12.09.2025

On September 7, Russia launched its largest missile and drone attack against Ukraine since the war. On September 10, tensions with the West escalated when multiple Russian drones flew into Poland , effectively invading NATO airspace, signaling a new level of Russian aggression. After remaining largely silent on Ukraine for weeks following his summit with U.S. President Donald Trump, Russian dictator Putin has been increasingly vocal about the issue during and after his visit to China. His comments, along with the escalation of Russian airstrikes, appeared to be a fresh attempt to show that Russia is not going to accept any ceasefire and intends to dictate the terms of the war’s end. In this context, the incursion of Russian drones into NATO airspace appears to be a possible reminder that Moscow is ready for increased confrontation with the Alliance.

Overall, Vladimir Putin must be very pleased with the results of the NATO air defense review. And, experts warn, he will likely be ready to go further next time. It also showed how unprepared Europe is for the kind of massive air attack that Russia is unleashing on Ukraine almost every night.

Former US Army Commander in Europe Ben Hodges points out that “Moscow has probably realized that we still haven’t learned the lessons from what Ukraine has faced for years, and now they are at our doorstep.”

NATO has acknowledged that its air defense system on its eastern flank is one of its weakest points and needs urgent investment. And this in the fourth year of a full-scale war in the middle of Europe. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said today that “we need to invest more… so that we have what we need to deter and defend.”

Another factor that the Russian raid on Poland has revealed is what is really going on between the US and NATO? The invasion of Russian drones into Poland requires a US response, which cannot afford to be indifferent. Can it? So far, the US leader’s response has been disappointing. But Putin seems unconcerned about Trump’s reaction, although the US president regularly expresses concern about his actions. Putin has agreed neither to a ceasefire nor to a meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky – Trump demanded both – and has not borne any real responsibility for his defiance. And what did we get from the American leader: “very dissatisfied”, “angry” or “disappointed”. The more such comments accumulate, the more the American president becomes a reflection of his own helplessness and inaction. It seems that Trump has never considered the main thing: Vladimir Putin does not want the war to end, because he thinks he can win it by taking advantage of the exhaustion of Ukraine and the West.

Even Trump’s favorite NYP could not stand it anymore: “The Russian escalation has only one goal: to demonstrate the futility and ineffectiveness of NATO. If the Kremlin succeeds in achieving this goal, a new wave of aggression will follow against Poland and other countries in Eastern Europe, including, probably, the seizure of one or more of the Baltic states. This attack is also a personal affront to President Trump, whose further actions will be closely watched both in the United States and around the world. Allowing the Russian leader to humiliate himself again is not just bad, but terrible policy.”

Well, dictator Putin has brought closer the moment when the world will find out whether the US will remain true to its commitment to defend its allies after the Russian drone attack on Poland, or whether the world will learn about the real crisis of the Alliance that they tried to postpone.

Oleh Shamshur, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Ukraine to the USA and France, shared his thoughts on these and other issues in an exclusive interview with OBOZ.UA.

– A massive attack by Russian drones on the territory of Poland. This is the first time that a NATO country has been hit like this. How much of a test is this for the Alliance? And is NATO reacting as it should? Because it seems that the Kremlin is testing the waters, and it could get even worse. Is Putin warning that they are in danger if they implement their plans to deploy troops in Ukraine, and is Putin making it clear to Trump that he will not compromise on his basic demands, even if he declares that Russia is still ready for a deal?

– The event did not come as a surprise – this was warned about a long time ago, it was only a question of time. And now it happened. It is impossible to qualify it otherwise than as a deliberate act of aggression. Putin continues his usual tactics – to check where the line of what is permissible is drawn. He always calibrates his actions according to one principle: what else can be done with impunity. When he saw that no one gave a systematic response to the regular flights of drones and missiles into the territory of Poland or Romania, this was the incentive to go further. And later we received a massive attack. The next step could be a “random excursion” of his troops to a border village – and this is an escalation in a growing manner. And all this is possible only if NATO again does not respond adequately. Because the previous incidents remained virtually without a reaction.

At the same time, the current response, to be honest, is also very far from adequate. At first, a decisive position sounded, but the longer the consultations lasted, the more flexible it became. And it was no longer about Article 5. Although, in my opinion, there are every reason to apply it here. Poland appealed regarding Article 4 – these are consultations and coordination of actions in response to a security threat. But, frankly, apart from loud statements and the standard participation of NATO forces in shooting down drones, we have not seen anything significant. And this is exactly what Putin interprets as weakness. Because he sees not determination, but the creation of space for himself for even more radical steps. And if you look at this logic – yes, now almost everyone in NATO is repeating the mantra that in 3-5 years, maybe even earlier, a major war with Russia will become a reality.

– It seems that after such a reaction, this scenario could happen sooner?

– Exactly. But it is strange that no one is talking about a simple thing: this can be avoided. This requires political will – to inflict a military defeat on Russia on the territory of Ukraine. All the tools for this have long been known and discussed. The problem is that the West only discusses, while Putin fights and does it effectively.

– NATO has recognized that the air defense system on the eastern flank is one of its weak points and requires urgent investment. Somehow, all this looks strange in the fourth year of the full-scale war in Ukraine. Yes, they shot down these drones. But with what? F-35 and a missile worth hundreds of thousands of dollars against “Geraniums” worth 10 thousand dollars each. And the second point: if Article 5 was discussed, then in a whisper and so that no one would hear. Only Article 4 was activated, which looks like “the last Chinese warning”. What does this give?

– Yes, Article 5, so to speak, was whispered in expert discussions. And they admitted: there are formal grounds for its application. But it was not heard at the political level.

Article 4 – consultations, recognition of the threat, preparation for a possible response. But in this case, we are not talking about a threat, but about a direct act of aggression. And here a problem arises: such a sluggish reaction by NATO only undermines trust in both articles – both 4 and 5. After all, everyone already knows that Article 5 is not automatic. Will collective defense really work? In practice, it happened only once – after September 11. And that case was very specific. Now, the weak reaction only strengthens doubts about the effectiveness of Article 5. And this is the main negative result of this “incident” – although let’s call a spade a spade – it is an act of Russian aggression.

The worst thing is this: if NATO is really preparing for a big war with Russia, as they constantly claim, then such inertia only reveals their incompetence. Europe has finally woken up and decided to prepare. But preparing is not about talking, but about acting. And yet we still see critically little action. And the example of Poland only emphasizes the problem. Yes, in Ukraine we are used to volunteering, patching holes, criticizing the authorities for weak production. But, unfortunately, we see the same helplessness in NATO countries, which should set an example of organization and efficiency.

– Regarding further actions. Poland immediately appealed to its allies with a request to provide additional air defense systems. Ukraine has long been appealing to NATO, the US and European countries with the same requests – and not only about air defense. The issue of closing the sky was raised from the very beginning of the full-scale war, it was even considered within the framework of the “coalition of the willing”. In your opinion, can this attack on Poland be an incentive for making a decision? The Ukrainians say: we can shoot down these drones on their approach so that they do not even reach the Polish border. That is – help us close the sky over Ukraine. Will NATO still limit itself to strengthening Polish air defense, but the sky over Ukraine will continue to remain open?

– I would like this attack to be a turning point – for the partners to finally move from correct statements to real actions. Because it is clear to anyone: closing the sky is exactly the decision that can turn the situation around not only on the front, but also in the war as a whole.

If we talk about the so-called guarantees that are currently being discussed, I see three things that can really change the course of events. First, this large-scale “pumping” of the Armed Forces of Ukraine with weapons and resources – not a point, but an exponential one, when it comes to a qualitative leap. For this, by the way, it is necessary that the Trump mechanism, even in its current form, works without interruption. Second – closing the sky. Third – protecting Ukraine’s maritime borders and ensuring freedom of navigation. But the second and third points are impossible without the partners’ readiness to engage in direct forceful confrontation with Russia. Because all this talk about “closed skies” or “freedom of the seas” is worthless if there is no military determination behind it. Let’s call a spade a spade: without the readiness to strike back, these are just diplomatic exercises. I would like us to eventually come to this.

But what we see yesterday and today, unfortunately, does not add even cautious optimism. And in vain. Because the potential for synergy is obvious: we have experience, technology, trained people; if this is combined with NATO resources – not in words, but in deeds – the situation in the air could change radically. We see what the Russian attacks of recent weeks on Kyiv and other cities are leading to: society is on the verge of exhaustion, nervous and physical. And this is not only a military argument, but also a socio-political one. Putin must be stopped both on the ground and in the sky.

– In this context, the incursion of Russian drones into Polish airspace looks like a possible message from the Kremlin that it is ready for increased confrontation with NATO. Is Putin demonstrating confidence?

– Absolutely. He feels extremely confident. The scare of 2022 has long passed. And since 2023, we have been observing an increasingly capable Russian army. It is no longer worth laughing at it and drawing caricatures – it is a serious force, and it must be fought with appropriate means: real strategy, tactics, weapons.

Yes, there is an element of adventurism and autocratic irrationality in his actions – this is typical of dictators. But he really has confidence. Remember, in 2022 the general consensus was: Putin will not engage in provocations against NATO countries. And now – this is no longer a hypothesis, but a completely realistic scenario.

– Why does he feel so confident? Only because the Russian army has strengthened? Are there other factors? After all, it is worth mentioning both Trump’s actions and his multi-day visit to China. After all, it was after Beijing that the most massive attack on Ukraine took place, and now we have an attack on a NATO country. Can we say that Xi Jinping actually gave Putin an indulgence to destabilize Europe?

– Everything is clear with Trump. Putin sees that his strategy of “playing the long game” with the US is working. He is counting on Trump’s indecision, his desire to “communicate as a partner”, to delay sanctions or to abandon them altogether. For the Kremlin, this is the perfect backdrop.

As for China, I don’t think that behind closed doors they said: “Come on, beat NATO.” China is playing at respectability. But practical agreements have undoubtedly reassured Putin and strengthened his confidence. This includes political support, diplomatic cover, and military-technical assistance – through the supply of elements for the Russian military-industrial complex and circumvention of sanctions. Plus, the purchase of energy resources. So Putin left Beijing satisfied. And the symbolism was transparent: he and the North Korean leader stood next to Xi at the parade. It was a message: China relies on this camp. It is enough to recall the statement of the Chinese Foreign Ministry: “China cannot allow Russia to be defeated.” For Beijing, this is strategic, and there are no random words in their mouths. So, China has been and will remain an ally of Russia. And this is precisely what gives Putin the confidence that we are observing now.

– Do you remember this favorite Chinese cliché – that they are against the expansion of military operations? It was in every one of their plans: first ten Chinese proposals, then a joint Brazilian-Chinese initiative – and everywhere this mantra was heard: China is against the expansion of the war. But now, when we have an attack on Poland, how much more? It turns out that China, in fact, is not against, but even for the expansion of the war in Europe.

– Here we need to separate rhetoric from real politics. Rhetoric is when China always tries to look respectable: they say, against the backdrop of unpredictability, impulsiveness and outright bullying from Trump, we are a force for stability, predictability, we are for rules and international law. Well, for the public it sounds like it, although in reality it looks ridiculous. But this is the picture the Chinese paint.

At the same time, it is absolutely clear: there will be Russian support, and that is why I said at the very beginning that China is interested in continuing the war. Because a prolonged war means that the US is distracted, Europe is mired in crisis, and the Chinese themselves have space for more active actions in their own region – the Asia-Pacific. This gives them free rein in the seas that they consider their own, and allows them to simultaneously promote propaganda: they say, real stability is rallying not around Washington or Brussels, but around Beijing. That is, no matter how you look at it, China will benefit from continuing the war. And if it sees an end, it will only be on Russian terms. Because Beijing does not even theoretically allow Moscow to be defeated – this is their strategic consensus.

– American and European media unanimously write: the invasion of Russian drones into Poland requires a US response. Otherwise, it will be the collapse of NATO. Washington cannot afford to remain silent. At the same time, Putin seems to no longer care about Trump’s reaction: he refused him both a meeting with Zelensky and the idea of ​​a ceasefire. But what do we see from Trump himself? First, silence, then some nervous tweets, and then an official comment: “What’s with the violation of Russian airspace in Poland? Let’s go!”. That’s the entire response of the US president. Yes, he will meet with Polish President Nawrotski, but you must admit – it looks strange. Moreover, his favorite newspaper, the New York Post, writes that this is a personal humiliation for the US president. And if there is no tough reaction, it will only get worse.

– Yes, and here, surprisingly, I completely agree with the New York Post. This is an actual humiliation. Not even a slap, but a spit in the face. If you look at the entire chain of events – unfulfilled promises, a disrupted meeting, a refusal to cease fire, and now an attack on a NATO country – it looks like a systemic humiliation of the American president. And Trump’s reaction here is not accidental. It fits into his established logic: to the last not to see Putin as an enemy, to talk to him as a “partner”, to hope for a “reformatting of relations”, and most importantly – to dream of using Russia against China. It seems that all this does not work, but this idea lives in Trump’s head. As we know, he always presents any defeat as his strategy.

There is only one question: will he have even a shred of strategic thinking in his head? Will he realize how dangerous Putin’s behavior is for the US, how synchronized it is with China? Because after Beijing, after all the joint statements, after the pictures where Xi and Putin are sitting next to Kim Jong-un, only a person who wants to deceive himself can have doubts about who is an ally of Moscow and who is a secondary partner. In psychiatry, there is even a term for this: when a person blocks the perception of reality because it does not meet his expectations. He wants to see the world differently than it is. Trump is exactly such a case. He and his entourage are building concepts in their heads that have nothing to do with reality. And this is dangerous – both for the US and even more so for Ukraine, which is fighting Russian aggression.

– If we take NATO, Mr. Olezh, then this is the beginning of the end of the Alliance, if the Americans do not give at least some adequate response. Of course, no one will expect strikes on Russian facilities, but at least political statements, appeals, symbolic steps – from the US side. If even this does not happen, then yes, this is the beginning of the end. And the final nail in the coffin will be after the capture of Estonia.

– Well, as they say: hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. Although, frankly speaking, I have almost no doubts anymore – we will not see an adequate reaction from either the US or NATO. There will be some reaction, of course, but it is purely for show. The only truly adequate reaction would be to destroy those launch points and complexes from which drones were launched over Poland. If this happened – yes, it would be a real response.

The worst thing is the other: we see the acceleration of NATO’s erosion, the growth of contradictions, the decline in effectiveness. And this strikes at the very heart of the Alliance – the realism of Article 5 is questioned. And the entire structure of NATO rests on it. So, the situation is critically dangerous for both NATO and us. Because for Ukraine, even though we have been put on pause, NATO still remains the main ally.

– Actually, Putin got a bunch of answers for himself with this attack. If before he only guessed, now he has confirmation.

– What’s more, I think the result even exceeded his expectations. It’s like Trump’s first conversation with Putin: Trump actually gave him more than the Kremlin dared to hope for.

– After this attack on Poland, judging by the American media, the conversation about Russia and sanctions in Congress has become tougher. Of course, no one has “exploded” there, but the atmosphere is changing. Is there a chance that they will go on their own, without Trump, and Congress can adopt sanctions decisions independently of the president.

– Everything will depend on how events unfold in the near future. Trump’s control over Congress is quite tight. The Republican majority is obedient, because he has virtually no internal opponents – and this is a paradox in the current conditions.

Regarding sanctions: yes, Congress can pass tough bills. We have been hearing about the Blumenthal-Graham package for a long time, even about the return of the Jackson-Vanik amendment. But the key issue is one: implementation. In any bill, even the most radical one, there is still presidential prerogative. Without the president’s consent, no tough sanctions will really work. And we see that Trump’s will is a constant postponement “for later”. And now the situation is becoming frankly scandalous for him. Because the line has already been crossed: a little more – and even loyal allies will begin to call his behavior not just weakness, but frankly shameful.

https://war.obozrevatel.com/ukr/pid-udarom-buv-naftonalivnij-port-droni-atakuvali-leningradsku-oblast-stalas-pozhezha-video.htm