The Current - What Does Russia's Incursion Into Poland Mean for NATO?

Episode Date: September 11, 2025

For the first time since the war in Ukraine began, NATO has shot down Russian drones over its own territory. Nearly 20 drones crossed into Poland, prompting Prime Minister Donald Tusk to warn his country is closer to war than at any time since WW2. Moscow insists it didn't mean to strike Poland, but many experts call the move deliberate and a provocation designed to test the alliance's resolve.

Hugh is a rock climber, a white supremacist, a Jewish neo-Nazi, a spam king, a crypto-billionaire, and then someone killed him. It is truly a mystery. It is truly a case of who done it. Dirtbag Climber, the story of the murder and the many lives of Jesse James. Available now wherever you get your podcasts. This is a CBC podcast. Hello, I'm Matt Galloway, and this is the current podcast. That's Poland's Prime Minister, Donald Tusk, warning that since the Second World War, Poland has never been as close to an open conflict as it is today.

Russian drones crossed into Polish airspace on Wednesday, prompting NATO to scramble fighter jets to intercept those drones. Poland has since been on high alert and has invoked NATO's article 4, Russia says the incursion into Polish airspace was an accident. Christian Leoprecht is a professor at Royal Military College in Queens University. His most recent book is Military Operations in response to domestic emergencies and global pandemics. Christian, good morning. Good morning, Matt. What was your reaction? I mean, people's phones were buzzing with alerts as this.

was unfolding, as I say, NATO scrambling fighter jets, Russian drones in Polish airspace. It sounded alarming from the outside. From your perspective as somebody who studies this, what was your response? Well, it was a continuation of the sort of pattern of hybrid warfare escalation that we've seen from Putin, especially since the beginning of the war of aggression on Ukraine, but especially since the Alaska summit, look, I mean, since the Alaska summit, we've had an attack on a U.S. factory in western Ukraine. We've had the indirect attacks on the British Council and the European Union delegation. Then, of course, we've had the attack on the key Ukraine and government building. So this is simply Putin showing that he can continue to escalate without impunity.

And I think this is part of the reason why Poland is invoking Article 4, because other than harsh worse, there has not been a way to set a limit to Russia pushing the red lines. I want to come back to the NATO response in a moment. But, I mean, huge numbers of drones. are being used in this war in Ukraine. Russia says that this was an accident, that some of its drones ended up in Poland. What do you make of that? Well, so Russia is outproducing Ukraine almost 10 to 1 in terms of drones.

Russia can produce about 170 drones a day currently, and it is deploying those systematically. Look, Russia, going back to the Soviet Union, has long used disinformation, misinformation, in order to advance its causes. Going back to 2015, right, in Syria, you know, humanitarian flights that Russia said were humanitarian flights were in the end military transport, you know, go back to every conflict that the Soviet Union and that Russia has fought.

It has all not just started with disinformation, but been underpinned by information operations. And so there's a clear trajectory here in terms of those drones, the number of drones. It would be impossible to tell whether these are armed. or not. And so you have to consider it an attack, but you can see that NATO is still sort of keeping its powder dry and trying to make sure that it has all the evidence that I expect will see more of that released. It turns out that these drones were not armed, right? Does that matter? Well, it doesn't matter in terms of air defense because you don't know whether those

drones are armed or not. And so you have to assume that these are armed drones. And regardless of whether they are armed or not, this is in terms of provocation unprecedented in the history of NATO against any NATO member country. And this is the reason why Poland has invoked Article 4. What is Article 4? Article 4 allows a member country to bring other countries together for consultations. And so the reason why Article 4 is very important in this case is that Russia has demonstrated it has a very broad escalation ladder where it can impose strategic dilemmas on NATO and NATO member

countries in the land, air, sea, space and aerospace and cyberdorf. domain. And effectively, we kind of call this hybrid warfare. So this is an ability for Poland NATO member countries to escalate because Putin is trying to divide NATO. And so bringing all countries together and having a consensus position in the response to this particular act is a way to counter and escalate Putin's effort to try to undermine NATO. The challenge will be, of course, will we be able to get that sort of consensus in terms of not just a response in terms of words, but in terms of action. Article 4 is not Article 5, and that's important because Article 5 states that an attack on one is an attack on all. Do you think there was any consideration to invoke Article 5?

Look, so this is not a surprise for either Poland or for NATO. This has been rehearsed. This was expected. It's been expected for at least the last three years, but it's been expected, especially in recent days, because Russia is about tomorrow is starting its major annual military exercise this year being held in Belarus. So we expected a provocation, and so all this response has been rehearsed, but the Polish government has made it clear that it considers this perhaps the gravest threat to its existence and sovereignty since World War II and that is prepared to act accordingly. And so the Article 4 is a clear signal that if something of the sort happens, again, Poland may consider involved. Article 5. This matters in part because Article 5 brings people into the war, right? Article 5 is the collective response. Of course, the nature ultimately of that response is something that would need to be cited by the North Atlantic Council, which is the senior political

decision-making body within NATO, but all these elements have been researched. What's interesting here is that Russia decided not to go after one of the smaller Baltic states, for instance Latvia where we have 2,000 soldiers stationed, but went after the largest frontline state that also has the highest military spending, 4.7% of GDP, so the country that is doing everything right in terms of what Donald Trump has been asking NATO members to do. So that's why it'll be particularly interesting to see how the United States reacts. How have NATO members responded to this? I mean, you mentioned the United States, Canada as well.

What's the response been? So we've seen essentially the coordinated response that we would expect, but of course the key question is what Donald Trump's and the United States response here will be. What's interesting from a Canadian perspective is the five key European defense ministers are meeting to coordinate the European response, but Canada is not invited to that meeting. And what's interesting is that Canada increasingly is on its own. Canada stands, was not invited to stand with European leaders at the White House. And so one of the challenges for the current Canadian administration for Canadians is we need to ask ourselves some hard questions, why we increasingly do not have a voice and do not have a say in the most important decision-making when it comes to protecting our values, our interests, and European and transatlantic security. Why are we not at the table? Is this about defense spending? This is about pay to play. If you don't pay, you don't get to play.

And the challenge is it takes a very long time to be uninvited from the table. But once you're uninvited from the table, it takes a very long time to get back in. And this is a reflection by both the United States and by the European Union and European members, that Canada has not been doing the part that they expected to do and that they're moving on without Canada. The challenge for Canada is that that means we no longer have an ability to shape the environment and to assert our interests. We're simply reacting. and it is an indication that while the Prime Minister may want to pivot to Europe, I would say that recent reactions and stance by Europe is not an indication that Canada has made the effort

that it needs to to be taken seriously by our European allies. You mentioned Donald Trump and obviously all eyes are on how the United States response to this. The U.S. President was on his social media site, True Social. And he posted, what's with Russia violating Poland's airspace with drones? And then, here we go with an economic. exclamation mark what does that mean i think this is a quintessential uh approach by the current administration to make sure that ultimately if europe thinks that the ukraine cause is so important europe needs to take the lead that it will not be russia that will be uh using its capabilities

on the escalation ladder to respond to uh that there will be the united states to respond to the Russian provocation, but rather it is looking to Europe to decide what European leaders, what to do in response to this provocation, and that the United States will support European leaders, but the United States will not lead. The predicament for European leaders is that they don't have the capabilities on the escalation ladder that the United States has, but there are capabilities such as cutting, for instance, the railing between Kaliningrad, excliffe, and contiguous Russia, cutting military or civilian air traffic. So there's a number of responses. NATO's disposal that go beyond mere harsh words.

I guess I'm just trying to figure out what Here We Go means from the U.S. President, when Article 4 of the NATO charter has been invoked and one of the NATO members has seen, not just its airspace violated, but fighter jets launched to bring down those drones. And those were, of course, allied fighter jets. And this is an important part of that conversation, which is that Russia is also testing, operationally the response by NATO and NATO member allies. How are they engaging? Russia is learning and is learning quickly. Yes, it's on a steep learning curve. But I think from a U.S. perspective, this sort of suggests perhaps that perhaps in some of the

conversations with European leaders that Donald Trump thinks he told them this was going to happen if Europe wasn't going to take other more specific measures that perhaps have not been disclosed. So I wonder whether that's an indirect signal or shot across the bow to European allies. Just finally, where, if anywhere, does this leave the peace process when it comes to war in Ukraine? Well, look, I think the peace process was always largely delusional that, you know, how can you make peace with someone like Putin who sent no signals about any sort of intent to make peace? And Putin believes that time, resources, and the momentum are ultimately on his side and that allies will inherently tire of supporting Ukraine. This is why it's more important than ever to demonstrate a sustained support for Ukraine

regardless of what the United States does in terms of weapons, in terms of money, and in general political and economic support. And so it'll be interesting to see whether, for instance, the upcoming budget, what commitments our prime minister will make because European leaders have made quite substantial commitments to Ukraine in recent months. Christian, good to speak with you as always. Thank you.

It's been my pleasure. Thank you, Matt. Christian Leiprecht is a professor at Royal Military College in Queens University and author of several books, including military operations in response to domestic emergencies and global pandemics. This has been the current podcast. You can hear our show Monday to Friday on CBC Radio 1 at 8.30 a.m. at all time zones. You can also listen online at cbc.ca.ca slash the current or on the CBC Listen app

or wherever you get your podcasts. My name is Matt Galloway. Thanks for listening. For more CBC podcasts, go to cBC.ca.ca slash podcasts.