• NATO
• Russia
• Europe
• Ukraine

September 10, 2025, 12:33 PM View Comments ()

Last night, Russia invaded NATO. Any other description is an obfuscation. At least 19 Russian drones, some launched from Belarus (Moscow’s close ally), flew into Poland. NATO scrambled jets and activated air defenses. Dutch F-35s and Polish F-16s shot down at least three of the uncrewed aircraft. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said that military conflict was “closer than at any time since the Second World War.” Warsaw then invoked NATO’s Article 4, which can be used when the “territorial integrity, political independence or security” of a member state is “threatened.” The alliance will now enter into collective consultations to devise a response. This is one step shy of activating Article 5, NATO’s mutual defense clause.

It is worth pointing out that, for years now, Europe has already been confronting a series of unexplained and unattributed attacks: bombs on rail lines or in packages inside planes, arson attacks at warehouses filled with military equipment for Ukraine, potentially catastrophic jamming of GPS signals. These, by the way, are only the physical manifestations of so-called gray zone warfare, actions that harass an enemy without crossing the line into open combat. In addition to these and other acts of subversion, Moscow has also kept up an unceasing torrent of disinformation, propaganda, and attempts to suborn European politicians. On Sept. 7, it should be noted, Russia launched its biggest air attack of the war on Ukrainian civilian targets, killing at least four people.

Now come the drones. In shades of Soviet practice, Moscow has so far denied responsibility for the incident. Further down the road, the Russians will undoubtedly claim that any drones that did cross the border did so by mistake, perhaps even alleging that the problem was the result of NATO jamming, thereby putting the onus back on the West. They may even offer some sort of watered-down apology. Don’t buy any of it. A drone swarm of this size is not an accident. Russian President Vladimir Putin, undoubtedly encouraged by U.S. President Donald Trump’s overly accommodating welcome for him in Alaska last month, is trying to test the alliance’s resolve. To date, that resolve has been wanting. The fact that NATO had to resort to ultra-expensive fighter planes to shoot down cheap Russian drones attests to a serious state of unpreparedness. On X, one commentator likened NATO negligence in the face of the Russian threat to “dangling meat in front of a tiger.”

The way ahead for NATO is clear. Its members should immediately provide Ukraine with long-range strike weapons that can hit targets deep inside Russia. That would cause Putin real pain and dramatize the costs of escalating his war. NATO should also move to dramatically upgrade its own defenses along its eastern border—perhaps by setting up its own version of a “drone wall,” a drone fleet that can respond quickly to threats from land or air. Shooting down drones in Russian or Belarusian airspace, though, would probably be a step too far.

The governments of NATO countries should act as well. The United States Senate can take the lead by passing the tough sanctions package proposed by Sens. Lindsey Graham and Richard Blumenthal, which allows Trump to impose secondary tariffs and sanctions on countries that continue to purchase Russia’s natural resources. (Some critics say that the bill is too weak, since it leaves implementation up to Trump—but passing it would still send a vital signal.) And most importantly of all, the United States and its European allies should finally move to seize the roughly $300 billion worth of Russian assets frozen in Western banks—and send that money to Ukraine. Russia’s economy is already under tremendous strain, and giving the Ukrainians a huge infusion of cash would make it far harder for Putin and his minions to continue the war.

The lesson here should be clear enough: Accommodating dictators—as Trump did by inviting Putin to Alaska without getting anything in return—usually ends badly. Encouraging an aggressor results in more aggression. NATO and the West should respond decisively.