Did NATO pass the Russian drone test?

With the dust now settled on Putin’s drone incursion into Poland, it’s time to ask: what was the Russian leader hoping to achieve, and did he get it?

The Kremlin has denied any role, and its client state Belarus blames jamming devices. But none of that gels with the facts around this (likely unarmed) incursion, including its sheer…

• Number (~20 drones)
• Duration (several hours)
• Depth (hundreds of kilometres into Poland), and
• Trajectory (five seemed headed to a NATO base that supports Ukraine).

Rather, the facts suggest Putin was testing a) Poland’s unity, b) NATO’s defences, c) NATO’s will, and d) America’s commitment. So… did the free world pass the test?

1. 🇵🇱 A test for Poland

Why test Poland? First, most Western support for Ukraine’s self-defence enters via Poland. And second, Poland has long borders with Belarus and Russia’s Kaliningrad exclave, offering a bit of plausible deniability (“chill, just a border error”).

But third, Putin might’ve hoped to exacerbate divisions between Poland’s pro-NATO PM (Tusk) and its more wary president (Nawrocki), and curb its support for Ukraine’s defence.

So… did Poland pass the test? Sure — for all their disagreements, Tusk and Nawrocki have basically fallen in lockstep since Wednesday, condemning it all as a Putin provocation.

2. 🚀 A test for NATO’s defences

On any given day, Putin floods Ukraine with hundreds of drones. So how did NATO handle ~20?

There are folks declaring NATO passed with flying colours: the alliance scrambled Polish and Dutch jets, German-run Patriots, and Italian surveillance aircraft. But that’s a lot of cash and tech to shoot down maybe five of the drones, each costing less than a used Camry.

So sure, the alliance might high-five itself for the kit, emergency response, and interoperability it displayed. But Putin might see the same set of facts and — in addition to pinpointing each Patriot — conclude NATO just tried blowing out a birthday candle with a firehose. That’s not sustainable.

3. 🌐 A test for NATO’s will

Poland immediately called for NATO’s eighth-ever Article 4 talks (not the more famous ‘attack on one is an attack on all’ Article 5). And those talks happened within hours, producing declarations of solidarity, denunciations of Russia, and pledges for more help.

But even Poland’s decision to trigger Article 4 is interesting for Putin as he calibrates where NATO’s lines are — the alliance still prefers consultations over confrontation.

4. 🇺🇸 A test for the US

For all Europe’s rhetoric and ramp-up, NATO still fundamentally relies on American airlift, intel, and nukes. The alliance has also traditionally relied on US leadership.

But while the US ambassador to NATO quickly tweeted US determination to defend every inch of NATO territory, we’re not sure this is the social media account Putin was watching.

Rather, the Kremlin will have been more interested in the response from the one guy who decides whether or not the US honours its commitments to its allies: the US president. And after another 12 or so hours, President Trump eventually offered this answer:

• “What’s with Russia violating Poland’s airspace with drones? Here we go!”

When asked for clarification yesterday (Thursday), the US president suggested the drone incursions could’ve been a mistake, but insisted either way he wasn’t happy.

Intrigue’s Take

Through his campaign of subterfuge, sabotage, and espionage, Putin is stress-testing the world’s most powerful defensive alliance, both to impose costs for getting in his way, but also to gauge the bloc’s limits for whatever he’s got planned next.

So, our report card for this week? Poland gets a pass, but the rest is debatable at best.

Ultimately, however, the real test here isn’t in the punchiness or timeliness of any NATO condemnation, but rather the effectiveness of any NATO adaptation that comes next.

First, there’s the operational adaptation to modern drone warfare, and the key here is realistically Ukraine itself: President Zelensky is already offering to share the lessons his country has had to learn the hard way.

But second, there’s also the political adaptation to a Putin who, since invading Georgia in 2008 or Crimea in 2014 or broader Ukraine in 2022, seemingly just interprets any hesitation or half-measure as yet another invitation to go in harder.

Sound even smarter:

• There’s an emergency UN Security Council session set for today (Friday), though Putin (as a permanent member) enjoys veto power there.