Testing NATO’s Limits?

During the night of September 9th and 10th, nearly two dozen Russian drones entered Polish airspace, causing NATO to scramble fighter jets. As the dust settled and NATO officials began to consider the consequences of Russia’s attack, it quickly became clear that NATO as an alliance was not remotely prepared for such Russian belligerence.

An unfortunate truism since the beginning of Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022 is that while many of NATO’s eastern partners understand Russia’s larger intentions in Europe, larger members like the United States, Germany, and France have played down the threat. Either through living under Soviet occupation, as in the case of the three Baltic states, or having a long and fraught history with Russia, like Poland, these countries have little doubt as to Russia’s desire to push the envelope as far as it can – to test NATO’s boundaries and see just how “unified” the alliance is.

Russia’s September “attack” (as it should be considered) was by far not a one-off event. In the last three years, numerous drones have flown into Poland, the Baltic countries, and Romania – all NATO members – as well as Moldova. Again, on September 19th, three Russian fighter jets flew into Estonian airspace for over 12 minutes, reaching the capital city of Tallinn and forcing NATO to once again scramble its jets. In doing so again and again, Russia is not only testing NATO’s boundaries, but it’s also highlighting a systemic weakness in the alliance.

NATO is not a unified alliance. It is made up of dozens of countries with very different priorities, determined by geopolitical considerations. For those countries that have dealt with Russian (and Belarusian) belligerence over the last years, the threat is indeed real. For others, such as Spain and Portugal, which are much farther away and rarely experience any of the daily challenges, the risk of war, and therefore the idea of supporting their partners closer to the war, is just further away.

The lack of unity among NATO members is further compounded by the alliance’s biggest player, the United States, under the complicated leadership of President Donald Trump. Trump has again and again called the alliance into question, at times considering leaving while at others refusing to defend countries that do not pay up — at least 2% of the countries’ GDP. While these threats may have been effective in increasing defence spending among NATO members, it has also demonstrated to Russia that some countries of the alliance are not necessarily ready to fight for the others. This messaging carries unprecedented risk for NATO’s individual members, especially those on its Eastern flank.

Admittedly, Poland’s decision on September 10th to invoke Article Four of the North Atlantic treaty – calling for consultations after its territorial integrity was infringed upon – was a necessary move to demonstrate that the alliance still has teeth. Estonia has reportedly done the same following the Russian incursion into its airspace. However, NATO’s demonstration of power ends there. Instead, a number of leaders have called the attack into question altogether, such as President Donald Trump, who claimed the drone incursion into Poland “could have been a mistake”. There has been no unified response, and all the while, many NATO countries have sought to play down the event and wait to assess Trump’s next move. They will be waiting a long time.

While a hard and lethal response to Russia would be incredibly unwise and carry numerous risks, the lack of any response portends longer-term damage to the alliance. Russia-Belarusian war games practicing an attack on NATO’s eastern flank in September, combined with these two incursions into NATO within 10 days, are not a coincidence – and definitely not a mistake. Russia is testing NATO’s limits to see what it can get away with. Time and time again, Moscow has shown it is not afraid to bomb entire cities and kill dozens of civilians to achieve its goals in Ukraine. While this is unlikely to take place in a NATO country in the near future, the Kremlin is likely considering other, less drastic measures for the near future, such as increasing acts of sabotage against western military production – especially those that supply Ukraine with the weapons it needs to survive – and critical infrastructure in order to take revenge for what it sees as a western conspiracy against Russian aspirations and greatness.

The potential consequences for NATO will be dire should the alliance be unable to dig its head out of the sand and rally. In his newly published book, If Russia Wins, German political scientist Carlo Masala highlights a scenario in which Russia makes a small but meaningful armed incursion into the eastern city of Narva, a predominantly Russian-speaking city, with little to no protest from NATO members. While the book was a thought exercise in the most worrisome of proportions, the idea poses a real question: will the United States, England, Portugal, Canada, Greece, etc., send their soldiers to protect a town in eastern Estonia? Would they do the same for northern Finland? If the answer is “no,” and members of the alliance refuse to fight shoulder to shoulder against any and all attacks on individual members, then the most important question will arise: what is left of NATO?

This is precisely what Russia is testing. There is little reason to believe that Russia is planning a large-scale war against Berlin, Amsterdam and Paris. However, Russia needs far less to achieve its goals. It only needs to demonstrate to the world – and to itself – that the greatest military alliance in history is no more. And if it can do that, then there is little stopping it from doing whatever it wants in the future.

Ultimately, NATO can no longer afford the luxury of hesitation or internal division. Each incursion, whether by drones, fighter jets, or covert sabotage, is a calculated test by Moscow to measure the alliance’s resolve. The longer NATO sits on its thumbs, the bolder Russia will become, and the more fragile the credibility of the alliance will appear. Now is the moment for NATO to get serious, reaffirm its unity, and prepare for the challenges ahead – before it’s too late and the damage is irreparable.

Joshua R. Kroeker is an independent researcher, founder of the boutique analytic firm Reaktion Group. He holds degrees from the University of British Columbia in Canada, Heidelberg University in Germany and St Petersburg State University, Russia.

New Eastern Europe is a reader supported publication. Please support us and help us reach our goal of $10,000! We are nearly there. Donate by clicking on the button below.

Article 5, drones, NATO, Russia, Ukraine, War