EXPERT INTERVIEW – Polish President Karol Nawrocki signed a classified decree over the weekend allowing armed forces of NATO member states to be present in his country after Poland’s airspace was violated by an incursion of 19 Russian drones last week.

Moscow’s incursion, which Western security experts see as a ‘test’ by Russia (even though it has denied those claims) that has prompted a series of responses intended to fend off a potential Russian attack in the future. And Poland isn’t alone. Romania, Lativa, Estonia and Lithuania have also reported drone incursions by Russian since Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

Experts believe that any effective strategy to address the incursions must be focused on deterring Russian President Vladimir Putin. And despite earlier promises to impose stricter sanctions on Russia if President Putin does not end the war in Ukraine, President Donald Trump now says that the U.S. will only carry through with those sanctions if NATO member states do the same and end all purchases of Russian oil.

THE CONTEXT

• Data from the Center for Information Resilience and reported by The Wall Street Journal shows that Moscow launched close to 6,300 drones in July of this year, up from 426 just one year earlier.

• According to officials, at least three Russian drones were shot down last week as Polish F-16 and Dutch F-35 fighter jets were scrambled.

• Acting U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Dorothy Shea told the UN Security Council that "The United States stands by our NATO allies in the face of these alarming airspace violations…And rest assured, we will defend every inch of NATO territory”, adding that "These actions, now with the addition of violating the airspace of a U.S. ally – intentionally or otherwise – show immense disrespect for good-faith U.S. efforts to bring an end to this conflict."

• On Friday, September 12, NATO launched operation Eastern Sentry to bolster deterrence. The mission includes enhanced air policing, expanding existing operations there. European Sentry is a “multi-domain activity” including aircraft, sensors and air defenses.

• Air policing is the use of military fighter aircraft to protect airspace from unauthorized penetration and ensure air traffic safety from threats. NATO Air Policing is a part of the Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD) framework, providing 24/7/365 coverage of NATO airspace. Begun in 1961, the NATO Air Policing mission provides airborne quick reaction forces (QRFs) to member countries.

• As a part of the broad set of assurance measures since Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, Allies are providing additional assets to enhance air policing along NATO’s eastern borders. To that end, Allies supplement the existing NATO Air Policing forces in the Baltic States, deploy additional aircraft to Poland, and augment the national air policing capabilities of the Bulgarian and Romanian air forces.

THE INTERVIEW

The Cipher Brief spoke with former Supreme Allied Commander General Phil Breedlove (Ret.), who also served earlier in his career as a military fighter jet pilot, to better understand what’s stake and what options NATO has for implementing its own form of deterrence from future Russian aggression. Our conversation has been lightly edited for length and clarity. You can also watch our conversation on The Cipher Brief’s Digital Channel.

General Philip M. Breedlove

Gen. Breedlove retired as the Commander, Supreme Allied Command, Europe, SHAPE, Belgium and Headquarters, U.S. European Command, Stuttgart, Germany.  He also served as Vice Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force, Senior Military Assistant to the Secretary of the Air Force; and Vice Director for Strategic Plans and Policy on the Joint Staff.

The Cipher Brief: How serious of an issue was Russia’s drone incursion into Poland?

Gen. Breedlove: I think it is serious, but it's not serious in the way that some in the press are reporting it. I've seen some press calling this an attack on Poland. I don't think that Mr. Putin intended to attack Poland, but I do believe it was completely and 1000% deliberate and that he is testing NATO and testing Poland. And for that reason, it is important. It is serious and we need to be taking appropriate action.

The Cipher Brief: Many experts are saying that what the U.S. decides to do in response could be consequential in terms of deterring President Putin. What do you think needs to be done to give NATO what it needs to be effective?

Gen. Breedlove: The very first thing would be a simple statement by President Trump saying, "This is wrong, Mr. Putin, stop it," and he needs to say it publicly for the whole world to see.

Second, I would encourage our government to help NATO to come to a better place on how we defend our skies. We are in a posture called air policing, that is a peacetime posture and operates under peacetime Rules of Engagement. Air policing is really a result of 9/11. It is a functionality of alert aircraft that are designed to address renegade - that's the official term - renegade aircraft, meaning aircraft that are not squawking appropriately, talking appropriately, or are flying in the wrong airspace. And all they can do in peacetime is to go up and to investigate and try to warn off the airplanes and this is only when a foreign country is flying over your airspace. So, as an example, when a British or a U.S. airplane is flying over Estonia, they have zero rules of engagement that allow them to engage the enemy, except in self-defense. If the enemy makes a move toward the aircraft, they can defend themselves. If the enemy makes a move to drop a bomb though, there are no rules of engagement for the air policing. I've been advocating since May of 2016 that we need to change our posture to an air defense posture with an air defense rule of engagement set, which would allow an American pilot to defend Estonia if the need arised.

The Cipher Brief: It’s not hard to imagine how a situation could escalate quickly. But you had an entire career to think about these types of things. You've also been a huge advocate of no-fly zones. You thought a no-fly zone needed to be imposed on Ukraine from day one. Could that have any bearing here now?

Gen. Breedlove: Absolutely. And we don't want to cry over spilt milk or water under the bridge, but we proposed a set of operations back in 2014, [when Russia invaded Crimea] and if we had adopted any of those, we would be in a different place than we are now. We are at the crux of being in the same situation again. In three or four years, we will be answering for the decisions we make now. And if we were to establish some sort of zone that says, "Mr. Putin, stop," publicly, loudly, so the Russian people can hear it and Mr. Putin can hear it, we will find ourselves in a different place in three years than if we just continue along the path that we're currently on.

The Cipher Brief Threat Conference is happening October 19-22 in Sea Island, GA. The world's leading minds on national security from both the public and private sectors will be there. Will you? Apply for a seat at the table today.

The Cipher Brief: Another thing that you have been very vocal on is deterrence. And the fact that the U.S. has really, despite actions that it has taken in the past, has not yet deterred the Russian president from aggressive acts against his neighbors. There's a sanctions package that's just waiting to be passed right now that a lot of Republicans in Congress are trying to push forward and it hasn't really gotten the support yet from the president. What impact might those sanctions have?

Breedlove: I'm a fan of sanctions, but we also have to be intellectually honest and understand that sanctions have never, ever changed Mr. Putin's battlefield actions. Sanctions have hurt Russia, they've hurt the Russian people, they've hurt the Russian economy and they're having an impact, and we need to keep them going. But sanctions alone have never changed Mr. Putin's battlefield actions. It's going to take more. I hope we adopt the sanctions. We need to tell Mr. Putin, "We are going to put these sanctions on you," and then do it. We've already said that and we’ve passed that red line a couple of times now, but this time we need to actually do it.

The other thing that would be a smart move by our president and our country would be to use every penny of frozen Russian assets to buy weapons for Ukraine. Why is this important? Most of that money belongs to oligarchs who are right below Mr. Putin, and you start taking their money and their boats and all that stuff away from them and he's not going to have as easy a time moving around in his own political circles. We need to start punishing those oligarchs by using their money to support the war effort in Ukraine. It would be important for the world to hear, especially the Russian people, that Russian money is paying for Ukrainian weapons.

The Cipher Brief: Using those frozen Russian assets has been another point of conversation for some time now that feels like a decision needs to be made one way or another. Whose decision is it right now, is it Europe?

Gen. Breedlove: Well, it's all of us. There are multiple systems that are involved, and this is going to have to be something that western leaders - to include our president - would have to rally to get it to move forward. It can't be a NATO action because you know Mr. Putin has at least two of our leaders in his pocket and they're going to vote against that if it's a NATO action. So, this has to be more of a coalition of the willing EU, NATO kind of thing where all the nations involved, including ours says, "This money is now going to the manufacturers in Europe and the manufacturers in America who are going to put forward weapons for Ukraine." That is the picture we need the Russian people to see, that their money, these oligarchs’ money is being used to buy Ukrainian weapons.

The Cipher Brief: What about other methods of deterrence?

Gen. Breedlove: I believe that we have strategic deterrence. I believe that we have conventional deterrence inside NATO, but I would tell you that tactical nuclear deterrence is beginning to fade because Mr. Putin continually talks about Russia lowering the bar and being ready to use tactical nuclear weapons. He's doing that to deter us, and it has worked. Former President Biden's administration was completely deterred. Mr. Trump's administration is nearly completely deterred when it comes to that realm. But here's the part that I think we need to think about. The previous administration said dozens of times, ‘We will defend every inch of NATO’. When President Biden said that, here's what President Putin heard: ‘Every other country is fair game have at it.’ So, he's essentially retaken Georgia politically. He's in the middle of doing the same in Moldova. He's attacking at will in Ukraine. So, we need to change that posture. We need to establish conventional deterrence outside of NATO because it has been forfeited and given away, and that is a problem.

The Cipher Brief: There's a lot of talk right now, a lot of speculation, a lot of concern, and a lot of talk about World War III when you're looking at the alignment of China and Russia. How realistic do you think that is?

Gen. Breedlove: That's exactly what Mr. Putin wants you to think. That is the exact result he wants, and he wants people like you and me talking about it and enhancing the message and getting everybody fearful of War War III. This is what is called reflexive control [Russian military theory based on the belief that you have control over your enemy by imposing assumptions that change the way they act]. Mr. Putin is exercising reflexive control, and it is working wildly. He is succeeding magnificently in controlling Western thought and especially, the decisions of Western leaders.

As I said before, Mr. Biden's administration was nearly completely deterred, and this administration is in the same place. Our most senior policy maker in the Pentagon is absolutely deterred, and we need to get past that. We need to think about how President Kennedy faced these kinds of problems during the Cuban missile crisis, how former President Reagan faced these problems during the intermediate range missile crisis and at how we’ve faced down the Soviet Union and Russia in the past. We seem to be somewhat incapable of doing that now.

Researchers Ian Coleman and Connor Cowman contributed to this report.

The Cipher Brief Threat Conference is happening October 19-22 in Sea Island, GA. The world's leading minds on national security from both the public and private sectors will be there. Will you? Apply for a seat at the table today.

Are you Subscribed to The Cipher Brief’s Digital Channel on YouTube? There is no better place to get clear perspectives from deeply experienced national security experts.

Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief because National Security is Everyone’s Business.

EXPERT INTERVIEW – More Western leaders and national security experts are now saying that Russia’s recent drone incursion into Poland was not a mission gone wrong as Moscow suggested but was more likely an intended probe to determine how quickly the NATO alliance – created to safeguard security - might rally in the face of an expanded Russian attack.

President Vladimir Putin now has his answer.

In a swift response, NATO announced that it is bolstering it’s eastern flank defenses. Germany is expanding air policing over Poland. France is sending 3 Rafale fighter jets and The Netherlands is sending two Patriot air defenses, NASAMS and counter drone systems to Warsaw. The Czech Republic is sending additional helicopters and up to 150 soldiers to help defend Poland’s borders.

In this expert weekend interview, The Cipher Brief spoke with General David Petraus (Ret.) who was on the ground in Kyiv this week, talking with senior leaders - not only about the seriousness of Russia’s incursion into NATO territory - but also about how technology continues to dramatically alter the battlespace in Ukraine and how Moscow is now using its troops on the ground.

THE CONTEXT

• 19 Russian drones entered Polish airspace on September 9 forcing the temporary closure of several airports.
• Polish F-16s and Dutch F-35s downed some of the drones, with NATO aerial refueling and AWACs C2 support.
• Russia said the drones were enroute to Ukraine and were not pursuing targets inside of Poland.
• Poland invoked Article 4 of the NATO Treaty to trigger allied consultation on response. The North Atlantic Council met on September 10 to discuss the situation and denounced Russia. Europe broadly condemned the incursion.
• NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte called the incursion “reckless and unacceptable” and warned that the alliance will “defend every inch of NATO territory.” Allied Commander Europe General Alexus Grynkewoch said the alliance will “learn lessons” and improve readiness in response.
• EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said “indications suggest [the incursion] was intentional, not accidental.” German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said the drones “were quite obviously deliberately directed on this course.”
• After President Donald Trump suggested the incursion may have been a mistake, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said on Friday in a post on X that, “We would also wish that the drone attack on Poland was a mistake. But it wasn't. And we know it.”
• NATO announced Eastern Sentry, a new mission to boost defenses on its eastern flank. The mission is modeled after Baltic Sentry, NATO’s maritime and aerial operation to monitor the Baltic Sea.

THE EXPERT INTERVIEW

General David Petraeus (Ret.)

General David Petraeus served more than 37 years in the U.S. military with six consecutive commands, five of which were combat, including command of the Multi-National Force-Iraq during the Surge, U.S. Central Command, and Coalition and U.S. Forces in Afghanistan. He is a partner in the KKR global investment firm and chairs the firm’s global institute.

Our conversation has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

The Cipher Brief: Let’s talk about this week’s Russian drone incursion into Poland, whether you believe it was an accident on Moscow’s behalf or a calculated probe, how significant of an event was this?

General Petraeus: It was a very significant episode. Again, 19 drones entered Polish airspace. The bottom line is that this could not have been a mistake. These aren't on autopilot. They may have way points from which they're flying to and from, but there were pilots behind this significant incursion. Just recently, I saw a report that five of the drones were actually headed for a major base, which is one of the hubs from which a lot of the NATO equipment is transported into Ukraine. It's one of the big areas for trans-shipment.

The NATO response was impressive, in my view. Keep in mind, you had Dutch F-35s, Polish F-16s in the air very rapidly. They clearly must have seen this coming. They've rehearsed this in the past. There was an AWACS up there to help them also with the command and control and early warning, and aerial refueling tankers were flying so they could refuel as required. At least several of the drones were shot down. So, again, an impressive response.

And then as a result of that, Poland called for an Article Four gathering. Keep in mind, Article Five is a call to arms, Article Four is a call to meet. They did that at the North Atlantic Council, of course, in Brussels at NATO headquarters. And out of that, came a very comprehensive set of actions that NATO will take, which apparently includes the U.S. as some part of the air component, but it's going to beef up all of the different capabilities that would be needed, including anti-air and anti-ballistic missile defenses for those countries on the eastern front and a number of other capabilities as well. This is now Operation Eastern Sentry.

This wasn't a wake-up call because clearly, they were already awake to the threat, but it was a significant incursion that has generated a significant response. I think the tactical response was quite impressive. The operational response - not quite strategic - perhaps you could describe it as that by NATO, was very significant, as well and quick, too.

I'm hoping that there are even bigger strategic responses though, and that this might be the catalyst in Washington for Congress to work with the White House on the sanctions package that Senator Lindsey Graham and others have been working for a number of months, which would add substantial U.S. sanctions to those already imposed by the EU and European countries [on Russia].

And then on the European side, for this to galvanize support for what is now termed the von der Leyen plan or concept, which is of course Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, who, by the way, gave a stirring State of the Union address written before the incursion, but delivered after it.

Her concept is to use those frozen hundreds of billions of dollars, of euros really, of frozen Russian reserves in European banks as collateral to give money to Ukraine now to help them. And as you know, the Ukrainians could build even more drones than the 3.5 million that they're going to build this year, if they had more money. And additional fundingwould be a huge help for them also in terms of their fiscal situation.

And then the frozen funds go back to Russia once Russia pays reparations to Ukraine for all the damage and destruction they have wrought in the country here. That's quite an artful approach because it avoids the actual seizure of these assets, which again, a number of European countries, I think rightly have concern about, that it might undermine the euro attractiveness for this kind of reserve.

I'd love to see those two actions on top of the very quick response and the very quick decisions by the North Atlantic Council to carry out the military actions announced. These would be very, very complimentery to the military actions and show Russia just how serious this was.

The Cipher Brief Threat Conference is happening October 19-22 in Sea Island, GA. The world's leading minds on national security from both the public and private sectors will be there. Will you? Apply for a seat at the table today.

I think in this case, Russia has vastly overplayed its hand, just as I think it has, frankly, in terms of the huge numbers of drones and missiles that have been launched into Ukraine in recent nights that we've seen in the Institute for the Study War statistics and so forth that show the highest ever numbers. In the sense that this shows very clearly if there were any remaining possibility of whether Vladimir Putin was willing to negotiate a ceasefire and agree to some kind of sustained and just peace, as President Trump sought to achieve, that clearly is not in the cards.

The Cipher Brief: General Oleksandr Syrskyi, commander in chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, said recently that the direct technological race is accelerating in the battlespace. The technology that is being put into battlefield drones, is being adapted very quickly by Russia. The Cipher Brief visited the Nemesis Regiment with you earlier this year – the separate battalion of the Unmanned Systems Forces that specializes in the use of bomber drones -what has changed on that front over the past few months?

General Petraeus: The Nemesis Regiment, now, having expanded from a battalion, is well known here in Ukraine because it (and all of the military units] is trying to compete for talent, and they have billboards that say, "Sign up for the Nemesis Regiment." They're now able to recruit directly. They now are able to do basic military training themselves as well. The workarounds that they have developed to get talent into uniform as rapidly as possible to make a difference, is really quite impressive. Only a country that is fighting for its very independence, it’s very survival, would be able to do all of this.

You'll recall that when I was last here and I talked to General Syrskyi and asked just roughly, "How many drones did you use yesterday of all types?" Because of course, they have air and ground and maritime drones (indeed, the maritime drones have been so effective that they have sunk one third of the Black Sea Fleet). His answer was, “Nearly 7,000.” And many of those flew multiple missions.

By the way, one of the briefings we had informed us that the entire remaining Black Sea Fleet is all completely in one Russian harbor as far as you can get away from Ukraine, in the eastern part of the Black Sea, with lots of defenses around it. So, the Ukrainians have basically forced it to bottle itself up just to survive, because the Ukrainians are still out there picking off occasional Russian patrol boats or carrying out other kinds of action at sea whenever they find Russian ships at sea.

The Ukrainians also have land drones of all types, remotely driven vehicles that do a lot of the back and forth from the rear to the front lines with logistics and taking casualties and so forth. And also, increasingly, remotely operated machine guns, grenade launchers, and other weapons systems, often on remotely driven vehicles.

And, of course, Ukraine has tons of all different types of aerial drones, including some now that very publicly are out there that reportedly can fly thousands of kilometers into the Russian Federation.

And long-range missiles are also now in production in Ukraine , and the numbers of these being produced are beginning to ramp up very substantially, in addition to the 3.5 million drones that will be produced this year.

I also met with the individuals that have developed the command, control, communications, intelligence and battle management intelligence - and knitting all of this together into a common operational picture/battle management system that is truly extraordinary. And the 7,000 drones doesn't quite capture all of this. They said, "In a 12-hour shift there are 40,000 flights." And again, all of this is being tracked. There are crews that are sending these out very quickly. Some come back, some does not. But just to give you a sense of the magnitude of the technology race. We learned last time that we were here, that to combat the Russian electronic warfare and jamming, as many as a quarter of the drones that go out from the Ukrainian side have tiny fiber optic cable that spools out behind them so that they can maintain the critical command and control links to fly these right into the enemy, regardless of the EW and jamming. A lot of these are first-person view suicide drones, as they're termed.

There are also other advances. The Russians, for example, now are putting jet engines on some of their Shahed drones. And because the way that you knock down drones encompasses all types of different systems - everything from a quite skillful use of heavy machine guns, laser designators, acoustic sensors, all kinds of radars, everything working together - but if they fly faster and higher, it's harder to counter. There are now also Ukrainian drones that run into the Russian drones, and again, hundreds of these are out there every night.

The skill involved in all of this is extraordinary, but the increased speed makes that much more difficult. So, what you have is a constant back and forth, where one side develops something new and innovative, the other side sees it, reverse engineers it, and adapts it. And while, of course, on the Russian side, it's much more top down than bottom up (as on the Ukrainian side), when they go top down, they can produce huge quantities very quickly. On the Ukrainian side, it's a lot more like a ‘let 1,000 flowers bloom’ initiative. There is tremendous innovation, but then you've got to figure out how to scale it. And Ukraine is doing that now, too.

Each side is very much going about this in a whole variety of different ways. The sensor component of this is particularly interesting, and then the fusion of all of the different reports. You might get a human intelligence report derived from a number of different methods. How do you then get that into the system, immediately alert those who have the means to actually deal with it, who then delivers this to those who can actually take action against it, kinetic action in many cases?

And what they're doing through their battle management system is shrinking the time from the so-called sensor to shooter, the ‘kill chain’, as Chris Brose wrote a book with that title. These are just breathtaking kinds of advances. And as you know – because you’ve been here with us - every four or five months or so, you see breathtaking new advances.

The very first time we spent time with Nemesis, and you and Brad were with us, it was a Battalion. Now it's the regiment, and it's going to be a brigade. And of course, it was founded by and still commanded by a former prime minister, the first one under President Zelensky - so everybody's in this fight. But the first time we were here, I think the drones they had were using had one antenna. Last time, I think there were three or four. Now, it's up to six. And of course, you also have the Starlink big board on top of it to communicate with what Elon Musk has put up in the constellation.

Need a daily dose of reality on national and global security issues? Subscriber to The Cipher Brief’s Nightcap newsletter, delivering expert insights on today’s events – right to your inbox. Sign up for free today.

So, Ukraine is where the most advanced innovation in the world can be found.

I also spent time with all of the defense security assistance folks in the U.S. embassy, which included more than just Americans, by the way. So, many allied countries were there as well. And while they are doing great work, we should also be doing much more, the U.S., NATO countries, and other allies and partners around the world that might be threatened by aggression, can learn huge lessons from here. But of course, the lessons aren’t really learned until they are institutionalized in some way in the military services in the form of doctrine, organizational changes, training, leader development courses, and the rest of that. And we're not doing that at all as assiduously and aggressively as we should be.

I know the US military service chiefs recognize the imperative of much more rapid innovation, but when you think that nearly 7,000 individual drones are used every day, many of which are on multiple missions, and you hear the scale of what it is they're doing, we're not remotely doing what we should be.

In terms of their organizations, the Ukrainians now have a drone platoon in every infantry company, a drone company in every infantry battalion, a drone battalion in every brigade. The new corps have their own drone units. And then there are the independent drone organizations like the Nemesis Regiment, which are active in all kinds of different ways and are apportioned according to the priorities on the battlefield, the most significant threats, the most lucrative targets and so forth.

And as you recall, drone units get points for the different targets that they strike. The strikes are all validated because you have drones watching drones. And those points can be redeemed for equipment and components that you need via an Amazon-like system that was established by Brave One (a Ukrainian government-funded organization that supports innovation) as an adjunct to the DELTA system, which is the overall software platform that is used by all of the elements of their Ministry of Defense and all their services. Noting that Ukraine don't just have an army, navy, air force and marine corps, they also now have an unmanned systems force, and the commander of that is incredibly aggressive and innovative.

The Cipher Brief: Given all of the focus on the technology, I think it's difficult for some people to understand what the front line still looks like today. Russia is still recruiting an incredible number of people with a very tight turnaround time between recruitment and when they're actually deploy. Can you just give us a picture of what that looks like today?

General Petraeus: Well, in fact, several of our other fellow travelers, as you know, Ralph Goff, Glenn Corn, and Joey Gagnard have been out to the front lines. They were down in the south. The commander down there said there are Russian soldiers who have gone from recruitment to deployment in considerably less than 20 days. In other words, recruits aren’t even getting 30 days of basic training before being integrated into a unit. No time to build cohesion and all the rest of that stuff. This is extraordinary, stunning, actually. Moscow is literally taking these individuals off the street, luring them in with huge enlistment bonuses, often from rural areas where the job opportunities are not all that great. And in many cases, the families actually celebrate that they're doing this because it leads to a massive financial windfall.

The recruits go in very quickly, are issued weapons, uniform, et cetera, and then shoved into the front lines and right into an offensive - keeping in mind that the offensives now are not combined arms as we have known them in the past. They're not tanks and armor personnel carriers supported by engineers, infantry, air defense, electronic warfare, artillery, and all the rest. They're infantrymen on foot, essentially running across a street or a field and trying to establish a foothold in the next block of buildings or treeline. It's literally proceeding at infantry pace, because the drones are so ubiquitous, the surveillance is so constant. At the minute that they're spotted, or if they get tanks moving, immediately the suicide drones will come out and take them out. So, you have almost blanket coverage except for really extreme weather when drones can't stay up or they can't see. The rest of the time, it's impossible for the kind of combined arms attacks that launched this invasion by Russia in the beginning. As you'll recall then, there were huge columns of tanks and other vehicles, and frankly, even into the second summer of the counteroffensive that was mounted by the Ukrainians. And now, you actually don't even have as clearly defined front lines as you had then with trench lines and almost World War I-like fortifications. Now you have outposts, and they'll actually allow the enemy to flow around them a bit because the drones will eventually police them up.

But this is hugely costly to the Russians. And for those Ukrainian units that are using the different command and control and intelligence and battle management systems, tools that are fusing the intelligence and enabling them to be even more effective with the drones than they otherwise would be, the exchange ratio is 10 to 1. And that's what it needs to be given how much the Russians outman and outgun the Ukrainian forces.

The Cipher Brief: What the sense of urgency now among European leaders you’ve talked to?

General Petraeus: I suspect that the events of the past number of months have probably been pretty sobering. There was some hope. President Trump made a valiant effort to try to bring this war to an end by engaging Putin, engaging the Europeans and President Zelensky. But it was for nought, it appears. And now on the NATO side, inn a lot of ways, there is renewed confidence because of the improvement in the relationship between President Trump and President Zelensky and the interation between President Trump and key European leaders.

European leaders are, of course, trying to come up with a security guarantee – which I think is quite elusive, frankly, as unless you put your forces in the front lines, you might as well just give all your stuff to the Ukrainians and arm them to the teeth. They're the security guarantee, I think, for Ukraine’s defense.

So, I think there's increasingly a more sober analysis of the prospects for some kind of ceasefire. Washington has actually gotten the Europeans – in a huge success for the White House, frankly - to increase their defense spending to 3.5% of GDP rather than the 2% that was the old standard. And even 5% when you take into account other investments in infrastructure to push the forces further out to the east and that kind of activity. And to see, again, the continued American commitment in eastern Poland and elsewhere, and the air commitment to what is going on in response to the Russian drone incursion, is very encouraging.

So, I think there's a degree of confidence that the Europeans are picking up their share of this load. The Germans, in particular, are doubling defense spending in the next 10 years or so, and that is between 700 billion and a trillion euros more than they would've spent otherwise. Other European countries are also stepping up impressively – and with swift diplomatic action, as well as much additional security assistance to Ukraine and in spending on national defense.

Washington has tried and done everything they could. President Trump engaged personally, repeatedly, and it should be clear to all now that Putin is just not really serious about negotiating an end to this war. He still has his maximalist objectives of replacing President Zelensky with a pro-Russian figure, essentially demilitarizing Ukraine to the extent that would be possible, and seeking additional land that they haven't even been able to seize. They haven't even yet gotten to the so-called fortified cities in the southeastern part of the country, in Donetsk Province in particular. And agreeing to any of those is not acceptable to Ukraine or to its leader. In fact, the Constitution of Ukraine does not allow a leader to give away territory or redraw borders.

The Cipher Brief: What else is top of mind for you as you’re on the ground there in Kyiv?

General Petraeus: I'm keen to hear from European and NATO leaders about how much this drone incursion has galvanized additional action. How much European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen's stirring European Union address has reinforced that new determination, and to get a sense of where that is headed. Because there's a seriousness of purpose right now that is even greater than it was just days ago. And to put a finger on the pulse of that, I think will be very important and could produce a number of insights. Needless to say, that is very heartening to the Ukrainians who are seeing the prospect of this substantial additional European commitment. They are also heartened by recognition that Washington has done everything it can to try to be the catalyst to bring about a ceasefire. That's not going to happen, it doesn't appear. And now, I think there's a seriousness of purpose in Washington, reinforced, I hope, by this incursion to get that sanctions package through Congress to the White House and into law.

Cipher Brief Writer and Editor Ethan Masucol contributed research for this report.

Are you Subscribed to The Cipher Brief’s Digital Channel on YouTube? There is no better place to get clear perspectives from deeply experienced national security experts.

Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief because National Security is Everyone’s Business.

DEEP DIVE - Russia’s drone barrage against Poland early Wednesday was an unprecedented incident in Moscow’s three-and-a-half-year war against Ukraine, bringing Europe to what Poland’s Prime Minister refers to as the country’s most dangerous moment in decades.

“It’s incomparably more dangerous than before,” Prime Minister Donald Tusk told members of Poland’s parliament. “This situation brings us the closest we have been to open conflict since World War II.”

Many of the 19 drones that crossed into Polish territory early Wednesday were shot down but the incursion was enough to prompt Warsaw to invoke NATO’s Article 4 – in a rare direct military engagement between NATO and Russia – the first since Russia’s 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

The Russian Defense Ministry said it was an accident, and that the drones were never intended to enter Poland. Polish, Ukrainian and other Western officials aren’t buying it, with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte saying that the question of intent doesn’t matter; Russia should be held accountable.

“It is absolutely reckless,” Rutte said. And in a message intended for Russian President Vladimir Putin, he added, “stop violating allied airspace. And know that we stand ready, that we are vigilant and that we will defend every inch of NATO territory.”

The possibility that NATO’s support for Ukraine could lead to military conflict with Russia has been a concern since the early days of the 2022 invasion. When a single stray missile landed on Polish soil in November 2022, killing two farmers, Ukraine blamed Russia. NATO went on high alert and then-President Joe Biden was awakened in the middle of the night to be briefed. In that incident though, an investigation found that the missile was a Ukrainian air-defense missile that had misfired.

As the war dragged on, and Russia seemed unable or unwilling to act on its repeated threats to punish the West for providing aid to Ukraine, experts argued that fears of a conflagration were overblown, and that they had slowed western assistance at precisely the time when Ukraine needed it most.

Wednesday’s drone attack was a game changer. While Russian drones have strayed into Polish territory before – seven in total, in more than three years – experts say this is different. Nearly two dozen drones flew into Poland in a single event, traveling as far as a hundred miles into the country.

The Cipher Brief Threat Conference is tackling global issues with leading national security experts October 19-22. Apply for your seat at the table today.

Poland, along with Lithuania and Ukraine, issued a joint statement condemning the incident as a “deliberate and coordinated attack.” In a video posted on Wednesday, Radoslaw Sikorski, Poland’s Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, said the drones “did not veer off course, but were deliberately targeted.” Former U.S. Ambassador to NATO Kurt Volker agrees.

“There can be no doubt that Russia deliberately sent these drones into Polish territory,” Volker told The Cipher Brief. “They may not have intended to attack anything – they were unarmed after all – but it was a deliberate incursion into NATO territory.”

Volker and others suggested that Moscow may have carried out the incursions in order to test NATO's resolve, collect intelligence, and issue a warning that unless Ukraine surrenders soon, Russia’s war will widen.

“The number of drones that crossed into Polish territory suggest the Russians were probing, trying to watch and see how NATO reacts,” Erin Dumbacher, a Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, told The Cipher Brief.

Daniel Fried, a former U.S. Ambassador to Poland, told The Cipher Brief that Russia’s success in Ukraine “depends on intimidating NATO, which this attack may have intended.”

NATO Supreme Allied Commander for Europe Alexus Grynkewich said that the alliance did not yet know whether the act was intentional. But several experts echoed the point made by Rutte, the alliance’s Secretary General: intentional or accidental, the incursions constituted an act of aggression that should not go unpunished.

“I don’t think intent matters much going forward,” John McLaughlin, a former acting director of the Central Intelligence Agency, told The Cipher Brief. “At this point, the issue is what is NATO capable of agreeing on and what does Russia learn from that. It will be a test of whether the ‘coalition of the willing’ has substance and who is prepared to be in it.”

Fried concurs. “Intent matters, but Russia is responsible in any case and cannot be allowed to hide behind plausible deniability,” he said. “Russia can put out a credible explanation of the error, if it wants its denials to be taken seriously.”

The initial reactions to the Russian barrage have been a mix of condemnation and calls for a NATO response. The UN Security Council is to hold an emergency session in response to the incursion. And NATO says it is investigating whether the Russian drones were deliberately sent into Poland, while planning to bolster its air defense and detection systems.

“If it is proven that this was a deliberate Russian incursion, NATO leaders have to respond diplomatically and militarily in a way that deters Russia from a similar incursion,” Dumbacher and Liana Fix, a Council on Foreign Relations Fellow, wrote on Thursday, outlining a series of steps that NATO might consider.

NATO “could pursue responses with little escalatory potential, such as increasing air patrolling and strengthening air defense on the Eastern flank,” they wrote. “There is also the option of a more robust response, such as supporting a Ukrainian attack on Russian drone production sites. Diplomatically, a joint response can include the ratcheting up of sanctions on Moscow that are already being discussed in Washington and Brussels."

“The next steps should focus on reinforcing deterrence at the border,” Dumbacher told The Cipher Brief. “NATO militaries should work together to demonstrate that Russia will suffer losses if they try the same probing attack or, worse, try to come across the border with higher quantities next time.”

McLaughlin suggests a ramping up of NATO reinforcements to the alliance’s Eastern flank – “and to make clear that they will stay there for the indefinite future. Reinforce air defense across the front and in Ukraine.” He and Volker also suggested the establishment of a no-fly or air-defense zone over Ukraine backed by western resources — an idea that surfaced in the early days of the war but was deemed too likely to lead to a NATO-Russian aerial engagement.

Need a daily dose of reality on national and global security issues? Subscriber to The Cipher Brief’s Nightcap newsletter, delivering expert insights on today’s events – right to your inbox. Sign up for free today.

“NATO should declare an extended air defense zone – for example, shooting down any hostile objects that fly within 200 kilometers of NATO territory,” Volker said. “This would be a direct and proportionate military response to Russia's willingness to threaten NATO populations.”

It might also carry more risk than the Europeans are willing to assume – even now. But several experts stressed that it was time for NATO to act with less concern about the Russian response.

“Russia is the aggressor and has been engaged in sabotage against and inside Europe for over a year,” said Fried, who also argued for imposing an air-defense zone. “Letting concerns over escalation dominate us allows Putin to set the terms of his escalation without concern over our response.”

Putin believes “that he can outlast whatever resolve there is in the West,” McLaughlin said. “A flaccid western response would say to Putin: the road is clear, push on. Some movement of forces, some material commitment, is required.”

How the U.S. responds also matters. Four weeks ago, President Trump welcomed Putin to Alaska, saying after their meeting that while “we didn’t get there (to a deal), we have a very good chance of getting there.” He also said that Putin and Zelensky would meet soon in the pursuit of peace.

But since the Alaska summit, Putin’s forces have dramatically stepped up their attacks on Ukraine, and have also struck an American factory in western Ukraine, two European diplomatic compounds and a key Ukrainian government building in Kyiv.

Ukraine’s Foreign Minister, Andrii Sybiha, said after the drone incursions into Poland that the absence of any real penalties was having an effect. “Putin’s sense of impunity keeps growing,” Sybiha said in a message on X. “He was not properly punished for his previous crimes.”

Even Republican members of Congress are taking that view. “I think Russia is playing – they’re really playing us like a piano right now,” North Carolina Republican Senator Thom Thillis said this week.

After this week’s drone barrage, President Trump spoke with Poland’s President Karol Nawrocki and wrote on social media, “What’s with Russia violating Poland’s airspace with drones?” He closed his post with a cryptic three words: “Here we go!”

Trump has threatened Putin repeatedly in an “or else” fashion but to this point, Putin has reaped the benefits of American engagement without paying a price. No new sanctions, despite repeated threats to impose them, even as the Senate has prepared a bipartisan sanctions bill that would punish Moscow by imposing tariffs on countries importing Russian energy and applying secondary sanctions on firms seen as aiding Russia’s energy sector.

“I hear every week, it’s coming, it’s coming. I just think we ought to stop talking about it,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said after the Russian drones flew into Poland. Other Republican senators – including Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso (R-Wy) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) – support the measure and are pushing President Trump to do the same.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Wednesday that the Poland incursion had boosted momentum in Congress to pass what he called the “bone-crushing” sanctions bill. He described Russia’s actions as “provocative,” and aimed at testing the U.S. and NATO. But he also said he would only bring the bill to the floor once he received a clear signal of support from the president.

“The U.S. needs to develop a realistic and informed understanding of how Russia operates,” McLaughlin said Thursday. “When Steve Witkoff returned from the Alaska meeting saying Russia had agreed to Article 5-like deployments to Ukraine by a European security force, it was obvious that could not have been a serious Russian commitment, or that Witkoff had misunderstood. And Putin must have come away thinking he could do just about anything without provoking the U.S. to serious action.”

McLaughlin added that “realism, consistency, careful negotiation, and backstopping the Europeans seem the minimal requirements to keep future historians from concluding that the administration ‘lost’ Ukraine.”

Last month Trump met with Nawrocki, the newly minted Polish president (whose candidacy Trump supported) and lavished praise on him and pledged to keep American troops in Poland – no matter what Putin said about it. Now Nawrocki and other Polish officials want help in terms of their own defense, and a robust message of deterrence to Putin.

“The U.S. should denounce Russia’s escalation of aggression, increase economic pressure on Russia, increase arms deliveries to Ukraine, and step up military support for NATO’s Eastern front members and for the Coalition of the Willing,” Fried said. “Including by backing their developing plans for a mission in Ukraine.”

Are you Subscribed to The Cipher Brief’s Digital Channel on YouTube? There is no better place to get clear perspectives from deeply experienced national security experts.

Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief because National Security is Everyone’s Business.

EXPERT Q&A — Russia’s massive drone attack overnight on six Ukrainian regions, which hit energy and gas transport infrastructure and cut off power to over 100,000 people, is the latest sign that Moscow is nowhere near peace. Coupled with the Kremlin’s rejection of meaningful security guarantees for Ukraine, it’s clear that President Vladimir Putin is still pursuing his maximalist war goals. That doesn’t surprise General (Ret.) Philip Breedlove, former NATO Supreme Allied Commander, who said the U.S. has been “completely deterred” by Putin for the last 11 years, across four presidents, which has built a "sanctuary" for Russia and allowed it to escalate in Ukraine unchecked.

Cipher Brief COO and Executive Editor of the Open Source Report, Brad Christian spoke with Gen. Breedlove about how that dynamic and is shaping the war and peace negotiations, as well as other global security challenges — from the threat posed by Iranian drones to the true relationship between members of the Axis of Authoritarians. Our conversation has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

The Cipher Brief: Let's start in the Middle East. Broadly speaking, how are you thinking about all of the changes and all of the action that is happening in the region and what it might be pointing to?

General Breedlove: I'm in the Middle East now and have been here for almost seven days. I'm in my second capital and we're working through some of the issues that are left over after the 12-day war such as how the Middle East is continuing to react to that and what we expect out of Iran following the pretty good beating they took. And then, what does that mean for our good friends and partners in the Middle East?

This is a time where I think many of the leaders of these nations are still reeling from what happened. I was talking with some very senior leaders today and I pointed out that in the first three and a half days of this 12-day war, Iran shot nearly 1,500 drones and missiles in the fight. And I asked them, "Is your country ready to defend against 1,500 rockets and missiles?" And of course, there's really only one nation in the Middle East that's set up for that and that's Israel, who was of course attacked. And so, others here in this region are trying to think this through.

And while these other countries are good, maybe even great partners of the U.S., we haven't fought together before. For example, how would they connect to the Navy ships and the US Air Force airplanes that have done so much in the Middle East in these recent challenges? And frankly, there's a lot of scratching of heads going on because those type’s of challenges can’t be solved overnight and nobody, including Israel, is ready to face that kind of onslaught without help from the United States.

So, there's a lot of concern and a lot of angst about how countries get ready for this? You've heard that the Axis of Evil countries, Iran and others, Russia, are starting to build these Shahed drones by the hundreds and thousands and starting new factories in South America. These adversarial nations are unable to use what we would call normal, Western style air power so they are substituting it with these drone attacks and it's a tough problem for many countries to defend against.

And then, frankly, while the nations I'm dealing with are not necessarily concerned about Israel attacking them, they are taken aback that Israel can launch aircraft, fly 1,000 miles and establish air superiority over a nation in two days. And so, there's a lot of people rethinking where they are and how it all works here based on the actions of the recent Israel-Iran conflict.

I think the good news is that the threat of Iran is somewhat diminished. Iran is going to spend some time rebuilding its defenses because especially its air defense network was pretty much decimated.

It's a busy time in the Middle East. It's a time where we need to find peace. It's a time where we don't need another distraction, as we're facing multiple theaters of conflict right now.

The Cipher Brief: On the topic of peace and some normalcy, what is the mood there? What’s happening in Gaza is both incredibly complicated and terribly upsetting to much of the world. Is there going to be a return to some regional normalcy in the relatively near future?

General Breedlove: I don't think I see or hear that right now. There's a lot of concern that the political situation, that the leadership of Israel is in with their own people and the desire for getting the hostages back either dead or alive is very much alive. And even inside of Israel, there are now protests against what's going on in Gaza. So, I can't imagine a more concerning and more confused situation and there is angst of how this is all going to work out. I must say that there is concern about how the people of Gaza have been treated. But I will tell you this, Brad, as I move around these capitals in this region, the recognized threat is Iran.

Prefer to watch The Cipher Brief interview with former NATO Supreme Allied Commander General (Ret.) Philip M. Breedlove? Check it out by subscribing to The Cipher Brief's YouTube channel.

The Cipher Brief: I want to shift gears a little bit here to the other topic that is dominating the national security space and that's Russia’s war with Ukraine. You've said consistently from the beginning of Russia’s full scale invasion that, "Mr. Putin has us deterred and we have not established deterrence over either Russia or Vladimir Putin." I'd just like to get your take on where we are with the negotiations. So many people seem to be scratching their heads at some of the things that we’re seeing play out in the public facing side of the negotiations. How are you thinking about it?

General Breedlove: Well, bottom line upfront, nothing has changed. We remain deterred. In the press you hear people talking about this war being three and a half years long. This war is over 11 years long. It started in the spring of '14 when I was still serving as the Supreme Allied Commander of Europe, and it hasn't stopped. It was hot for a few years and then it went warm. Russians were killing Ukrainians and Ukrainians were killing Russians on the line of contact. And then, after some six years or so of that warm war on the line of contact, Russia re-invaded, and I call this the third phase of the 11-year-long war.

This war has covered four presidents, Obama, Trump twice and Biden once, and all four of them have been nearly and completely deterred from the very beginning. We, as we always do in the military, offered options for how to address this conflict in Ukraine back in 2014. And the answer was, "We're not going to take any action because the war will escalate if we take action." Well, we gave them options from very small movements to larger more bellicose movements, they chose none of them and here we are. What we do know is we did not take action for fear of escalation. We were deterred and we didn't take action and Russia escalated anyway. And so our lack of action ended up in the escalation of the problem by the Russians. And that has repeated itself through four administrations for the past 11 years. We are still deterred. We have taken precious little action to stop the fight in Ukraine and we still find ourselves saying, "We're not going to do that because we've got to give peace a chance and we don't want to escalate the problem." And that formula is not working now and has not worked for 11 years.

We have virtually enabled the Russian war on Ukraine by our lack of action in a more severe way. Many of us from military backgrounds say that we have built sanctuary for Russia. From that sanctuary, we allow them to attack Ukraine. If you can think of a map, up in the northwest corner of the map is Belarus all the way to the east around through Russia all the way to the south, into the Black Sea and west across the Black Sea. We have allowed Russia to attack Ukraine from nearly 300 degrees on the map, and we still cannot determine that we should allow Ukraine to fire back deeply into Russia with our kit.

Mr. Elbridge Colby, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, at times seems to be out of sync with President Trump because the President recently said, "You can't win a war that way." And Mr. Colby, once again, announced in the last day or so that, "We're not going to let them do long-range fires with American kit." This is an absurd policy, and it's guaranteed to be a loser and we've got to get past being so completely deterred by Russia's threats. Their program of reflexive control is working excellent on our leadership and we've got to break free of it.

The Cipher Brief: The US and Europe could inflict significant pressure on Russia through the expanded use of sanctions, yet President Trump has not yet approved the use of the sanctions that could really bite. Would increasing sanctions really cause that much of a risk of escalation on the part of Russia?

General Breedlove: Folks who follow Putin and Russia will say something to the following effect, I actually say it all the time- Sanctions have never changed Putin's actions on the battlefield. Sanctions have hurt Russia. Sanctions have hurt the Russian people. Sanctions have hurt the Russian economy. All those things are true, but they have never changed Russian actions on the battlefield. And so, we either need to double and triple the really crushing sanctions and take all of the frozen Russian money and use it to help Ukraine. We've got to physically stop the Russian shadow fleet from moving oil around the world. There's a whole host of things we could do that would truly bring Russia to their knees and we haven't done it.

It's hard to understand. We're all hoping that the President will regain his gumption, like he did going into the conversation in Alaska with Mr. Putin. You remember it was very, very clear, he said it multiple times, "If we don't get a ceasefire, there is no second meeting." Well, we didn't get a ceasefire and now we're negotiating a second meeting. And there was also the 50-day that turned into 10 days that turned into 12 days. Well, those 12 days are gone. We don't have a ceasefire, and we haven't announced new sanctions. So, there are many tools that we haven't taken that we need to take. Mr. Putin is not going to stop. Mr. Putin will have to be stopped.

Are you Subscribed to The Cipher Brief’s Digital Channel on YouTube? There is no better place to get clear perspectives from deeply experienced national security experts.

The Cipher Brief: What are NATO and Ukraine's next best moves, given everything that's in play right now?

General Breedlove: It's a confusing issue about what America is going to do or not do in any possible peace-enforcement capacity. The best move right now, not under a NATO hat, because clearly, Mr. Putin believes he's in charge and he said there will be no NATO involvement, but if NATO or European Union nations were to volunteer for a coalition of the willing presence in Ukraine, then that's what, I think, needs to happen. We need the big nations- the UK, the French, the Germans, to step up but they're waiting and watching for American leadership. Is America going to be that backbone and offer what the president talked about in his post-talk news conference and so forth? We need for all of that to happen. We need for America to make a decision to supply air power, command and control, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, et cetera, those non-boots on the ground capabilities. And then, we need the European nations who've already intimated they may be willing to provide boots on the ground to get in there and get a stoppage of the fighting.

Mr. Putin’s entire objective however is to keep kicking the can to the right, run right up to the red line, wave a bright shiny object, get another red line, run right up to the red line, wave another shiny object, get another deadline. He is very good and has had great success at moving our red lines to the right.

The Cipher Brief: I want to ask if you could give us your best and worst-case scenario about how the axis relationship between China- Russia- Iran- North Korea could evolve over the next six months and what that might mean for America and our allies?

General Breedlove: I recently heard someone use a new construct that I had never heard, but it's beginning to make even more sense. This particular author labeled Russia as a proxy of China fighting against America. We've heard several times people describe Russia as the little brother, and China's going to use Russia, as opposed to Russia using China in this conflict. There does appear to be a definite relationship there where China is positioning Russia to do as much damage as they can to the United States' interests in the region. And so I think that we're going to see continued cooperation amongst these nations. They're doing this, every one of them, to benefit their nation. Russia's getting what they need from China by way of parts for the Shahed drones and other things.

Russia, of course, now is using three tranches of North Koreans to fight and to man their factories. And now, we hear they're even looking for women in South America who might want to come over and man factories. Russia is in trouble. I'd like to finish the conversation with the fact that I see Russia as losing the war against Ukraine now, not winning it.

But back to the cooperation. There's a lot of mutual benefit there for these countries. Iran has got to rebuild its air defenses; they were decimated by Israel. Russia desperately needs manpower. They can't staff their factories, and they still haven't totally retaken all the land that was taken by Ukraine and they're having to use North Koreans to help them do that. China needs them all because they want American power diminished, tied up, canceled, in any way they can, and they see Russia as a useful tool to do that. So, they all have their needs and desires and I think the mutual affray will only increase over time.

Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief because National Security is Everyone’s Business.

CIPHER BRIEF REPORTING — Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is signaling fresh optimism that his country could once again acquire U.S.-made F-35 fighter jets—an unexpected twist in a long-running defense dispute that once fractured NATO unity.

After meeting with former President Donald Trump at the NATO Summit in The Hague earlier this summer, Erdogan told reporters that “technical-level talks” between Turkish and U.S. officials were already underway.

“We discussed the F-35 issue. We made payments of $1.3 to $1.4 billion for the jets, and we saw that Mr. Trump was well-intentioned about delivering them,” Erdogan said. Notably, he added that Turkey’s Russian-made S-400 air defense system—at the center of the years-long impasse—“did not come up” during the talks.

That detail matters. In 2019, the United States formally expelled Turkey from the multinational F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program, citing the S-400 purchase as a direct threat to the aircraft’s stealth and intelligence safeguards. At the time, the decision was widely seen as a sharp rebuke to a NATO ally drifting closer to Moscow.

With a shifting geopolitical landscape and renewed U.S.-Turkey dialogue, the question returns: should Turkey be allowed back into the F-35 program?

Many national security experts argue that the risks of reintegration far outweigh the benefits—both technically and strategically.

“Turkey made its choice despite repeated warnings, advice, and pressure from allies. It went into this with eyes wide open and decided in 2019 to proceed with the S-400 missile defense system,” Sinan Ciddi, Associate Professor of Security Studies at the Marine Corps University and Senior Fellow for the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, tells The Cipher Brief. “Given that, there’s no real upside to letting Turkey back into the F-35 program. The associated dangers are significant.”

Others contend that the potential upsides are worth considering.

“Bringing Turkey back into the F-35 program could strengthen NATO’s southern flank, where Turkey’s strategic position bordering Syria, Iran, and Russia matters. Its air force, stuck with aging F-16s, would gain fifth-generation stealth with the F-35, boosting NATO interoperability and deterrence against adversaries like China and Russia,” John Thomas, Managing Director of strategic advocacy firm, Nestpoint Associates, tells The Cipher Brief. “The deal could allow Turkish firms to make parts which could lower costs, saving US taxpayers billions.”

Ankara had invested approximately $1.4 billion into the project before its removal. Turkish defense contractors played a key role in manufacturing over 900 parts for the aircraft, many of which had to be relocated to U.S. and European facilities at considerable cost and logistical strain.

Yet even among advocates, most agree that reentry would need to be conditional and tightly controlled.

There is also a compelling strategic case. Geographically, Turkey straddles Europe, Asia, and the Middle East, offering air base access near conflict zones from Syria to the Caucasus and eastern Mediterranean.

Beyond hardware and geography, some view Turkey’s reintegration as a means to draw Ankara back from its increasingly independent defense path and closer to the West. Erdogan has hedged against U.S. sanctions by ramping up cooperation with Russia and accelerating development of a homegrown fifth-generation fighter, the KAAN, which completed its first test flight in early 2024.

The Cipher Brief Threat Conference is happening October 19-22 in Sea Island, GA. The world's leading minds on national security from both the public and private sectors will be there. Can you afford to miss out? Apply for your seat at the table today.

The Risks That Haven’t Gone Away

Still, the concerns that led to Turkey’s original expulsion remain unresolved. Chief among them is the continued presence of the Russian S-400 system on Turkish soil.

“The S-400’s radars are a dealbreaker,” Thomas asserted. “Russian systems could collect data on the F-35’s stealth, risking leaks to Moscow, endangering American pilots and allies like Israel.”

Washington officials have repeatedly warned that operating both the S-400 and F-35s in the same environment poses an unacceptable risk to sensitive data and stealth technology.

“To restore trust, Turkey must fully decommission its S-400s—dismantling key components or transferring them to U.S. control at Incirlik. Legal guarantees, like a binding commitment not to procure Russian systems again, need to be non-negotiable,” Thomas continued.

While technical safeguards and legal commitments may help mitigate security risks, others caution that deeper strategic questions remain unresolved.

Jennifer Kavanagh, senior fellow and director of military analysis at Defense Priorities, tells The Cipher Brief that there are several questions Washington officials need to ask.

“How likely is it that Turkey would fight alongside the U.S. in a war or crisis with F-35s should they regain access to the program? In the past, they have even denied the U.S. even the ability to operate from Turkish bases, so there are reasons to be skeptical,” she said.

From her purview, Ankara should “give the S-400 system back to Russia if they are serious about reentering the F-35 program.”

“This is probably not feasible. Decommissioning the system might be sufficient, but in that case, Turkey’s access to the F-35’s classified technology should be limited,” Kavanagh said.

Although Turkish officials have hinted at a possible deactivation or sale of the S-400, no concrete steps have been taken.

Sign up for the Cyber Initiatives Group Sunday newsletter, delivering expert-level insights on the cyber and tech stories of the day – directly to your inbox. Sign up for the CIG newsletter today.

Congressional Red Lines and Executive Authority

Reintegrating Turkey wouldn’t just be a military or diplomatic decision—it would require navigating deep skepticism on Capitol Hill. Under the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA), the U.S. imposed sanctions on Turkey’s defense procurement agency in 2020. Lifting those sanctions would likely require congressional approval, and opposition remains strong.

Senator Jim Risch, a senior Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has repeatedly stated that Turkey should not receive the F-35 as long as the S-400 is operational.

Moreover, in July, a bipartisan letter began circulating in the House, authored by Representatives Chris Pappas (D-NH), Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY), and Dina Titus (D-NV). The lawmakers urged the administration to block any efforts they say would violate U.S. law and compromise national security policy. The State Department responded to the letter, saying: “We have expressed our displeasure with Ankara's acquisition of the S-400 system and have made clear the steps that should be taken as part of our ongoing assessment of the implementation of CAATSA sanctions.”

Ciddi pointed out, however, that there are ways to skirt Congress.

“The National Defense Authorization Act includes explicit language: as long as Turkey maintains the S-400 on its soil, it cannot receive the F-35. That’s been the case since 2019,” he explained. “Could that be bypassed? If the President were to invoke national emergency powers, there is a theoretical path around Congress.”

Beyond Congress, Ciddi continued, there are also “concerns from U.S. allies—Israel, Greece, Cyprus—who argue Turkey has repeatedly crossed red lines, not only by purchasing Russian missile systems but also by deepening strategic ties with Moscow and supporting groups like Hamas.”

“It’s not just about the S-400 anymore; it’s about a broader pattern,” he said. “Turkey isn’t just buying arms from Russia. It’s also building nuclear power plants with them, raising concerns about their eventual nuclear capability. And still, Erdogan hasn’t been held to account.”

There are also regional implications to consider. Israel, which relies heavily on its fleet of F-35s for maintaining its qualitative military edge, has historically been wary of advanced U.S. weapons flowing to rivals or unstable actors in the region. Although Turkey and Israel have recently taken cautious steps toward diplomatic normalization, tensions remain high over Ankara’s support for Hamas and its rhetoric against Israeli military operations.

At the same time, Turkey’s defense posture has shifted notably since its removal. It has forged stronger ties with Russia, expanded defense trade with Central Asian states, and emphasized sovereignty over strategic alignment. Erdogan’s government has leaned on nationalist rhetoric and positioned Turkey as a power broker, independent of both the U.S. and the EU. Analysts underscore that re-admitting Ankara without substantial guarantees risks validating this drift—and could erode the credibility of Western alliances.

A Conditional Path Back—If There Is One

Yet some analysts argue that the current geopolitical moment offers a narrow window for recalibration. The resurgence of great-power competition, coupled with Turkey’s economic strains and regional fatigue, may make Erdogan more inclined to engage in negotiations.

Yet, even limited reentry carries significant political and strategic risks. Whether Turkey is brought back in or kept at arm’s length, the decision will set a precedent not just for arms sales—but for how the U.S. manages defiant allies in an era of global fragmentation.

As the Defense Department emphasized in 2019, the F-35 program depends on mutual trust and alignment. The question now is whether those foundations can be restored—or whether reengagement without clear conditions will do more harm than good.

“Five U.S. administrations now have all sent the same message: that Turkey is too big to fail. No matter how Turkey undermines or acts against U.S. interests, it has barely ever faced any repercussions from Washington,” Blaise Misztal, Vice President for Policy at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, tells The Cipher Brief.

“To allow Turkey to get the F-35 now, without real steps to demonstrate it is willing to be a better ally, will only further convince Turkey that it can do whatever it wants without fear of U.S. pushback. Countries surrounding Turkey, meanwhile, whether U.S. partners or not, will only have their fears confirmed that they must prepare themselves to confront Turkey’s rising power.”

Are you Subscribed to The Cipher Brief’s Digital Channel on YouTube? There is no better place to get clear perspectives from deeply experienced national security experts.

Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief because National Security is Everyone’s Business.

The German Public Prosecution Service confirmed that a bunker functioning as an illegal cyber center had ties to a right-wing dissident movement and possibly to WikiLeaks. These revelations came to light when the main suspect – Herman Johan Verwoert-Derksen (60), also known as ‘Johan X.’ – reacted to his criminal case for the first time.

According to German media, the employees of the cyber center saw the hosting of servers for dissident groups as a lucrative endeavor. One group is specifically mentioned: Generation Identity. That right-wing movement has chapters in several European countries, such as France, Germany, Austria, and the United Kingdom.

Through encrypted messages, an employee of the bunker communicated with a member of Generation Identity. For just thirty euros a month, the cyber bunker would host a cloud server for the group. A very competitive price because other tenants paid hundreds of euros a month for the same service. That may indicate that the employees of the bunker had some degree of sympathy for the ideology of Generation Identity.

The cyber bunker offered a host of IT services, without requiring contracts or personal details. Furthermore, the bunker hosted many websites on the dark web involved in the distribution of drugs, weapons, and even child pornography. The center was also connected to dark web markets such as Wall Street Market, Cannabis Road, and Flugsvamp 2.0. Moreover, massive cyber attacks were conducted from the bunker, sometimes targeting a million routers at the same time.

In 2013, Johan X. – the head of the organization – bought the former NATO bunker located in Traben-Trarbach, a town in Western Germany. In secret, he converted the former bunker into an underground data center. In addition to the main suspect, the police arrested twelve other men, all German and Dutch nationals. They claim to provide a high degree of privacy and thus do not know illegal content was hosted on their servers.

In 2002, Johan X. was involved in a similar case, running a data center in the South West of the Netherlands. His customers were mostly legal pornographers. The police also discovered an ecstasy laboratory in the same building, although he was never convicted in that case.

Johan X. claims to be a victim of political persecution. He believes the German authorities only showed interest because his data center hosted the servers of WikiLeaks. The public prosecutor denies those allegations, stating that investigators did not found any server belonging to WikiLeaks. Furthermore, WikiLeaks is not even mentioned in the indictment.

Regardless of the outcome, (former) employees of Johan X. are already making plans for a new data center. Several countries showed interest, including Bahrain, Moldova, Zimbabwe, and Vietnam.

The post Darknet bunker plot thickens: ties to right-wing dissidents and WikiLeaks appeared first on Rana News.