BRUSSELS — Nothing to see here. That was the message from NATO chief Mark Rutte on Monday, just days after U.S. President Donald Trump doubled down on his threats to take Greenland by force — a move that Denmark cautioned would spell the end of the transatlantic military alliance. NATO is “not at all” in crisis, Rutte told reporters during a visit to Zagreb, brushing off the standoff and saying: “I think we are really working in the right direction.” Trump on Friday warned the U.S. “may” have to choose between seizing Greenland and keeping NATO intact, marking the latest escalation of his long-running campaign to grab the giant Arctic island. Controlling Greenland is “what I feel is psychologically needed,” he added. The U.S. president’s bellicose rhetoric has put the alliance on the brink of an existential crisis, with the prospect of a military attack against an alliance member jolting NATO into largely uncharted waters.  EU defense chief Andrius Kubilius on Monday echoed those concerns. Any military takeover would be “the end of NATO,” he said, and have a “very deep negative impact … on our transatlantic relations.” Alongside its oil and critical mineral deposits, Trump has previously cited swarms of Russian and Chinese vessels near Greenland as driving the U.S.’s need to control the island.  Experts and intelligence reports largely dismiss those claims. But Rutte said there was “a risk that Russians and the Chinese will be more active” regionally.  “All allies agree on the importance of the Arctic and Arctic security,” he said, “and currently we are discussing … how to make sure that we give practical follow-up on those discussions.” On Wednesday, NATO countries asked the alliance to look into options for securing the Arctic, including shifting more military assets to the region and holding more military exercises in Greenland’s vicinity. The U.K. and Germany are reportedly in talks to send troops to the self-ruling Danish territory in an attempt to assuage Washington’s concerns. Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen on Monday also said the territory “increase its efforts to ensure that the defense of Greenland takes place under the auspices of NATO.” Croatian Prime Minister Andrej Plenković, speaking alongside Rutte, said that “allies have to respect each other, including the U.S. as the largest NATO member.” But Rutte also heaped praise on the U.S. president, underscoring the near-impossible tightrope he continues to tread as he attempts to speak for all 32 members of the alliance. “Donald Trump is doing the right things for NATO by encouraging us all to spend more to equalize this,” he said, referencing the alliance’s defense spending target of 5 percent of GDP, agreed last year after intense pressure from Trump. “As [NATO] secretary-general, it is my role to make sure that the whole of the alliance is as secure and safe as possible,” he said. NATO has previously survived the 1974 Turkish invasion of Greek-allied Cyprus, a series of naval confrontations between the U.K. and Iceland over cod and several territorial disputes in the Aegean Sea between Greece and Turkey climaxing in 1987. But an outright attack by its biggest and most well-armed member against another would be unprecedented.  “No provision [in the alliance’s 1949 founding treaty] envisions an attack on one NATO ally by another one,” said one NATO diplomat, who was granted anonymity to speak freely. It would mean “the end of the alliance,” they added.

BRUSSELS — European governments have launched a two-pronged diplomatic offensive to convince Donald Trump to back away from his claims on Greenland: by lobbying in Washington and pressing NATO to allay the U.S. president’s security concerns. The latest moves mark an abrupt change in Europe’s response to Trump’s threats, which are fast escalating into a crisis and have sent officials in Brussels, Berlin and Paris scrambling to sketch out an urgent way forward. Until now they have attempted to play down the seriousness of Trump’s ideas, fearing it would only add credence to what they hoped was mere rhetoric, but officials involved in the discussions say that has now changed. As if to underscore the shift, French President Emmanuel Macron became the most powerful European leader so far to starkly set out the challenges facing the continent. “The United States is an established power that is gradually turning away from some of its allies and breaking free from the international rules that it used to promote,” Macron said in his annual foreign policy address in Paris on Thursday. Trump ratcheted up his rhetoric this week, telling reporters on Sunday night “we need Greenland from the standpoint of national security.” The president has repeatedly refused to rule out military intervention, something Denmark has said would spell the end of NATO ― an alliance of 32 countries, including the U.S., which has its largest military force. Greenland is not in the EU but is a semi-autonomous territory in the Kingdom of Denmark, which is an EU member. Most of the diplomacy remains behind closed doors. The Danish ambassador to the U.S., Jesper Møller Sørensen, and the Greenlandic representative in Washington, Jacob Isbosethsen, held intensive talks with lawmakers on Capitol Hill. The two envoys are attempting to persuade as many of them as possible that Greenland does not want to be bought by the U.S. and that Denmark has no interest in such a deal, an EU diplomat told POLITICO. In an unusual show of dissent, some Trump allies this week publicly objected to the president’s proposal to take Greenland by military force. Danish officials are expected to provide a formal briefing and update on the situation at a meeting of EU ambassadors on Friday, two EU diplomats said. RUSSIAN, CHINESE INFLUENCE At a closed-door meeting in Brussels on Thursday, NATO ambassadors agreed the organization should reinforce the Arctic region, according to three NATO diplomats, all of whom were granted anonymity to talk about the sensitive discussions. Trump claimed the Danish territory is exposed to Russian and Chinese influence, and cited an alleged swarm of threatening ships near Greenland as a reason behind Washington’s latest campaign to control the territory. Experts largely dispute those claims, with Moscow and Beijing mostly focusing their defense efforts — including joint patrols and military investment — in the eastern Arctic. But U.S. Vice President JD Vance told reporters Thursday that Trump wants Europe to take Greenland’s security “more seriously,” or else “the United States is going to have to do something about it.” Europeans see finding a compromise with Trump as the first and preferred option. A boosted NATO presence on the Arctic island might convince the U.S. president that there is no need to own Greenland for security reasons. The Danish ambassador to the US and the Greenlandic representative in Washington held intensive talks with lawmakers on Capitol Hill. | Kevin Carter/Getty Images The NATO envoys meeting Thursday floated leveraging intelligence capabilities to better monitor the territory, stepping up defense spending to the Arctic, shifting more military equipment to the region, and holding more military exercises in the vicinity.  The request for proposals just days after the White House’s latest broadside reflects how seriously Europe is taking the ultimatum and the existential risk any incursion into Greenland would have on the alliance and transatlantic ties. NATO’s civil servants are now expected to come up with options for envoys, the alliance diplomats said. Thursday’s meeting of 32 envoys veered away from direct confrontation, the three NATO diplomats said, with one calling the mood in the room “productive” and “constructive.” Denmark’s ambassador, who spoke first, said the dispute was a bilateral issue and instead focused on the recent successes of NATO’s Arctic strategy and the need for more work in the region, the diplomats said — a statement that received widespread support. The Greenland issue was also raised at a closed-door meeting of EU defense and foreign policy ambassadors on Thursday even though it wasn’t on the formal agenda, the two EU diplomats said. The bloc’s capitals expressed solidarity with Denmark, they added. Jacopo Barigazzi contributed reporting.

BRUSSELS — NATO countries asked the alliance to beef up its presence in the Arctic after the U.S. ramped up threats to seize Greenland, three NATO diplomats told POLITICO. At a closed-door meeting in Brussels on Thursday, the alliance’s ambassadors agreed the organization should reinforce its Arctic flank, according to the diplomats, all of whom were granted anonymity to talk about the sensitive discussions. U.S. President Donald Trump has claimed the Danish territory is exposed to Russian and Chinese influence. Envoys floated leveraging intelligence capabilities to better monitor the territory, stepping up defense spending to the Arctic, shifting more military equipment to the region, and holding more military exercises in the vicinity.  The flurry of ideas underscores a growing European concern around U.S. intentions on Greenland. This week, the White House ratcheted up its claims on Greenland, and repeatedly refused to rule out a military takeover.  Europe is scrambling to placate the latest Trump threats and avoid a military intervention that Denmark has said would mean the end of the alliance. A compromise with the U.S. president is seen as the first and preferred option. The request for proposals just days after the White House’s latest broadside reflects how seriously Europe is taking the ultimatum and the existential risk any incursion onto Greenland would be on the alliance and transatlantic ties. NATO’s civil servants are now expected to come up with options for envoys, the alliance diplomats said. Alongside its wealth of raw material and oil deposits, Trump has cited an alleged swarm of threatening Russian and Chinese ships near Greenland as a reason behind Washington’s latest campaign to control the territory.  Experts largely dispute those claims, with Moscow and Beijing mostly focusing their defense efforts — including joint patrols and military investment — in the eastern Arctic. Thursday’s meeting of 32 envoys veered away from direct confrontation, the three NATO diplomats said, with one calling the mood in the room “productive” and “constructive.” Denmark’s ambassador, who spoke first, said the dispute was a bilateral issue and instead focused on recent successes of NATO’s Arctic strategy and the need for more work in the region, the diplomats said — a statement that received widespread support. The Greenland issue was also raised at a closed-door meeting of EU defense and foreign policy ambassadors on Thursday, despite it not being on the formal agenda, two EU diplomats said. The bloc’s capitals then expressed their solidarity for Denmark, they added. Denmark is expected to provide a formal briefing and update at a meeting of EU envoys on Friday, the same diplomats said. Zoya Sheftalovich contributed to this report.

BRUSSELS — If European governments didn’t realize before that Donald Trump’s threats to seize Greenland were serious, they do now. Policymakers are no longer ignoring the U.S. president’s ramped-up rhetoric — and are desperately searching for a plan to stop him. “We must be ready for a direct confrontation with Trump,” said an EU diplomat briefed on ongoing discussions. “He is in an aggressive mode, and we need to be geared up.” U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Wednesday that he planned to discuss a U.S. acquisition of Greenland with Danish officials next week. The White House said Trump’s preference would be to acquire the territory through a negotiation and also that it would consider purchasing the island — but that a military takeover was possible. As diplomatic efforts intensified in Europe, French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot said he and his counterparts from Germany and Poland had discussed a joint European response to Trump’s threats. “What is at stake is the question of how Europe, the EU, can be strengthened to deter threats, attempts on its security and interests,” Barrot told reporters. “Greenland is not for sale, and it is not for taking … so the threats must stop.” POLITICO spoke with officials, diplomats, experts and NATO insiders to map out how Europe could deter the U.S. president from getting that far, and what its options are if he does. They were granted anonymity to speak freely. “Everyone is very stunned and unaware of what we actually have in the toolbox,” said a former Danish MP. “No one really knows what to do because the Americans can do whatever they want. But we need answers to these questions immediately. They can’t wait three or five or seven years.” On Wednesday, POLITICO set out the steps Trump could take to seize Greenland. Now here’s the flip side: What Europe does to stop him. OPTION 1: FIND A COMPROMISE Trump says Greenland is vital for U.S. security interests and accuses Denmark of not doing enough to protect it against increasing Chinese and Russian military activity in the Arctic.  A negotiated settlement that sees Trump come out of talks with something he can sell as a win and that allows Denmark and Greenland to save face is perhaps the fastest route out of trouble. A former senior NATO official suggested the alliance could mediate between Greenland, Denmark and the U.S., as it has done with alliance members Turkey and Greece over their disputes. U.S. NATO Ambassador Matthew Whitaker said on Wednesday that Trump and his advisers do not believe Greenland is properly secured. | Omar Havana/Getty Images U.S. NATO Ambassador Matthew Whitaker said on Wednesday that Trump and his advisers do not believe Greenland is properly secured. “As the ice thaws and as the routes in the Arctic and the High North open up … Greenland becomes a very serious security risk for the mainland of the United States of America.” NATO allies are also mulling fresh overtures to Trump that could bolster Greenland’s security, despite a widely held view that any direct threat from Russian and Chinese ships to the territory is overstated. Among other proposals, the alliance should consider accelerating defense spending on the Arctic, holding more military exercises in the region, and posting troops to secure Greenland and reassure the U.S. if necessary, according to three NATO diplomats.  The alliance should also be open to setting up an “Arctic Sentry” scheme — shifting its military assets to the region — similar to its Eastern Sentry and Baltic Sentry initiatives, two of the diplomats said. “Anything that can be done” to bolster the alliance’s presence near Greenland and meet Trump’s demands “should be maxed out,” said one of the NATO diplomats cited above. Trump also says he wants Greenland for its vast mineral deposits and potential oil and gas reserves. But there’s a reason Greenland has remained largely untapped: Extracting resources from its inhospitable terrain is difficult and very expensive, making them less competitive than Chinese imports. Denmark’s envoys say they tried for years to make the case for investment in Greenland, but their European counterparts weren’t receptive — though an EU diplomat familiar with the matter said there are signs that attitude is shifting. OPTION 2: GIVE GREENLAND A TON OF CASH The Trump administration has thrown its weight behind Greenland’s independence movement. The pitch is that if the Arctic territory leaves the Kingdom of Denmark and signs up to a deal with the U.S., it will be flooded with American cash.  While Trump has repeatedly refused to rule out using military force to take Greenland, he has also insisted he wants it to come willingly. The EU and Denmark are trying to convince Greenlanders that they can give them a better deal. Brussels is planning to more than double its spending on Greenland from 2028 under long-term budget plans drawn up after Trump started to make claims on the Danish-held territory, according to a draft proposal from the European Commission published in September. Under the plans, which are subject to further negotiations among member countries, the EU would almost double spending on Greenland to €530 million for a seven-year period starting in 2028.  That comes on top of the money Denmark sends Greenland as part of its agreement with the self-governing territory. Greenland would also be eligible to apply for an additional €44 million in EU funding for remote territories associated with European countries, per the same document. Danish and European support currently focuses mainly on welfare, health care, education and the territory’s green transition. Under the new spending plans, that focus would expand to developing the island’s ability to extract mineral resources. “We have many, many people below the poverty line, and the infrastructure in Greenland is lagging, and our resources are primarily taken out without good profit to Greenland but mostly profit to Danish companies,” said Kuno Fencker, a pro-independence Greenlandic opposition MP.  An attractive offer from Denmark and the EU could be enough to keep Greenlanders out of America’s grasp. OPTION 3: RETALIATE ECONOMICALLY Since Trump’s first term in office, “there’s been a lot of effort to try and think through how we ensure European security, Nordic security, Arctic security, without the U.S. actively involved,” said Thomas Crosbie, a U.S. military expert at the Royal Danish Defense College, which provides training and education for the Danish defense force. “That’s hard, but it’s possible. But I don’t know if anyone has seriously contemplated ensuring European security against America. It’s just crazy,” Crosbie said. The EU does have one strong political tool at its disposal, which it could use to deter Trump: the Anti-Coercion Instrument, the “trade bazooka” created after the first Trump administration, which allows the EU to retaliate against trade discrimination. The EU threatened to deploy it after Trump slapped tariffs on the bloc but shelved it in July after the two sides reached a deal. With the U.S. still imposing tariffs on the EU, Brussels could bring the bazooka back out. “We have exports to the United States a bit above €600 billion, and for around one-third of those goods we have a market share of more than 50 percent and it’s totally clear that this is also the power in our hands,” said Bernd Lange, chair of the European Parliament’s trade committee. But Trump would have to believe the EU was serious, given that all its tough talk amounted to nothing the last time around. OPTION 4: BOOTS ON THE GROUND If the U.S. does decide to take Greenland by military force, there’s little Europeans could do to prevent it.  “They are not going to preemptively attack Americans before they claim Greenland, because that would be done before an act of war,” said Crosbie, the Danish military educator. “But in terms of responding to the first move, it really depends. If the Americans have a very small group of people, you could try and arrest those people, because there’d be a criminal act.” It’s a different story if the U.S. goes in hard. Legally speaking, it’s possible Denmark would be forced to respond militarily. Under a 1952 standing order, troops should “immediately take up the fight without waiting for, or seeking orders” in “the event of an attack on Danish territory.” European countries should weigh the possibility of deploying troops to Greenland — if Denmark requests it — to increase the potential cost of U.S. military action, an EU diplomat said, echoing suggestions that Berlin and Paris could send forces to deter any incursion. While those forces are unlikely to be able to withstand a U.S. invasion, they would act as a deterrent. “You could have a tripwire effect where you have some groups of people who are physically in the way, like a Tiananmen Square-type situation, which would potentially force the [U.S.] military to use violence” or to back down, said Crosbie.  But that strategy comes at a high cost, he said. “This is completely unexplored territory, but it is quite possible that people’s lives will be lost in the attempt to reject the American claim over Greenland.” Gerardo Fortuna, Clea Caulcutt and Eli Stokols contributed reporting.

BUCHAREST — NATO chief Mark Rutte on Wednesday played down a U.S. announcement that it was withdrawing hundreds of troops from Romania just as the alliance grapples with an increasing number of suspected Russian hybrid attacks. Washington had said last week it would redeploy an infantry brigade of around 700 troops back to Kentucky from Romania, as the Pentagon reorients its focus to domestic priorities like border protection and the Indo-Pacific region. “This happens all the time … please don’t read too much into that,” Rutte told POLITICO at a press conference. “Wherever and whenever needed we can always scale up collectively, including in Romania.” “In Europe and Romania, the American presence is more powerful than in 2020,” echoed Romanian President Nicușor Dan, speaking from a vast marbled Union Hall in Bucharest’s sprawling Cotroceni Palace. “So there is no concern, no worry.” The comments come as the alliance faces escalating airspace violations and hybrid attacks. Russian drones have been intercepted and shot down over Poland in recent months while another Russian drone was tracked over Romania; drones of unknown origin have disrupted air traffic at airports in Denmark, Norway and Germany. In response to the incursions, NATO has agreed to deploy more warplanes and air defense systems to frontline countries in a new program called “Eastern Sentry.” Rutte suggested the new deployments could also help fill any gap left by U.S. withdrawals. “With this Eastern Sentry, we can bring more capabilities to bear wherever and whenever needed … also in Romania,” he said. “This military activity not only adds additional assets from allies, it also better connects the range of assets already available all along our eastern flank,” Rutte added. The alliance is also currently carrying out beefed-up military exercises in Romania, the NATO chief said. Allies are scaling up participating troops “from 1,500 to over 5,000 troops so that we are able, whenever necessary, to immediately get all the troops in Romania needed,” Rutte argued. The U.S. has around 85,000 troops in Europe including 20,000 that were deployed after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The announced pullback, which would leave around 1,000 U.S. soldiers in Romania, will include forces stationed at Romania’s eastern Mihail Kogălniceanu Air Base, a key hub for the alliance’s operations on the Black Sea. NATO allies including Norway and the U.K. on Wednesday also downplayed Washington’s announcement, even as senior Republican lawmakers in the U.S. Senate and House cried foul over the move. But Rutte insisted the alliance was ready to defend Bucharest — whether the troops are rotated out or stay put. “We can bring more capabilities where needed, but … if this country would be under attack, it is 31 other nations coming to the rescue of Romania,” he said, adding: “This makes us unbeatable — absolutely unbeatable — and that is why I believe that nobody will ever try.”

BERLIN — A joint military exercise in Bavaria went badly wrong this week after a German soldier was shot and wounded by police officers who mistook him for an armed threat, authorities said Thursday. The incident occurred Wednesday evening in the town of Erding, northeast of Munich, when police received an emergency call reporting “a man with a long gun,” according to the Bavarian police. Officers responding to the call surrounded the area and, amid what officials later described as a “miscommunication,” opened fire. “It was a communication failure,” a police spokesperson told the German press agency dpa, adding that the local police were unaware that a Bundeswehr training exercise was taking place in the area. The soldier, who was participating in a drill simulating combat during wartime, was hit and lightly injured. He was treated in hospital and released later that night, police said. The shooting happened during “Marshal Power,” a large-scale defense exercise involving several hundred soldiers across 12 Bavarian districts. The Bundeswehr said the drill was meant to test coordination between soldiers, police, firefighters and rescue services in a mock national defense scenario. According to Bild, the Bundeswehr’s military police may have fired training blanks at the responding officers, apparently mistaking them for part of the ongoing drill. The police, unaware of the exercise, allegedly returned fire with live ammunition, injuring the soldier. The police confirmed that the local units had not been involved in planning the drill and were unaware that armed personnel would be active in the area that day. “We are now intensively examining where the communication broke down,” a police spokesperson said. The Bavarian state criminal police and prosecutors in Landshut have opened an investigation into the incident. Bavaria’s Interior Minister Joachim Herrmann, who oversees the Bavarian police, has not yet commented publicly.

When Vladimir Putin sent at least 19 drones into Poland last week, the Russian president was delivering a message: He’s not planning to end his war against the West anytime soon. The Russian incursion into NATO airspace follows weeks of aerial attacks in Ukraine that killed dozens of civilians, damaged buildings housing the EU and British delegations and struck for the first time a government building in central Kyiv.  Far from being ready to strike a peace deal with Ukraine under pressure from U.S. President Donald Trump, Putin has pegged his political survival to a simmering conflict with the United States and its allies. “Putin is the president of war,” said Nikolai Petrov, a senior analyst at the London-based New Eurasian Strategies Center. “He has no interest in ending it.” Having fashioned himself as a wartime leader, going back to being a peacetime president would be tantamount to a demotion. “No matter what the conditions are, he cannot give up that role,” Petrov said.  As Putin’s full-scale assault on Ukraine drags toward its fourth year, the Russian president arguably has the most cause for optimism since the early days of the war when the Kremlin hoped to capture the country in a matter of days. With Ukrainian forces hamstrung by a lack of weapons and manpower, Russia has been grinding deeper into the country.  But Moscow’s progress has been slow — and costly. The Kremlin’s armed forces have suffered an estimated one million casualties and the conflict has taken its toll on the Russian economy, which threatens to tip into recession. And yet, politically, ending the conflict comes with risks. The Kremlin’s tight control over the media and the internet would likely allow it to sell a peace deal to most Russians as a victory. But that’s not who the Russian president will be worrying about. With Russia’s liberal opposition decimated, a small but vocal group of nationalists now presents the biggest threat to his rule, said Petrov. And he has promised them a grandiose victory, not only over Ukraine but over what the Kremlin calls “the collective West.” “There’s a desire among the hawkish part of the military-political establishment to destroy NATO,” Alexander Baunov, a former Russian diplomat now a senior fellow at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center, told DW’s Russian service. “To show NATO is worthless.” Since Putin met with Trump in Alaska last month in what the U.S. president had touted as a summit dedicated to striking a ceasefire, Moscow has ramped up its campaign of hybrid warfare against Europe, according to military analysts.  Before Wednesday’s incursion, Russian drones had repeatedly ventured into Polish airspace from neighboring Belarus, circling cities before turning back. In August, a Russian drone crashed some 100 kilometers southwest of Warsaw.  According to WELT, a sister publication of POLITICO in the Axel Springer Group, five of the drones that crossed into Poland were on a direct flight path toward a NATO base before being intercepted by Dutch Lockheed Martin F-35 fighter jets. In an opinion piece published two days before the drones crossed into Poland, Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, accused Helsinki of planning an attack, threatening that any assault “could lead to the collapse of Finnish statehood — once and for all.”  Analysts noted the article’s rhetoric resembled the Kremlin’s talking points ahead of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Moscow has also begun to shift vital industries, including shipbuilding, to the east of the country, away from its border with NATO, Petrov pointed out. On Friday, Russia began carrying out large-scale military exercises with Belarus, including just across the Polish border. The exercises are expected to conclude on Tuesday. “Whatever Putin achieves in Ukraine, the confrontation with the West will not end there; it will continue in various forms,” said Petrov. “Including militarily.” With actions like the incursion into Poland, Putin is issuing a warning to Trump and European leaders discussing providing security guarantees for Kyiv after a potential peace deal, said Kirill Rogov, founder of the think tank Re:Russia. “Putin showed that he can attack NATO countries today and they have no defense systems in place,” he said. Trump’s mixed signaling on his commitment to NATO and his unwillingness to stick to his own deadlines when it comes to imposing sanctions on Moscow give Putin the confidence that he can get away with it. For the Russian president, “it’s now or never,” Baunov added. Incursions like the one in Poland are intended to chip away at the Western military alliance’s commitment to collective defense, with small offensives that test NATO’s willingness to respond. The hope, said Baunov, is to reveal the military alliance as a toothless tiger. So far, the reaction from Washington has fed into those fears.  On Thursday, Trump echoed Moscow’s talking points, telling reporters that “it could have been a mistake.”  The Kremlin has dismissed accusations that the drones were a deliberate provocation. The Russian defense ministry said there “had been no plans to target facilities” in Poland.  Belarus, which served as a launchpad for some of the drones according to Polish officials, said the incursion could have been the result of a mishap due to “electronic jamming.” “This is typical Putin-style trolling and probing,” said Rogov. “He likes things to be ambivalent so that they can be interpreted either as deliberate or accidental.”

Poland will shut its border with Belarus at midnight on Thursday in response to a major Russian military exercise, Prime Minister Donald Tusk said Tuesday. Moscow holds the Zapad exercise, a joint drill with Kremlin-allied Belarus, roughly every four years to simulate a clash with NATO countries in Eastern Europe. Tusk said the “very aggressive” drills had prompted Warsaw’s decision to shut the border with Belarus. “We are facing a growing number of provocations from Russia and Belarus,” he added. The war games, running Sept. 12–16, will involve tens of thousands of Russian and Belarusian troops in maneuvers close to Poland and Lithuania. Some drills — near the Belarusian village of Gozha and in the Russian exclave Kaliningrad’s Dobrovolsk — will take place just a few dozen kilometers away from the NATO countries’ borders. Russian and Belarusian troops will also practice planning to use Oreshnik nuclear-capable missile systems. Tusk said a key “target” of the drills is the Suwałki Gap, the NATO-controlled, 70-kilometer choke point separating Belarus and Kaliningrad that Russia would need to take over in the event of an all-out war. It is not the first time Poland has clamped down on its border with Belarus. Warsaw has shut border checkpoints in recent years amid mounting tensions with Minsk and last year suspended access to asylum for migrants crossing into the country via Belarus, accusing the country of orchestrating a crisis on the Polish border as a form of hybrid warfare.  

Russia’s neighbors are preparing for a nervous few days next week when the Kremlin holds its Zapad 2025 war games along with its ally Belarus, its first since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. The drills, running Sept. 12–16, will have some maneuvers taking place close to Poland and Lithuania as the Kremlin practices for a possible clash with NATO forces. “We must take the exercises near NATO and EU borders seriously; both the bordering countries and NATO itself are treating them with the utmost seriousness,” said Lithuanian Deputy Defense Minister Tomas Godliauskas. “Lithuania and our allies are prepared, united, and will closely monitor developments, ready to respond if necessary.” In response, NATO countries bordering Russia are holding their own war games. Tarassis 25 involves 10 Northern European NATO countries, while Lithuania will hold its own Thunder Strike national defense exercise. Poland holds its Iron Defender-25, with 30,000 troops taking part, this week. “Poland will respond to the Zapad 2025 exercises … in an appropriate manner on the Polish side,” Deputy Defense Minister Cezary Tomczyk told Polish broadcaster RMF.  Russia has been running Zapad exercises roughly every four years since 1999, and anxiety about them is something of a tradition. Although they are formally defensive drills, the one in 2009 simulated a nuclear attack on Warsaw and the 2021 exercise led to a massive buildup of forces in Belarus that were used months later to attack Ukraine. With growing alarm in NATO that Russia might add to its ongoing war with Ukraine by attacking an alliance member — possibly in the Baltics — NATO is watching very carefully to see if Zapad gives any clues about a future Russian offensive, said Tomas Janeliūnas, professor at Vilnius University’s Institute of International Relations and Political Science. Western observers will use Zapad to gauge the readiness of the Russian military three years after it attacked Ukraine — a war that has cost Russia over a million casualties and destroyed vast amounts of equipment but also ramped up Russia’s war economy. “NATO monitors Russia’s military activity very closely. We do not see any immediate military threat against any NATO Ally. Nevertheless, we remain vigilant,” the alliance said in a written comment. Russia has been running Zapad exercises roughly every four years since 1999, and anxiety about them is something of a tradition. | Tatiana Zenkovich/EPA Zapad organizers claim their drills will not exceed 13,000 personnel, and Belarus has said it is inviting observers from NATO countries as well as the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe. Russian and Belarusian troops will also practice planning to use Oreshnik nuclear-capable missile systems. Russia is also running three other separate exercises with Collective Security Treaty Organization countries — masking the true size of the drills, said the German Council on Foreign Relations. (The CSTO includes Russia, Belarus, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan.) “The scenarios of these exercises are expected to indicate the type of warfare Russia is preparing for against the West,” it said. The Zapad exercise will cover Russia’s Moscow and Leningrad military districts, the Kaliningrad exclave, the Arctic region, the Baltic and Barents seas and Belarus. Some drills — near the Belarusian village of Gozha and in Kaliningrad’s Dobrovolsk — will take place just a few dozen kilometers from Poland and Lithuania. Troops will also be positioned on both sides of the Suwałki Gap, the 70-kilometer corridor between Belarus and Kaliningrad widely seen as one of Europe’s most vulnerable defense bottlenecks. Lithuania’s military intelligence expects that up to 30,000 soldiers will participate in Zapad— far less than in 2021, which saw around 200,000 soldiers take part. That is far from what Russia would need to attack a NATO member, especially as the war in Ukraine is ongoing, Janeliūnas said. ESCALATION RISK However, Moscow could use the drills to test NATO’s reaction to provocations such as airspace violations, cyberattacks or even sabotage of civilian infrastructure — gauging how quickly allies respond and whether they pin responsibility on Russia. That raises the danger of escalation. “It is entirely possible that certain coinciding signals could be interpreted as an actual attack on NATO countries,” Janeliūnas said. “One has to understand a simple fact: During military exercises, when weapons are ready … it is often difficult to distinguish simulation from real military action.” But Godliauskas said Lithuania is capable of differentiating threats. “We have the ability to observe and respond, and to distinguish between an accident and a real threat,” he said. Despite that, Godliauskas said, “it’s unrealistic to expect a zero probability of air incursions.” Two drones entered Lithuanian airspace from Belarus in July, and the country recently closed its airspace along the Belarus border until Oct. 1. 

Officials in Canberra are scrambling to stop Russia from using an Indonesian air force base that would put its jets within striking range of the Australian mainland. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said Tuesday his government was “seeking further clarification” from Jakarta about Moscow’s request to access the Manuhua Air Force Base, which was first reported by American military website Janes. Apparently confirming that the Kremlin asked to house its long-range aircraft at the base, Defense Minister Richard Marles said Tuesday that Indonesia had “not responded” to the request and that Canberra was engaging with Jakarta “at a senior level” on the matter. Although Indonesia has long maintained strategic neutrality, it has deepened security and defense ties with Russia since President Prabowo Subianto was elected last year. Manuhua Air Force Base sits in the province of West Papua, about 1,300 kilometers from Darwin, a city on Australia’s northern tip. Australia and the United States frequently conduct military exercises in the area.