials aren’t buying it, with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte saying that the question of intent doesn’t matter; Russia should be held accountable.
“It is absolutely reckless,” Rutte said. And in a message intended for Russian President Vladimir Putin, he added, “stop violating allied airspace. And know that we stand ready, that we are vigilant and that we will defend every inch of NATO territory.”
The possibility that NATO’s support for Ukraine could lead to military conflict with Russia has been a concern since the early days of the 2022 invasion. When a single stray missile landed on Polish soil in November 2022, killing two farmers, Ukraine blamed Russia. NATO went on high alert and then-President Joe Biden was awakened in the middle of the night to be briefed. In that incident though, an investigation found that the missile was a Ukrainian air-defense missile that had misfired.
As the war dragged on, and Russia seemed unable or unwilling to act on its repeated threats to punish the West for providing aid to Ukraine, experts argued that fears of a conflagration were overblown, and that they had slowed western assistance at precisely the time when Ukraine needed it most.
Wednesday’s drone attack was a game changer. While Russian drones have strayed into Polish territory before – seven in total, in more than three years – experts say this is different. Nearly two dozen drones flew into Poland in a single event, traveling as far as a hundred miles into the country.
The Cipher Brief Threat Conference is tackling global issues with leading national security experts October 19-22. Apply for your seat at the table today.
Poland, along with Lithuania and Ukraine, issued a joint statement condemning the incident as a “deliberate and coordinated attack.” In a video posted on Wednesday, Radoslaw Sikorski, Poland’s Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, said the drones “did not veer off course, but were deliberately targeted.” Former U.S. Ambassador to NATO Kurt Volker agrees.
“There can be no doubt that Russia deliberately sent these drones into Polish territory,” Volker told The Cipher Brief. “They may not have intended to attack anything – they were unarmed after all – but it was a deliberate incursion into NATO territory.”
Volker and others suggested that Moscow may have carried out the incursions in order to test NATO's resolve, collect intelligence, and issue a warning that unless Ukraine surrenders soon, Russia’s war will widen.
“The number of drones that crossed into Polish territory suggest the Russians were probing, trying to watch and see how NATO reacts,” Erin Dumbacher, a Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, told The Cipher Brief.
Daniel Fried, a former U.S. Ambassador to Poland, told The Cipher Brief that Russia’s success in Ukraine “depends on intimidating NATO, which this attack may have intended.”
NATO Supreme Allied Commander for Europe Alexus Grynkewich said that the alliance did not yet know whether the act was intentional. But several experts echoed the point made by Rutte, the alliance’s Secretary General: intentional or accidental, the incursions constituted an act of aggression that should not go unpunished.
“I don’t think intent matters much going forward,” John McLaughlin, a former acting director of the Central Intelligence Agency, told The Cipher Brief. “At this point, the issue is what is NATO capable of agreeing on and what does Russia learn from that. It will be a test of whether the ‘coalition of the willing’ has substance and who is prepared to be in it.”
Fried concurs. “Intent matters, but Russia is responsible in any case and cannot be allowed to hide behind plausible deniability,” he said. “Russia can put out a credible explanation of the error, if it wants its denials to be taken seriously.”
The initial reactions to the Russian barrage have been a mix of condemnation and calls for a NATO response. The UN Security Council is to hold an emergency session in response to the incursion. And NATO says it is investigating whether the Russian drones were deliberately sent into Poland, while planning to bolster its air defense and detection systems.
“If it is proven that this was a deliberate Russian incursion, NATO leaders have to respond diplomatically and militarily in a way that deters Russia from a similar incursion,” Dumbacher and Liana Fix, a Council on Foreign Relations Fellow, wrote on Thursday, outlining a series of steps that NATO might consider.
NATO “could pursue responses with little escalatory potential, such as increasing air patrolling and strengthening air defense on the Eastern flank,” they wrote. “There is also the option of a more robust response, such as supporting a Ukrainian attack on Russian drone production sites. Diplomatically, a joint response can include the ratcheting up of sanctions on Moscow that are already being discussed in Washington and Brussels."
“The next steps should focus on reinforcing deterrence at the border,” Dumbacher told The Cipher Brief. “NATO militaries should work together to demonstrate that Russia will suffer losses if they try the same probing attack or, worse, try to come across the border with higher quantities next time.”
McLaughlin suggests a ramping up of NATO reinforcements to the alliance’s Eastern flank – “and to make clear that they will stay there for the indefinite future. Reinforce air defense across the front and in Ukraine.” He and Volker also suggested the establishment of a no-fly or air-defense zone over Ukraine backed by western resources — an idea that surfaced in the early days of the war but was deemed too likely to lead to a NATO-Russian aerial engagement.
Need a daily dose of reality on national and global security issues? Subscriber to The Cipher Brief’s Nightcap newsletter, delivering expert insights on today’s events – right to your inbox. Sign up for free today.
“NATO should declare an extended air defense zone – for example, shooting down any hostile objects that fly within 200 kilometers of NATO territory,” Volker said. “This would be a direct and proportionate military response to Russia's willingness to threaten NATO populations.”
It might also carry more risk than the Europeans are willing to assume – even now. But several experts stressed that it was time for NATO to act with less concern about the Russian response.
“Russia is the aggressor and has been engaged in sabotage against and inside Europe for over a year,” said Fried, who also argued for imposing an air-defense zone. “Letting concerns over escalation dominate us allows Putin to set the terms of his escalation without concern over our response.”
Putin believes “that he can outlast whatever resolve there is in the West,” McLaughlin said. “A flaccid western response would say to Putin: the road is clear, push on. Some movement of forces, some material commitment, is required.”
How the U.S. responds also matters. Four weeks ago, President Trump welcomed Putin to Alaska, saying after their meeting that while “we didn’t get there (to a deal), we have a very good chance of getting there.” He also said that Putin and Zelensky would meet soon in the pursuit of peace.
But since the Alaska summit, Putin’s forces have dramatically stepped up their attacks on Ukraine, and have also struck an American factory in western Ukraine, two European diplomatic compounds and a key Ukrainian government building in Kyiv.
Ukraine’s Foreign Minister, Andrii Sybiha, said after the drone incursions into Poland that the absence of any real penalties was having an effect. “Putin’s sense of impunity keeps growing,” Sybiha said in a message on X. “He was not properly punished for his previous crimes.”
Even Republican members of Congress are taking that view. “I think Russia is playing – they’re really playing us like a piano right now,” North Carolina Republican Senator Thom Thillis said this week.
After this week’s drone barrage, President Trump spoke with Poland’s President Karol Nawrocki and wrote on social media, “What’s with Russia violating Poland’s airspace with drones?” He closed his post with a cryptic three words: “Here we go!”
Trump has threatened Putin repeatedly in an “or else” fashion but to this point, Putin has reaped the benefits of American engagement without paying a price. No new sanctions, despite repeated threats to impose them, even as the Senate has prepared a bipartisan sanctions bill that would punish Moscow by imposing tariffs on countries importing Russian energy and applying secondary sanctions on firms seen as aiding Russia’s energy sector.
“I hear every week, it’s coming, it’s coming. I just think we ought to stop talking about it,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said after the Russian drones flew into Poland. Other Republican senators – including Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso (R-Wy) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) – support the measure and are pushing President Trump to do the same.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Wednesday that the Poland incursion had boosted momentum in Congress to pass what he called the “bone-crushing” sanctions bill. He described Russia’s actions as “provocative,” and aimed at testing the U.S. and NATO. But he also said he would only bring the bill to the floor once he received a clear signal of support from the president.
“The U.S. needs to develop a realistic and informed understanding of how Russia operates,” McLaughlin said Thursday. “When Steve Witkoff returned from the Alaska meeting saying Russia had agreed to Article 5-like deployments to Ukraine by a European security force, it was obvious that could not have been a serious Russian commitment, or that Witkoff had misunderstood. And Putin must have come away thinking he could do just about anything without provoking the U.S. to serious action.”
McLaughlin added that “realism, consistency, careful negotiation, and backstopping the Europeans seem the minimal requirements to keep future historians from concluding that the administration ‘lost’ Ukraine.”
Last month Trump met with Nawrocki, the newly minted Polish president (whose candidacy Trump supported) and lavished praise on him and pledged to keep American troops in Poland – no matter what Putin said about it. Now Nawrocki and other Polish officials want help in terms of their own defense, and a robust message of deterrence to Putin.
“The U.S. should denounce Russia’s escalation of aggression, increase economic pressure on Russia, increase arms deliveries to Ukraine, and step up military support for NATO’s Eastern front members and for the Coalition of the Willing,” Fried said. “Including by backing their developing plans for a mission in Ukraine.”
Are you Subscribed to The Cipher Brief’s Digital Channel on YouTube? There is no better place to get clear perspectives from deeply experienced national security experts.
Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief because National Security is Everyone’s Business.
