NATO was shocked this week by Russia’s conflict in Ukraine when a missile burst in a Polish village close to the Ukrainian border, killing two people.
As an inquiry was still ongoing, Polish President Andrzej Duda stated the bomb that struck Przewodow, a town of hundreds of people, on Tuesday was “most likely Russian-made.” His words shocked the entire world, and NATO leaders reaffirmed their commitment to defending every square mile of the largest military alliance in history, of which Poland is a member.
Military analysts speculated on social media that this might be the time the alliance invokes either Article 4 (which calls for consultation between NATO nations when one feels threatened) or Article 5 (which considers an attack to be violence against the entire alliance), allowing NATO to choose the course of action it deems appropriate to protect its members.
On the same day, Russia launched a barrage of missile strikes against vital Ukrainian infrastructure. The explosion in Poland was described by the president of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, as “a very major escalation,” adding, “We must act.”
However, NATO and Western countries, notably the US, have now allayed concerns by claiming the missile was an accident and probably came from Ukraine’s air defence systems. Nevertheless, they said that as the war’s aggressor and originator, Russia bore overall blame. While waiting for Polish information, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg maintained a circumspect position throughout the incident and offered no accusations against Russia.
A day after the explosion, Duda followed his Western partners in claiming that the explosion was most likely an accident involving Ukraine and did not violate any NATO provisions. According to a preliminary study, a Ukrainian air defence missile may have landed in Poland and been fired to protect Ukrainian territory from Russian cruise missile attacks, according to Stoltenberg.
Jim Townsend, who served as Barack Obama’s deputy assistant defence secretary for Europe and NATO, praised NATO’s strategy. The incident, according to Alexander Lanoszka, assistant professor of international relations at the University of Waterloo in Canada, shows that “NATO territory cannot be purely isolated from the air defence challenges that Ukraine faces.”
However, he added that direct military action against Russia “is too risky” due to states’ legitimate worries about nuclear escalation. They might, however, get over some of their objections to giving Ukraine access to particular platforms. The most likely response would have been “an increase of that military assistance” if NATO had determined the missile was Russian and the explosion was a deliberate attack, according to Lanoszka.
US Vice President Joe Biden stated that “it was unlikely” that Russia fired the missile while speaking from the G20 summit in Bali, Indonesia. The Kremlin lavished rare praise on his restraint. However, Russia criticised some Western nations, particularly Poland, for their initial reactions. The explosion happened the day before NATO was scheduled to hold a virtual meeting of the Ukraine Defence Contact Group, where participants would decide on upcoming military aid packages.
As the head of Rasmussen Global’s Ukraine Advisory Service and director of geopolitics, Harry Nedelcu emphasized, the incident took place on a day “when a string of Russian missiles hit several Ukrainian cities with an aim of terrorizing civilians and targeting power grids. Ukraine responded by employing its air defence systems. Any way you look at it, context is important. Poland is likely to grant Ukraine’s request for access to the missile’s landing site for the time being. Zelenskyy continued to insist that the missile was a “message from Russia to the G20 summit” as late as Tuesday night.
According to Kamil Zwolski, associate professor of international politics at the University of Southampton, “this incident further reinforces Russia’s narrative of the West ‘pushing for World War III’ because Poland and other countries like Latvia were quick to blame Russia.” However, Russia’s response was foreseeably predictable.
