Russian-made or Russia-linked drones that crossed into Polish airspace on the night of Sept. 10 have prompted renewed debate about how NATO and the United States should respond to low‑level but provocative acts that fall short of full-scale war.
In an opinion column, Dalibor Rohac, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, characterized the incursions as an attack on NATO territory and said they were intended to test and discredit the alliance. Rohac wrote that the scale and timing of the incursions — which followed a high‑profile visit to Washington by Poland’s newly elected president, Karol Nawrocki, a week earlier — made any claim of plausible deniability "unusually thin."
Rohac said NATO officials were caught off guard and pointed to the alliance’s decision to scramble F‑35 jets in response, arguing that deploying multi‑hundred‑million dollar aircraft to intercept inexpensive drones is not a sustainable defense strategy. He also cited open‑source reporting suggesting that at least some of the drones that crossed into Poland crashed rather than being intercepted.
The column rejected a purely rhetorical response from Western governments. Rohac urged a range of measures he said would raise the cost to Moscow while remaining below the threshold of open warfare. His recommendations included tightening and expanding economic sanctions — including targeting purchasers of Russian fossil fuels — seizing frozen Russian sovereign assets held in Western financial systems, and increasing lethal and intelligence support to Ukraine so it can strike deeper into Russian territory.
Rohac also proposed more aggressive covert and cyber measures, such as offensive cyber operations, sabotage, measures to cause blackouts, and information operations intended to sow discord within Russia. He argued that a disproportionate but calibrated mix of responses would be necessary to deter further probes of NATO’s will and prevent a steady escalation that could threaten Eastern European members.
The opinion piece framed the incursions as part of a broader Russian strategy to escalate in ways that remain short of conventional war, saying the Kremlin’s advantage lies in conducting repeated, low‑intensity actions that test Western resolve. Rohac warned that if Western leaders respond with only expressions of concern and solidarity, Moscow could draw the conclusion that NATO is ineffective and continue to press against neighboring states, possibly targeting the Baltic countries in the future.
Rohac also singled out the United States and President Donald Trump, writing that the American response would be watched closely around the world and arguing that allowing the Kremlin to "humiliate" the U.S. would carry both strategic and political costs.
The column did not present new operational details from NATO or Polish military sources. It attributed assessments about the incident, the alliance’s response, and the identity of the drones to the author’s analysis and to open‑source reporting. NATO and Polish officials have issued public statements in past incidents asserting that violations of allied airspace are taken seriously; those statements were not republished in Rohac’s piece.
Analysts and officials will be monitoring whether the episode prompts changes in NATO’s air‑defense posture in Eastern Europe, including investments in more cost‑effective systems to counter unmanned aerial systems, changes in rules of engagement for interceptions near allied territory, and escalations in economic and covert pressure on Moscow.
The incident underscores an ongoing challenge for NATO members: balancing deterrence and escalation management in confrontations with a near‑peer power that has repeatedly demonstrated the capacity to act below the threshold of declared war. Commentators argue the policy choices made in response could shape the security environment in Europe for years to come.
Rohac’s recommendations reflect one strand of opinion among Western analysts advocating a harder line on Russia that blends conventional support for Ukraine with expanded economic pressure and covert action. Other analysts and policymakers favor more restrained, legally grounded measures and continued diplomatic engagement to reduce the risk of miscalculation.
Poland, as the NATO member whose airspace was breached, has called for clarity on the circumstances of the incursions and for concrete steps from allies to strengthen regional defenses. How NATO responds, and whether it adopts new measures beyond statements of solidarity, will be closely watched in capitals across Europe and by Moscow.
The episode follows a string of cross‑border incidents since the start of the Russia‑Ukraine war and comes at a time of heightened concern about the alliance’s ability to deter hybrid and unconventional threats. Debate over the appropriate mix of deterrence, defense spending, sanctions, and covert measures is likely to continue as Western governments weigh the risks of escalation against the imperative of preventing further incursions into allied territory.