Whether Russian President Vladimir Putin will launch an attack on the Baltic countries, as many now fear is possible, remains uncertain (seeStrategic Snapshot, June 8, 2025; see EDM, September 4, 2025, May 8;Novaya Gazeta Evropa, June 5). Moscow is pushing a propaganda line that has consequences not only for the Baltics but for all members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
Senior Russian officials are now very publicly declaring that the three Baltic countries, all members of NATO, cannot count on the alliance to come to their aid if Moscow attacks them, as Article 5 of the treaty requires, because they, not Russia, are the aggressor (Re:Baltica, June 4). Such a claim—one arising from Putin’s assessment of NATO’s current state amid changes in U.S. policy and divisions in Europe—will intimidate some alliance members and pave the way for further Russian aggression unless NATO unequivocally rejects it (see EDM, February 2).
As Russia’s war against Ukraine grinds on in its fifth year with no path to a Russian triumph clear, many are speculating that Putin will try to get a victory elsewhere to recover his image as a strongman who always wins. Among the places where experts have most often suggested he might attack are islands in the North Atlantic and Baltic Seas with complicated legal regimes (see EDM, June 11, August 15, September 24, 2024,September 16, 2025).
In recent months, however, speculation about a new vector of Russian aggression has focused increasingly often on the possibility of a Russian move against one or more of the Baltic countries, given their former status as Russian possessions. Their current membership in the Western alliance is especially irritating to Putin and is something he would very much like to change (Novaya Gazeta Evropa, June 5). Such suggestions have become increasingly frequent given Russian provocations such as the recent redirection of Ukrainian drones onto Latvian territory by Russian forces (Window on Eurasia, June 1).
The Baltic countries have responded in three ways. They have taken the lead among Western countries in supporting Ukraine, have sought new security relations with their immediate neighbors, such as Poland, and with the new NATO members Finland and Sweden, and have built up their own defense capabilities (see EDM, February 2). They have done so, however, in every case with confidence that Article 5 of the NATO Charter remains in place. This article specifies that an attack on any NATO country will be treated as an attack on all and that NATO’s leaders will consult with one another on how to respond. Until recently, most Baltic leaders and many observers in the West have stressed the first part of that arrangement and assumed that the alliance would respond vigorously and militarily to any Russian move against a NATO member state. Now, however, given changes in U.S. policy and divisions among some European NATO members, there is an increasing tendency to question the open-ended nature of Article 5, which promised to consult on what to do in the event of an attack rather than to respond immediately and forcefully, as many had assumed.
Unsurprisingly, Moscow has sought to exploit these divisions. That approach reached a new high on May 19 when Vasiliy Nebenza, Russia’s permanent representative to the United Nations, pointedly told the Latvians that their support for Ukraine and opposition to Russian actions there meant that “NATO membership will not protect you” in the event of a Russian action against the Baltics because the Baltics themselves will have provoked it. The U.S. representative at the UN Security Council, Tammy Bruce, responded by criticizing Nebenza for his attack on another UN member state and insisted that Washington would continue to fulfill its responsibilities as a NATO member (Facebook/dw.russian, May 19). Whether that will be enough to stop this Russian campaign and the actions it appears to be pointing toward remains to be seen.
Anastasija Tetarenko-Supe, a Latvian foreign policy expert and journalist, points out that Nebenza’s words are especially troubling. They were not an isolated move but part of what she calls “a perfect storm” of Russian actions against the Baltic countries (Re:Baltica, June 4). On the same day the Russian diplomat made his remarks at the UN Security Council, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) released a report saying that Ukrainian military personnel were already in Latvia to prepare drone strikes against Russia and that Moscow “knew the coordinates of the relevant ‘decision-making’ centers” (SVR, May 19). This is something Russian Telegram channels had earlier claimed, but it now has the imprimatur of the Russian government, even though it is quite clear that, similar to many other Russian statements on such subjects, it is itself a provocation and untrue.
Titarenko-Supe says major Russian propaganda channels and state-affiliated news wires amplified support for the Nebenza–SVR version of events. These outlets particularly included “TASS, Readovka, Voekony Russkoy Vesny, Solovoyev, Skabeyeva, [and] ANNA,” among others. Channels targeting Baltic audiences then picked it up, including “Baltnews, Sputnik Lithuania, Sprats in Exile, The Latvian Bump, Shadows of the Baltics, Baltic Anti-Fascists and The Baltic Bridge.” She explained, “Some of these are linked to former RT (formerly Russia Today) contributors who once lived in the Baltics, as well as local activists who fled to Russia” (Re:Baltica, June 4).
Some channels went even further, portraying denials by Latvian officials not as rebuttals but as “proof” that the SVR had struck a nerve. Titarenko-Supe says, citing Latvian disinformation researcher Mārtiņš Hiršs’s conclusions, that what Moscow is doing is consistent with its past actions on other issues. The Kremlin floods the media with its version in the hopes that volume will outweigh the facts and that journalists seeking to be balanced will report its version of events, one that makes Latvia the aggressor and Russia the defender of international law, alongside more accurate reporting that shows just the reverse is true. (For Hiršs’s study on such patterns, see Echoes from Kremlin: New Platforms, Old Narratives, July 2025.)
Echoing Hiršs, Titarenko-Supe argues that Moscow’s “objective” has been to spread fear while recasting the Baltics from bystanders to participants. This makes Russian threats appear less like aggression and more like a response” and “to weaken support for Ukraine and erode trust in Latvian democratic institutions by suggesting that governments conceal the truth, the media lies and the truth is told by Russia—or [a] Tiktoker broadcasting from Belarus” (Re:Baltica, June 4). One could add to this list of Russia’s goals the reduction in trust in NATO and its Article 5 guarantees, a development that would threaten far more than Latvia and the other Baltic countries and make Europe an even more unstable place unless and until NATO makes it crystal clear that it will not be deterred from fulfilling its Article 5 guarantees by Russian threats and propaganda campaigns.
French NATO jets destroy mystery drone over Latvia as Ukraine war intensifies
French NATO fighter jets stationed in the Baltic region shot down a drone that had entered Latvian airspace on Monday, marking a rare interception under the alliance’s Baltic Air Policing mission. It follows a series of similar incidents linked to the war in Ukraine as Moscow and Kyiv step up drone strikes on each other.
Issued on: 08/06/2026 - RFI
A French Rafale fighter jet flying a NATO mission shot down a “foreign” drone over Latvia on 8 June 2026 (illustration) AFP - CHRISTOPHE ARCHAMBAULT
Latvia’s military said in a statement that the unmanned aerial vehicle had crossed into its territory "as a result of Russian electronic warfare", without specifying its origin.
Officials suggested the drone may have been diverted from its intended course amid ongoing interference linked to the war in Ukraine.
Latvian Foreign Minister Baiba Braze praised the operation, writing on social media platform X: "Thank you, our French Allies, for taking down the drone that flew into Latvian airspace!"
According to Lithuanian military spokesperson Gintautas Ciunis, two French jets deployed at the Siauliai airbase in northern Lithuania were scrambled and neutralised the drone at around 10:00 local time.
Drone incident near French carrier in Sweden points to possible Russian link
The incident is the first confirmed case of NATO aircraft intercepting and destroying a drone over Latvia as part of the Baltic Air Policing mission, which has operated since 2004 to safeguard the airspace of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.
Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, both Russian and Ukrainian drones have crashed in the Baltic states and beyond, raising concerns over airspace security and the risk of escalation.
FILE - A Romanian Air Force F- 16s military fighter jet, left, and a Portuguese Air Force F- 16s military fighter jets participating in NATO's Baltic Air Policing Mission operate over the Baltic Sea, Lithuanian airspace, on May 22, 2023. The United States has given its approval for the Netherlands to deliver F-16s to Ukraine, the Dutch defense minister said Friday, Aug. 18, 2023 in a major gain for Kyiv even though the fighter jets won’t have an immediate impact on the almost 18-month war. (AP Photo/Mindaugas Kulbis, File) AP - Mindaugas Kulbis
On 19 May, a Romanian jet stationed in Lithuania shot down a Ukrainian drone over Estonia after it strayed off course, while a day later Lithuania issued its first public air alert when another drone approached Vilnius.
Escalation
Elsewhere, Moldova reported on Monday that a drone had crashed and exploded on agricultural land near the eastern village of Lopatna after entering its airspace overnight.
Authorities said no injuries were reported and suggested the drone was most likely of Ukrainian origin, though officials in Chisinau stressed that Russia ultimately bears responsibility for such incidents.
Moldova has had its airspace breached dozens of times since the start of the war in Ukraine in 2022.
Zelensky to urge EU leaders to speed up Europe’s drone shield plan
Moldovan President Maia Sandu said the country needs to strengthen its anti-drone and jamming systems.
"We must begin producing drones capable of intercepting and shooting down other drones," she said in an interview over the weekend.
Romania, an EU and NATO member bordering both Moldova and Ukraine, has also seen two drones explode on its territory in recent weeks.
Officials across the region warn that Russian electronic warfare systems are increasingly disrupting navigation, causing drones to veer into neighbouring countries.
Nuclear storage unit hit
Moscow and Kyiv have intensified drone strikes on each other in recent months, as US-led diplomatic efforts to end the war – now in its fifth year – remain stalled and sidetracked by the conflict in the Middle East.
On Monday, a Ukrainian drone strike on a passenger train killed one of its drivers and wounded the other, Sergey Aksyonov, the Moscow-installed head of the Crimea region wrote on Telegram.
France, UK, Germany back face-to-face Ukraine-Russia ceasefire talks
The attack came hours after Russia fired waves of drones and other munitions at Ukraine, with one of the attacks damaging a nuclear storage facility near the Chernobyl disaster site, Ukrainian officials said.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said it was dispatching a team to inspect the damage, calling the incident "deeply concerning".
