By Matt Underwood 
NATO does not treat the drone incident over Poland as a Russian attack, source says, and that’s pretty much what we’d expect, isn’t it? It seems like everyone saw this coming. The general consensus is that Putin’s testing the waters, seeing how far he can go, and right now, the answer seems to be quite far. It’s a careful balancing act, and many worry about the consequences of inaction. It feels like we’re watching another piece of the puzzle fall away.
Where do we draw the line? We’ve seen spies, saboteurs, and now even drones hitting European territory, yet there doesn’t seem to be a clear escalation strategy. There’s a sense of “can kicking,” as if the issues in Ukraine are destined to spread further into the Baltics and Eastern Europe. The argument is that Putin only responds to strength, and that, historically, appeasement hasn’t worked. We’re told that Moscow has been preparing for potential actions against Poland, even using SIM cards to test cellular networks, as reported by a specific publication. This publication suggests that the goal was to gather intelligence on Polish air defenses, particularly leading up to a major military exercise.
The point is raised: if Poland hypothetically sent loaded drones over Russian airspace, would Russia simply dismiss it? Some suggest NATO’s response to a similar incident in Croatia was also underwhelming. There’s a feeling that a more significant response won’t come until there are human casualties, or possibly not even then unless the scale of an event is massive. It all boils down to the old saying: “it depends.” Lines are fluid, influenced by politics, relationships, and cost-benefit analyses. A minor incident, like a few French army units accidentally wandering into Germany, would likely be laughed off, not treated as a full-blown invasion.
The consensus is that it’s not worth pressing Article 5 over a single drone. If Poland wanted to invoke it, that would require serious discussions with Moscow, with any action taken only after any diplomatic efforts have failed. The overall view is a fear of appeasement, and concerns that this will only invite further aggression. The general sentiment is that Putin needs to be addressed directly with strength, as he operates by pushing boundaries and testing responses. The use of the Salisbury nerve agent and the response afterward highlights the mindset at play, where denial, destabilization, and normalization are the name of the game.
The fear is that if nothing is done, the probes will go deeper, with largely symbolic responses from the EU. There’s a feeling that the EU needs to find ways to confront Russia without military force but that the question is, how long will this go on for? Some feel it’s up to Poland to make the call, not NATO. However, even a small action should lead to a proper response, for example NATO airplanes shooting down anything approaching the border. Some argue this situation is the same as children teasing each other. We know what’s happening, and we should stop it now. The feeling that Putin is being treated as a victim seems to be widespread. He’s laughing while the West seems to be unwilling to act.
The counterargument to calls for action suggests that this is a situation we may not fully understand, with a potential for a “sleep-fucked drone dispatcher” simply making a mistake. They also suggest that even if it was a deliberate test, the drones were shot down, and that the response should be proportional. The sentiment is that we don’t need to expand the war, and that those eager for conflict should join the Ukrainian Foreign Legion. The overall sense is that those who are speaking haven’t fully understand the situation.
There’s also the belief that if the situation doesn’t stop soon, it could invite an attack on Poland’s land through the Ukraine. The ideal action from NATO would be to draw a line at a set distance from its territory, treating any munitions fired within that distance as a threat, and responding accordingly. Some feel that NATO should sign a deal with Ukraine to set up air defenses within Ukraine’s borders.
The main fear is that enough incidents could blur the line between an attack on Ukraine and an attack on NATO. The fear is that NATO is showing itself to be ineffective. Some see this as similar to historical examples, such as Hitler before World War II. There’s a feeling that neighboring states will eventually be forced to act without NATO’s authority if the aggression continues. It seems like the general feeling is that those that are willing to act in response to Russia need to be stronger, rather than issuing statements of support.
One suggestion is a tit-for-tat approach, perhaps by dropping a drone or two near St. Petersburg, giving Russia a warning, and increasing the number of drones if they retaliate. Some would say the current response is just like ignoring a bully. Many express frustration with the situation, fearing that it could lead to further escalation. The hope is that this situation will be resolved peacefully, but the fears of war still exists. The sentiment seems to be, that Putin wants to drag NATO into a war hoping to have a scapegoat for Russia’s failing economy.