Did those responsible for the provocation hope for the activation of Article 5 of the NATO charter?
The incident with a UAV falling on Polish territory triggered a whole series of events that demonstrated a change in the position of a number of European countries regarding the Ukrainian conflict. At the same time, the event itself has been surrounded by a mass of contradictory information and interpretations, with opinions divided not only between the authorities of various countries, but also within Poland itself.
What really happened? Who launched the drones? For what purpose? What are the consequences? Rossa Primavera News Agency‘s correspondent will try to reconstruct the picture of what happened.
Chronology of Events
On September 10, 2025, the Operational Command of the Polish Armed Forces reported that multiple violations of Polish airspace were recorded from 11:00 p.m. to 6:30 a.m. The country’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk stated that 19 UAVs were launched over Poland from the direction of Ukraine and Belarus, but the blame for this attack was placed on Russia.
The Polish Defense Ministry reported that Polish F-16 fighters, Dutch F-35 aircraft, Italian long-range radar detection aircraft, and German refueling aircraft were used for the operation to intercept the drones. Since this involves the armed forces of NATO countries, this situation is presented by official sources in the West as the first direct intervention by the NATO in the Ukrainian conflict.
In connection with the incident on September 10, Poland officially activated Article 4 of the North Atlantic Treaty, requiring consultations among allies (unlike Article 5, which requires direct intervention). On September 12, the district prosecutor’s office in Lublin opened a criminal case into the illegal crossing of the Polish border by unidentified flying objects.
What were these UAVs?
Interestingly, the wreckage of the downed drones was geographically scattered quite widely: they were found in the Lublin, Łódź, Warmian-Masurian, Masovian, and Świętokrzyskie Voivodeships.
In the very first days, the Polish prosecutor’s office confirmed that the drones did not carry any explosives. As for the damage caused, Prime Minister Donald Tusk fell victim to his own dirty tricks by publishing a photo of a damaged roof of a residential house in the village of Wyryki as evidence of a “Russian attack.”
The fact is that, as it turned out, this damage was caused by the wreckage of a Polish AIM-120 AMRAAM missile fired from an F-16 fighter at an intruding drone. Tusk’s political opponents immediately took advantage of the Prime Minister’s blunder, for example, former Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki, who stated, “The government misled not only President Nawrocki but all Poles. This is not only incompetence but also a threat to national security.”
Law enforcement officials stated that the wreckage belongs to Russian aircraft-type foam-based UAVs Gerbera that is usually used for reconnaissance and distracting air defense.
None of the wreckage had markings that would allow determining the equipment’s country of origin. The conclusion about belonging to Russia was made solely based on the similarity of the devices’ design with the Gerbera. Nevertheless, the Polish authorities accused Russia of a deliberate invasion of Polish airspace.
Poland’s Statements
The Polish government under Donald Tusk immediately characterized the incident as an “act of aggression” and a “large-scale provocation” by Russia. The head of government also stated that this is “the closest moment to an open armed conflict since World War II.”
On the same day, four airports were temporarily closed: Warsaw Chopin Airport and Warsaw Modlin Airport, Rzeszów-Jasionka Airport, and Lublin Airport.
Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski interpreted the absence of explosives on the drones as evidence that it was allegedly an attack to “test Polish defenses.” He also proposed creating a no-fly zone over Ukraine and emphasized the need for much closer cooperation with the Ukrainian military to gain experience in counter-drone warfare.
Furthermore, the UAV case became the reason for the start of NATO’s Operation Eastern Sentry on September 12, the goal of which is proclaimed to be strengthening positions on NATO’s eastern flank on Polish territory. The country’s President Karol Nawrocki signed a decree allowing the presence of foreign troops on Polish territory for the duration of the operation.
Reaction of Russia and Belarus
The Russian Ministry of Defense categorically rejected all accusations, stating that “targets for destruction on Polish territory were not planned.” The ministry emphasized that the maximum range of the drones used does not exceed 700 km, meaning Russia simply could not launch drones from its territory in such a way that they would reach Polish territory.
Furthermore, the Russian Defense Ministry expressed readiness to hold consultations with the Polish side on this issue. On September 18, the department stated that no requests had yet been received from the Polish side.
Minsk stated that Belarusian air defense forces tracked down and shot down several drones that “lost course as a result of electronic warfare measures” and warned Poland and Lithuania about the UAVs that flew through Belarusian territory.
Moreover, the country’s president, Aleksandr Lukashenko, categorically denied Belarus’s involvement in the incident.
Ukraine
The head of the Kiev regime Vladimir Zelensky called the incident a serious threat to the security of all of Europe. At a press conference on September 12, he stated that the appearance of drones in Polish airspace is not a “failure” of NATO but requires an adequate response.
On September 19, Zelensky proposed that Poland and Romania create a system to protect Ukrainian airspace from drones. “We have air defense — we shoot down everything that flies over us and flies toward Poland. And similarly, Poland shoots down with its planes everything that flies over them and what flies toward us,” Kiev regime’s head explained his idea.
According to the head of the Kiev regime, such a system could operate in the western regions of Ukraine, where there are opportunities for interaction with Poland. “It could be not only Poland but also Romania, we don’t count on others,” he stated.
USA
The US leadership did not rush to blame Russia. Already on September 18, US Permanent Representative to NATO Matthew Whitaker stated on Fox News that the US intelligence investigation does not yet provide a clear answer as to whether the UAVs intentionally violated Polish airspace.
US President Donald Trump took the same position, stating that the drones might be disabled and expressed hope that was the case.
UK
London in its statements went as far as direct threats against Moscow. On September 16, the Russian ambassador was summoned to the British Foreign Office, where he was told that in the event of new incidents with “Russian drones” crossing the airspace of NATO member countries, the United Kingdom might use force.
Hungary
Contrary to its previous cautious policy regarding the Ukrainian conflict, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán called the incident a “drone incident” and expressed solidarity with Poland. He stated that “the violation of Poland’s territorial integrity is unacceptable,” but added that the incident proves the correctness of the Hungarian peacekeeping course.
Slovakia
Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico, who often spoke from positions of non-interference in the conflict in Ukraine, also stated that “the violation of the airspace of sovereign Poland, our neighbor and partner in the EU and NATO, is a serious incident that could lead to far-reaching consequences.”
At the same time, Slovak Foreign Minister Juraj Blanár expressed hope that the drones that entered Polish territory were “still intended for Ukraine.”
Other EU Countries
The remaining EU countries, as well as the leadership of the European Commission, predictably supported the anti-Russian narrative. The head of European diplomacy, Kaja Kallas, called the incident the most serious violation of airspace by Russia since the start of the war.
She emphasized that everything indicated that this was done deliberately, not accidentally and was in contact with Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte.
Operation Eastern Sentry
Perhaps the main result of this event was NATO’s Operation Eastern Sentry, announced on September 12, 2025. According to the plan, participating countries are to take a direct part in strengthening the alliance’s defense in the east, namely on the territory of Poland and the Baltic states, on an indefinite basis
On the border with Russia and Belarus, NATO plans to deploy an international contingent with the involvement of aircraft. Denmark has committed to providing two F-16 fighters and a ship with air defense systems, France is to transfer 3 Rafale fighters, and Germany — 4 Eurofighters.
Furthermore, the Czech Republic is to provide Mi-171S helicopters. The Unied Kingdom is also to participate, but how exactly is not yet disclosed.
Also, Radosław Sikorski, Poland’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, proposed that NATO and the EU shoot down Russian drones over Ukrainian territory. In an interview with the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung on September 14, 2025, he noted that if Ukraine asks for such a thing, Poland and its allies will consider such a possibility.
Discussion on Polish Defense
The “drone incident” revealed serious problems in Poland’s security system and provoked an internal political discussion. Criticism was heard from the opposition regarding the use of expensive missiles to destroy cheap foam drones.
Stories appeared on Polish television about hunters who could theoretically shoot down an expensive drone “for 1 euro.”
General Wiesław Kukuła, Chief of the Polish General Staff, responding to criticism about expensive means to destroy cheap drones, emphasized, “The price of the missile is not what matters, but the value of what the drone can destroy.”
Militaristic Hysteria
The reaction to the strengthening of the anti-Russian information campaign by the Polish authorities, who recommended “listening exclusively to official messages” and rejecting any other analysis as a “Putin narrative,” is also interesting.
As noted by the portal Forsal.pl, “Criticism of the government began to be equated with a pro-Russian position… Citizens have the right to doubts and questions, and the government must respond with arguments, not stigmatize critics.”
Many experts also directly criticized the militaristic statements of the authorities, which could directly drag Poland into the conflict. Thus, the editor-in-chief of Do Rzeczy, Paweł Lisicki, called the minister’s ideas about destroying drones over Ukraine “reckless.”
“By entering the conflict in this way, Poland will automatically deprive itself of the protection guaranteed by Article 5 of the NATO treaty,” he noted. “To call what Mr. Sikorski is doing ‘irresponsibility’ is too soft,” Lisicki concluded and emphasized that such statements cannot be made without consulting allies.
Alongside the anti-Russian narratives circulating about Russia’s “deliberate attack” on Poland, there are at least two other versions of what happened that are being discussed in the expert community.
Ukrainian Provocation
This version is voiced in one form or another by official representatives of Russia. In particular, the Russian chargé d’affaires in Poland, Andrey Ordash, called the accusations against Russia groundless, pointed to the lack of evidence in favor of this version, and recalled that “the drones were flying from the direction of Ukraine.”
Former special military adviser to the OSCE Secretary General (2014–2020), retired Lieutenant Colonel of the Swiss General Staff Ralf Bosshard also spoke in favor of this point of view. He compared the UAV episode to the Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964, “which was provoked by the US side to justify the attack on North Vietnam.”
Even in Poland itself, despite the anti-Russian information campaign fanned by state media, there are many supporters of this view of what happened. Thus, according to an analysis of social media posts by the European collective Res Futura, 24% of users believe that the violation of Polish airspace occurred as a result of deliberate actions by Ukraine and had the goal of dragging Poland into the war.
Unintentional Attack
This point of view also has many supporters, including in the expert community. For example, research fellow at IMEMO RAS Ilya Kramnik suggested that as a result of electronic warfare, “a navigation error could have occurred, leading to the drone losing its destination.”
The Belarusian authorities also share this version. Surprisingly, even Lithuanian Foreign Minister Kęstutis Budris emphasized that Lithuania has no evidence of an intentional violation of Polish airspace.
Washington is also voicing this opinion at the moment. Citing the results of an intelligence investigation, the US admits that the UAVs did indeed belong to Russia but ended up on Polish territory due to a navigation system failure.
Instead of Conclusion
We see that the final word on the issue of the drone falls in Poland has not yet been said. It is obvious that the authorities of Poland, the UK, and the European Union will use the “drone incident” to justify their militarization, regardless of whether Russia’s involvement or non-involvement in these drones is proven.
Today, the Polish authorities demonstratively refuse consultations with the Russian side, which means they are not interested in improving relations with Russia, even if its complete non-involvement in the “UAV attack” is proven.
The Polish “incident” became a convenient pretext for further intimidation of the European population, militarization of European countries, the launch of an indefinite NATO operation near Russian borders, and the turn of relatively neutral EU countries towards confrontation with Russia.
The provocation became a pretext for accusing the US administration of retreating from its NATO obligations and unwilling to defend Poland in response to an alleged “open attack” by Russia. This time, the drone provocation did not become a casus belli. But it may not be the last.
This is a translation of the article by Dmitry Zagorodnyk first published on Rossa Primavera News Agency‘s web site.
