We should not expect Russia to passively lose.
As Russia's war in Ukraine stalls and Ukrainian strikes reach deep into Russian territory, intelligence services from Latvia and Poland are warning that Moscow may be preparing provocations along NATO's eastern flank — not as a prelude to full invasion, but as a calculated test of whether the West will hold together under pressure. The Kremlin, historically unwilling to absorb defeat quietly, appears to be searching for leverage at the margins: hybrid attacks, drone incursions, and acts of sabotage designed to raise the cost of supporting Ukraine without triggering the alliance's mutual defense clause. The question now before NATO, gathering in Ankara amid doubts about American commitment, is an old one dressed in new urgency — whether solidarity is a principle or merely a convenience.
- Ukrainian deep-strike drones are now reaching Moscow itself, forcing the Kremlin to confront a war it can no longer contain within Ukraine's borders.
- Latvia and Poland's intelligence services warn Russia is actively preparing provocations — missiles, drones, hybrid operations — aimed at the Baltic states to test whether NATO will actually defend its smallest members.
- Russia has already rehearsed this playbook: firebombs in DHL parcels across Europe, 19 decoy drones crossing into Polish airspace last September, each incident probing the alliance without quite crossing the line that would demand a unified response.
- NATO's Ankara summit arrives shadowed by Trump's public frustration with European allies, handing the Kremlin exactly the atmosphere of doubt it needs to gamble on Western fracture.
- Intelligence officials caution the current warnings lack the specificity of pre-invasion assessments from 2022 — the signals are real, but the shape and timing of what Russia intends remain uncertain.
Intelligence officials from Latvia and a second unnamed NATO country are warning that Russia may be preparing a deliberate provocation against the Baltic states or Poland — not a full invasion, but a calculated act designed to test whether the West will hold firm in its support for Ukraine.
The warnings arrive at a moment of mounting pressure on Moscow. Ukrainian forces have developed the capacity to strike targets nearly 2,000 kilometers inside Russia, and last week alone, close to 200 drones hit locations across Moscow, including a refinery whose burning oil fell on parts of the capital. For the first time, the war has come home to Russia in a visceral way — and Western analysts fear the Kremlin's response may be to lash out sideways rather than absorb the blow.
Russia lacks the military capacity to open a genuine second front, but it has other tools. Intelligence officials describe a strategy of 'hybrid attacks' — missiles, drones, sabotage — designed to send a message without technically triggering Article 5, NATO's mutual defense clause. This is not a new playbook: since 2022, Moscow has conducted waves of European sabotage, including firebombs concealed in DHL parcels and, last September, 19 decoy drones that crossed into Polish airspace and sent civilians in three provinces to shelter.
What makes the current moment distinct is context. Russia's invasion has stalled, Ukrainian counteroffensives have reclaimed territory, and Keir Giles of Chatham House warns that Moscow will seek to disrupt the trajectory rather than passively accept it. 'We should not expect Russia to passively lose,' he said.
NATO's annual summit in Ankara this month adds another layer of uncertainty. Donald Trump recently expressed frustration with European allies, and that public doubt about American commitment may be precisely what the Kremlin is calculating on — that a well-timed provocation could expose fractures in the alliance and convince wavering members that backing Ukraine carries too high a price.
The intelligence being shared is real but incomplete — consistent across services, but lacking the specificity of the warnings that preceded Russia's full-scale invasion in February 2022. The question is no longer whether Russia will attempt something, but what form it will take, and whether NATO can respond in a way that keeps the alliance intact.
Intelligence officials from two NATO countries are sounding an alarm about Russian military activity along the alliance's eastern border. Latvia's intelligence service reported this week that Moscow is preparing what it calls a "provocation" against the Baltic states or Poland—a move designed not as a full invasion but as a calculated test of Western resolve.
The warning comes as Russia finds itself in an increasingly difficult position in Ukraine. Ukrainian forces have developed the ability to strike deep into Russian territory, hitting targets as far as 2,000 kilometers away. Last week alone, nearly 200 drones attacked locations across Moscow, and a bombed refinery sent black oil raining down on parts of the capital. These strikes have brought the war to Russia's doorstep in a way that has not happened before, and Western military analysts worry the Kremlin may respond by lashing out elsewhere.
A senior official from a second NATO member made similar observations last week, saying intelligence suggests Vladimir Putin is considering action against the Baltic states—Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. The calculation, according to this source, is straightforward: test whether the United States will actually defend NATO's smallest members, and in doing so, signal to the West that supporting Ukraine comes with a cost. Russia lacks the military capacity to open a genuine second front, but it can wage what intelligence officials describe as "hybrid attacks"—missiles, drones, and other operations designed to send a message without crossing into outright war.
This pattern of Russian mischief is not new. Since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine began in 2022, Moscow has conducted waves of sabotage and provocation across Europe. In the summer of 2024, firebombs hidden in DHL parcels turned up in the United Kingdom, Poland, and Germany. Last September, 19 Russian decoy drones crossed into Polish airspace, forcing NATO to scramble fighter jets and sending civilians in three eastern provinces to shelter. Each incident tested the alliance's response without triggering Article 5, the mutual defense clause that would require a unified military response.
What distinguishes the current warnings is the timing and the context. Russia's invasion of Ukraine has stalled. The initial momentum is gone. Ukrainian counteroffensives have reclaimed territory, and now Ukrainian strikes are reaching into the Russian heartland. Keir Giles, a Russia expert at Chatham House, observed that Moscow will be searching for ways to disrupt the current trajectory—either by spreading the conflict horizontally to other countries or by shifting the dynamics in its favor. "We should not expect Russia to passively lose," he said.
The warnings also arrive as NATO prepares for its annual summit in Ankara this month, a gathering shadowed by uncertainty about American commitment to the alliance. Donald Trump recently expressed frustration with European allies, saying he felt "let down" because they would not allow U.S. aircraft to bomb Iran from their airfields. This backdrop of doubt about U.S. resolve may be precisely what the Kremlin is banking on—that a provocation could expose fractures in the Western alliance and convince some members that the cost of supporting Ukraine is too high.
Western military sources acknowledge the danger. One described the current moment as "a period of danger," particularly if Putin feels cornered by the expanding scope of Ukrainian strikes. There is historical precedent for concern: in the autumn of 2022, when Russian forces suffered sudden reversals in Kharkiv province, Western intelligence worried Moscow might even resort to nuclear weapons. That escalation never materialized, and the frontline eventually stabilized. But the fear was real, and it could be real again if the Kremlin perceives itself as losing control of the narrative.
The intelligence being shared now is less detailed than the warnings the CIA and MI6 released before Russia's full-scale invasion in February 2022. There are indications and concerns, but not yet the kind of specific, corroborated intelligence that would allow NATO to say with certainty what Russia is planning or when. Still, the consistency of the warnings from multiple intelligence services suggests something is shifting in Russian calculations. The question is no longer whether Russia will attempt something, but what form it will take and whether NATO can respond in a way that holds the alliance together.
Notable Quotes
Moscow will be looking for ways to disrupt the current trend, through horizontal escalation or doing something elsewhere. We should not expect Russia to passively lose.— Keir Giles, Russia expert at Chatham House
I cannot lie, that is a period of danger.— Western military source on risk of Russian escalation if Putin feels pressured
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why would Russia provoke NATO now, when it's already struggling in Ukraine? Doesn't that just invite more trouble?
Because Russia is losing the narrative. Ukraine is striking Moscow itself now. The war that was supposed to be quick and decisive has stalled, and the Kremlin is under pressure at home. A provocation tests whether the West will stay united—whether the U.S. will really defend the Baltic states, whether Europe will keep supporting Ukraine if there's a cost.
But you said Russia can't open a second front. So what's the actual threat?
It's not about conquest. It's about signaling. A drone attack, a missile strike, sabotage—something that says: keep supporting Ukraine and you'll have your own problems. It's designed to sow doubt and division, not to seize territory.
Has Russia done this before?
Yes. Firebombs in DHL packages across Europe. Decoy drones crossing into Polish airspace. Each one tests NATO's response without quite triggering a unified military reaction. It's a pattern.
What makes this moment different?
The timing. Russia is weakening, Ukraine is striking deeper into Russian territory, and NATO is gathering for a summit while the U.S. commitment to the alliance is in question. If there was ever a moment for the Kremlin to try something, it's now.
And if they do provoke? What happens?
That's the real uncertainty. NATO has to respond firmly enough to deter further escalation, but carefully enough not to trigger something worse. It's a narrow path, and everyone knows it.