At the UN in New York, Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov declared that NATO and the EU have “already declared a real war” on Russia—his most explicit attempt yet to flip Moscow’s invasion into a defensive narrative and pre-justify retaliation when the West enforces its borders.
Hours later, the allied message hardened. NATO’s leadership publicly affirmed that members can target Russian aircraft or drones that enter allied airspace “when necessary,” making clear that escorts are not the only option when incursions look deliberate or threatening. It’s deterrence, out loud.
Behind the scenes, European diplomats also delivered a private warning in Moscow: further violations could be met with shoot-downs. That raised the stakes—and prompted a counter-threat from Russian officials that such a response could mean “war.”
This isn’t theory. It’s been a month of tests, drones, and brinkmanship on NATO’s eastern flank:
Estonia: Three Russian military jets reportedly violated Estonian airspace for roughly 12 minutes—“unprecedentedly brazen,” Tallinn said—triggering Article 4 consultations and a flurry of allied coordination. Moscow denied it. The point still landed: NATO’s red lines are being probed.
Baltic–Polish corridor: Repeated drone incursions pushed Lithuania to authorize the army to shoot down violating UAVs; Poland says it’s already intercepted some drones. Allies are moving ROE and cheaper interceptors into place because you can’t fire million-dollar missiles at $30k drones forever.
More eyes overhead: Turkey deployed an AWACS to Lithuania, expanding NATO’s airborne command-and-control net as incidents stack up across Estonia, Denmark, and Poland. It’s a visible indicator that the next violation might not end with a polite escort.
The Kremlin’s rhetorical gambit—“we’re already at war”—meets a clearer allied proposition: violate our sovereign airspace and you may be engaged. That’s where deterrence is supposed to live: at the edge of certainty.
Moscow is telegraphing a price tag for Western enforcement. A Russian diplomat warned that a NATO shoot-down could mean “war.” That’s the pressure tactic in one sentence: treat violations as cost-free—or face escalation framed as self-defense.
Read that carefully. It’s not a promise of Armageddon; it’s a political threat designed to deter NATO from defending NATO’s own airspace. It’s also a test of allied public opinion. Calling it “war” before the fact helps Moscow launder the next escalation as inevitable.
This week’s bravado rests on logistics. Russia can run a high-tempo war of attrition—and keep daring NATO—because DPRK shells and troops, Iranian drones/missiles, and Chinese dual-use inputs refill Moscow’s magazines and factories.
North Korea: North Korean ammunition shipments—measured in thousands of containers and millions of 122/152mm shells—have stabilized Russia’s artillery tempo and offset domestic production gaps. Not to mention the 25k NK troops occupying Ukraine.
Iran: Russia’s long-range strikes now lean heavily on Shahed-series one-way attack drones and follow-on variants. Tracking shows near-daily Shahed use across 2025 and deepening cooperation on missiles and UAV tech.
China: Beijing denies lethal aid, but dual-use flows—machine tools, semiconductors, engines, UAV components—and technical collaboration with sanctioned Russian arms makers have strengthened Russia’s industrial base. Analysts estimate billions in “high-priority” dual-use exports this year alone. Not to mention the 4-6k CCP troops fighting with Russia in Donbas.
Moscow’s “let us do whatever we want—or else” posture only holds if the supply lines hold. For now, they do.
Add one more piece: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has abruptly summoned hundreds of generals and admirals to a base in northern Virginia—extraordinary in both size and timing. No detailed agenda is public; the consensus takeaway is urgency.
What could this be? Three plausible reads that all intersect with the airspace crisis:
Rules-of-engagement & comms sync: If a NATO member shoots down a Russian aircraft or drone and debris falls on populated territory, you want everyone on the same legal, strategic, and messaging page in the first hour—not the third day.
Command-structure tightening: A gray-zone air campaign across the Baltics demands faster ISR-to-engage handoffs; that can mean reshuffling authorities and standing alerts.
Narrative discipline: When “war” rhetoric is flying, leaks and freelancing can move markets and missiles. A mass brief signals unity of message before the next incident.
There’s going to be a purge, and Heegseth plans to gut the Army/Navy of their leadership ahead of a “different” Conflict
Whatever the mix, corralling the flag corps underscores how quickly a border incursion can become a crisis of minutes.
Moscow’s aim: Normalize violations and recast Western self-defense as aggression. Say “we’re already at war” so enforcing airspace looks like escalation, not law.
Allied aim: Re-establish deterrence by stating the consequence—up to and including kinetic defense—while quietly thickening ISR and air-defense layers.
Logistics reality: DPRK shells, Iranian drones/missiles, and Chinese dual-use inputs keep Russia’s options open—and its rhetoric loud.
U.S. posture: A Quantico all-hands is how you pre-wire the chain of command for the day a Russian aircraft doesn’t turn back.
Sept 10: Lithuania warns the alliance to take drone incursions seriously.
Sept 19–20: Estonia reports a 12-minute violation by three Russian jets; Article 4 consultations follow; Moscow denies.
Sept 23: Lithuania authorizes shoot-downs of drones violating its airspace; Poland highlights recent interceptions.
Sept 23: Trump publicly says NATO countries should shoot down Russian aircraft that violate their airspace.
Sept 22–25: Turkey sends AWACS to Lithuania as assurance measures amid rising violations.
Sept 25 (AM): Lavrov at the UN says NATO/EU are waging a “real war” on Russia.
Sept 25 (PM): European officials privately warn the Kremlin they’re ready to shoot down violating jets; a Russian rejoinder claims such a response could mean “war.”
Sept 25 (PM): NATO leadership publicly underscores that allies can target intruders “when necessary.”
Sept 25 (PM): Hegseth summons hundreds of generals/admirals to Virginia for an urgent in-person meeting.
First shoot-down risk: Another deliberate drone/fighter probe over the Baltics or Poland—paired with an immediate disinformation blitz about “NATO aggression.”
Supply-line sanctions: Expanded U.S./EU penalties on Chinese dual-use exporters enabling Russia’s war industries.
Deconfliction hotlines: Whether Moscow tests “search-and-rescue” pretexts after an incident—an easy way to intrude again under a humanitarian flag.
Lavrov’s “we’re already at war” line isn’t analysis; it’s pretext management. NATO’s answer is calibrated and crystal: Your jets and drones do not get a free pass over allied territory. The danger is the gap between rhetoric and reaction time—measured in minutes, not days—while Russia’s magazines are kept full by DPRK shells, Iranian drones and missiles, and Chinese dual-use tech. And in Virginia, an all-hands summons says Washington wants one voice and one playbook before the next radar track becomes the next crisis.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.