Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania are reportedly preparing for the mass evacuation of their populations in the event of a potential Russian “attack” in the Baltic region.
(upd) Europe and NATO appear to be engaging in a dangerous game with unpredictable consequences, with Russia as the immediate target.
Western decisions increasingly move in the very direction they claim to want to avoid: a military confrontation with nuclear-armed Russia.
The European Parliament, through a recent resolution, has laid the legal and operational groundwork for intercepting and “neutralising” Russian fighter jets and drones. Meanwhile, NATO is conducting exercises simulating nuclear scenarios and is developing unified rules for when and how its pilots can open fire on Russian forces.
What appears on paper as a defensive measure is, in practice, shrinking the margin to avoid conflict: any “violation” could, through a simple legal interpretation, become a casus belli.
War-driven irrationality is intensifying, and there is no one to stop it.
A stark example is the Baltic states’ plan for mass civilian evacuations in the event of a Russian attack.
The new European and Atlantic rhetoric does not reduce the threat – on the contrary, it makes it more immediate and more dangerous.
Everything is heading in the wrong direction.
Moves intended to strengthen security risk becoming a catalyst for uncontrolled escalation with Russia, and the skies above Europe could become the stage where this is decided.
European Parliament Decision
The European Parliament’s decision to permit the shooting down of Russian aircraft and drones within EU airspace, combined with the strong rhetoric from Brussels, highlights the dangerous dynamics developing in the region.
When representatives from the leading democratic, cultured, and peace-oriented states gather, for some inexplicable reason, instead of addressing truly urgent issues (such as population decline or economic challenges), they produce a Russophobic document every time.
This time, the document has broken records—not only in the degree of Russophobia—but also in its complete disregard for basic instincts, including the instinct for survival.
Interception order
The European Parliament, by an overwhelming majority, approved a resolution calling on EU member states to intercept and force the landing of Russian aircraft and drones allegedly violating EU airspace, as well as permitting the use of force against Russian aircraft.
“The European Parliament promotes every initiative that allows the EU and its member states to take coordinated, unified, and proportionate action against any airspace violations, including neutralising aerial threats.”
While the resolution is technically a set of “recommendations,” its approval is no accident. It represents a deliberate move with long-term consequences.
“Mr. Trump, the Russians are attacking you”
To understand why this resolution was approved, one need only look at European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s statement before the European Parliament session.
She said: “Russia has launched a targeted campaign in the ‘grey zone,’ including airspace violations, sabotage, and cyberattacks, which will intensify if we do not confront the Kremlin.”
The message is clear: Mr. Trump, Russia is actively attacking NATO—and, by extension, indirectly, the United States.
They are attacking you, listen carefully.
The push for U.S. involvement
The aim seems to be to draw the U.S. fully into a conflict.
However, prior warnings have already lost their impact. To fully involve Trump, a larger, more horrific and bloody incident is needed—and groundwork is being prepared.
Incidents first highlighted included Russian drone activity in Poland and Romania, quickly followed by allegations that Russian fighter jets violated Estonian airspace.
This approach failed.
Trump reportedly responded dismissively, noting that it “could simply have been a mistake.”
The legal rationale
Next came the report by Michael Schmidt, Professor of International Law at the University of Reading, titled: “Legal Bases for Responding to Russian Violations of NATO Airspace.”
The professor laid out a precise logical chain:
- Russia’s actions are clearly illegal, violating everything from the United Nations Charter to the European Convention on Human Rights.
- Violation of NATO and EU member states’ airspace by aircraft or drones constitutes a “threat of force.”
- A threat of force is equivalent to the use of force, even if there is no evidence of hostile intent or actual damage.
- Use of force constitutes an “armed attack”—meaning all prior incidents are legally considered armed attacks.
Absurd escalation
The argument continues with an alarming line of reasoning: “Whether Russia intended to launch an attack—under conditions where Russian aggression against NATO states, particularly the Baltic countries, has become highly likely—it is fair that the country wielding weapons (Russia) must bear the risk of mistakes or misinterpretation of the situation.”
In other words, any potential incident, even if caused by an unarmed aircraft or minor provocations, will automatically be interpreted against Russia, considered an armed attack, and provide a legal basis to neutralize Russian aircraft.
“Mr. Trump, the law is entirely on your side—you can act with maximum force!”
100% Casus Belli
In an extraordinary coincidence, Reuters has supported this line of reasoning, analyzing the legal basis for invoking Articles 4 and 5 of the NATO Charter.
Recall that after mysterious drone incidents, Denmark invoked Article 4, which allowed only discussions within the Atlantic Council about potential measures—thus, it had no real effect.
Legal analysts at Reuters point out that Article 5 states: “An armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against all members of the Alliance.”
Since airspace violations are now treated as “armed attacks,” any Russian drone or aircraft accidentally entering NATO territory is automatically casus belli.
Preparations for provocation
Reuters notes: “Article 5 has been applied only once—as a response to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, when the U.S. was attacked with hijacked aircraft in New York and Washington.”
This means the Allies’ ultimate option is always a massive, bloody response from which the U.S. cannot remain neutral.
For instance, last Monday, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) reported: “According to British plans, a group of Russian ‘traitors’ fighting alongside Ukrainian forces was to attack a Ukrainian Navy vessel or a foreign political ship in a European port.
After the ‘terrorists’ are discovered, it would be announced that they acted on Moscow’s orders.”
Devious plans
The provocation was reportedly prevented, but there is no doubt that the current European Parliament resolution, combined with British intelligence plans, forms a chain of events designed to draw the U.S. into a major war with Russia.
This development signals a new round of escalation, after which a Russian response—sooner or later—may follow.
NATO rules for engagement and air combat
At the same time, NATO is also in a… war-ready posture.
A report by the Spanish newspaper El Mundo claims that NATO is already working on unifying the action plans of its member states in the event of an airspace incursion.
"The goal is for the pilot to feel more confident before firing," a diplomatic source told the newspaper.
"There have been cases where pilots were ready to open fire on a drone, but the protocol of the country over which it was flying did not allow it or was unclear."
In this context, the newspaper reports that NATO wants to harmonize the relevant protocols of its member states, particularly those closest to Russia.
The regulation stipulates that the rules of the country whose airspace is violated must be followed.
"These are decisions that must be made quickly, and there is no time to review instructions," the source said.
"There must be a clear and coordinated protocol."
It is expected that the issue of unifying action plans will be discussed at the upcoming NATO Defense Ministers meeting next week in Brussels.
Nuclear exercises too
Additionally, NATO is preparing a nuclear weapons simulation during its annual Steadfast Noon military exercises on October 13.
Steadfast Noon are NATO’s annual nuclear deterrence exercises, during which personnel and air forces are trained without the use of actual weapons.
"I am at the Volkel base in the Netherlands.
This base participates in NATO’s Steadfast Noon exercises, which will begin on October 13," said NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, noting that aircraft from across the Alliance will participate, but no real nuclear weapons will be used.
"We must conduct these exercises to ensure that our nuclear deterrent capability remains as reliable, safe, and effective as possible.
Then, to send a clear message to potential adversaries: we have the will and capability to protect all allies against any threat," the Secretary-General added.
Storm over the Baltic Sea
Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania are preparing for the mass evacuation of their populations in the event of a potential Russian “attack” on the Baltic region.
According to Reuters, “concerned about Russia’s massive military spending, the three Baltic states are developing extreme contingency plans, anticipating the relocation of hundreds of thousands of people if Russian forces increase or an attack occurs.”
The report emphasizes that Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania have long expressed concerns to other NATO member states regarding potential “Russian aggression.”
At the same time, it reminds readers that Russian authorities have repeatedly stated they do not intend to attack Europe.
Where exactly “hundreds of thousands” of citizens could be relocated in the event of a potential escalation of tensions between Russia and Europe is not specified.
Putin’s consistent message
Russia categorically denies any aggressive intent. On October 2, Russian President Vladimir Putin responded to a statement claiming Russia could attack NATO during his participation in the Valdai International Forum:
"Government elites and united Europe continue to spread hysteria: they say that war with the Russians is almost at our doorstep.
They repeat this nonsense, this mantra, over and over.
Sometimes I look at what they are saying and I wonder, they cannot really believe that Russia intends to attack NATO — it is impossible to believe, yet they convince their people," Putin said.
www.bankingnews.gr
Western decisions increasingly move in the very direction they claim to want to avoid: a military confrontation with nuclear-armed Russia.
The European Parliament, through a recent resolution, has laid the legal and operational groundwork for intercepting and “neutralising” Russian fighter jets and drones. Meanwhile, NATO is conducting exercises simulating nuclear scenarios and is developing unified rules for when and how its pilots can open fire on Russian forces.
What appears on paper as a defensive measure is, in practice, shrinking the margin to avoid conflict: any “violation” could, through a simple legal interpretation, become a casus belli.
War-driven irrationality is intensifying, and there is no one to stop it.
A stark example is the Baltic states’ plan for mass civilian evacuations in the event of a Russian attack.
The new European and Atlantic rhetoric does not reduce the threat – on the contrary, it makes it more immediate and more dangerous.
Everything is heading in the wrong direction.
Moves intended to strengthen security risk becoming a catalyst for uncontrolled escalation with Russia, and the skies above Europe could become the stage where this is decided.
European Parliament Decision
The European Parliament’s decision to permit the shooting down of Russian aircraft and drones within EU airspace, combined with the strong rhetoric from Brussels, highlights the dangerous dynamics developing in the region.
When representatives from the leading democratic, cultured, and peace-oriented states gather, for some inexplicable reason, instead of addressing truly urgent issues (such as population decline or economic challenges), they produce a Russophobic document every time.
This time, the document has broken records—not only in the degree of Russophobia—but also in its complete disregard for basic instincts, including the instinct for survival.
Interception order
The European Parliament, by an overwhelming majority, approved a resolution calling on EU member states to intercept and force the landing of Russian aircraft and drones allegedly violating EU airspace, as well as permitting the use of force against Russian aircraft.
“The European Parliament promotes every initiative that allows the EU and its member states to take coordinated, unified, and proportionate action against any airspace violations, including neutralising aerial threats.”
While the resolution is technically a set of “recommendations,” its approval is no accident. It represents a deliberate move with long-term consequences.
“Mr. Trump, the Russians are attacking you”
To understand why this resolution was approved, one need only look at European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s statement before the European Parliament session.
She said: “Russia has launched a targeted campaign in the ‘grey zone,’ including airspace violations, sabotage, and cyberattacks, which will intensify if we do not confront the Kremlin.”
The message is clear: Mr. Trump, Russia is actively attacking NATO—and, by extension, indirectly, the United States.
They are attacking you, listen carefully.
The push for U.S. involvement
The aim seems to be to draw the U.S. fully into a conflict.
However, prior warnings have already lost their impact. To fully involve Trump, a larger, more horrific and bloody incident is needed—and groundwork is being prepared.
Incidents first highlighted included Russian drone activity in Poland and Romania, quickly followed by allegations that Russian fighter jets violated Estonian airspace.
This approach failed.
Trump reportedly responded dismissively, noting that it “could simply have been a mistake.”
The legal rationale
Next came the report by Michael Schmidt, Professor of International Law at the University of Reading, titled: “Legal Bases for Responding to Russian Violations of NATO Airspace.”
The professor laid out a precise logical chain:
- Russia’s actions are clearly illegal, violating everything from the United Nations Charter to the European Convention on Human Rights.
- Violation of NATO and EU member states’ airspace by aircraft or drones constitutes a “threat of force.”
- A threat of force is equivalent to the use of force, even if there is no evidence of hostile intent or actual damage.
- Use of force constitutes an “armed attack”—meaning all prior incidents are legally considered armed attacks.
Absurd escalation
The argument continues with an alarming line of reasoning: “Whether Russia intended to launch an attack—under conditions where Russian aggression against NATO states, particularly the Baltic countries, has become highly likely—it is fair that the country wielding weapons (Russia) must bear the risk of mistakes or misinterpretation of the situation.”
In other words, any potential incident, even if caused by an unarmed aircraft or minor provocations, will automatically be interpreted against Russia, considered an armed attack, and provide a legal basis to neutralize Russian aircraft.
“Mr. Trump, the law is entirely on your side—you can act with maximum force!”
100% Casus Belli
In an extraordinary coincidence, Reuters has supported this line of reasoning, analyzing the legal basis for invoking Articles 4 and 5 of the NATO Charter.
Recall that after mysterious drone incidents, Denmark invoked Article 4, which allowed only discussions within the Atlantic Council about potential measures—thus, it had no real effect.
Legal analysts at Reuters point out that Article 5 states: “An armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against all members of the Alliance.”
Since airspace violations are now treated as “armed attacks,” any Russian drone or aircraft accidentally entering NATO territory is automatically casus belli.
Preparations for provocation
Reuters notes: “Article 5 has been applied only once—as a response to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, when the U.S. was attacked with hijacked aircraft in New York and Washington.”
This means the Allies’ ultimate option is always a massive, bloody response from which the U.S. cannot remain neutral.
For instance, last Monday, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) reported: “According to British plans, a group of Russian ‘traitors’ fighting alongside Ukrainian forces was to attack a Ukrainian Navy vessel or a foreign political ship in a European port.
After the ‘terrorists’ are discovered, it would be announced that they acted on Moscow’s orders.”
Devious plans
The provocation was reportedly prevented, but there is no doubt that the current European Parliament resolution, combined with British intelligence plans, forms a chain of events designed to draw the U.S. into a major war with Russia.
This development signals a new round of escalation, after which a Russian response—sooner or later—may follow.
NATO rules for engagement and air combat
At the same time, NATO is also in a… war-ready posture.
A report by the Spanish newspaper El Mundo claims that NATO is already working on unifying the action plans of its member states in the event of an airspace incursion.
"The goal is for the pilot to feel more confident before firing," a diplomatic source told the newspaper.
"There have been cases where pilots were ready to open fire on a drone, but the protocol of the country over which it was flying did not allow it or was unclear."
In this context, the newspaper reports that NATO wants to harmonize the relevant protocols of its member states, particularly those closest to Russia.
The regulation stipulates that the rules of the country whose airspace is violated must be followed.
"These are decisions that must be made quickly, and there is no time to review instructions," the source said.
"There must be a clear and coordinated protocol."
It is expected that the issue of unifying action plans will be discussed at the upcoming NATO Defense Ministers meeting next week in Brussels.
Nuclear exercises too
Additionally, NATO is preparing a nuclear weapons simulation during its annual Steadfast Noon military exercises on October 13.
Steadfast Noon are NATO’s annual nuclear deterrence exercises, during which personnel and air forces are trained without the use of actual weapons.
"I am at the Volkel base in the Netherlands.
This base participates in NATO’s Steadfast Noon exercises, which will begin on October 13," said NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, noting that aircraft from across the Alliance will participate, but no real nuclear weapons will be used.
"We must conduct these exercises to ensure that our nuclear deterrent capability remains as reliable, safe, and effective as possible.
Then, to send a clear message to potential adversaries: we have the will and capability to protect all allies against any threat," the Secretary-General added.
Storm over the Baltic Sea
Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania are preparing for the mass evacuation of their populations in the event of a potential Russian “attack” on the Baltic region.
According to Reuters, “concerned about Russia’s massive military spending, the three Baltic states are developing extreme contingency plans, anticipating the relocation of hundreds of thousands of people if Russian forces increase or an attack occurs.”
The report emphasizes that Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania have long expressed concerns to other NATO member states regarding potential “Russian aggression.”
At the same time, it reminds readers that Russian authorities have repeatedly stated they do not intend to attack Europe.
Where exactly “hundreds of thousands” of citizens could be relocated in the event of a potential escalation of tensions between Russia and Europe is not specified.
Putin’s consistent message
Russia categorically denies any aggressive intent. On October 2, Russian President Vladimir Putin responded to a statement claiming Russia could attack NATO during his participation in the Valdai International Forum:
"Government elites and united Europe continue to spread hysteria: they say that war with the Russians is almost at our doorstep.
They repeat this nonsense, this mantra, over and over.
Sometimes I look at what they are saying and I wonder, they cannot really believe that Russia intends to attack NATO — it is impossible to believe, yet they convince their people," Putin said.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών