On the eve of a NATO summit held in Ankara, several frontline member states issued warnings about the potential for imminent Russian aggression. Polish officials in particular highlighted concerns over a possible escalation, drawing historical parallels to past false-flag operations used to justify military invasions.

Radoslaw Sikorski, Poland’s foreign minister, referenced the 1939 Gleiwitz incident—where Nazi Germany staged an attack on its own radio station and blamed Poland as a pretext for war—as a cautionary example. “Our message to Vladimir Putin is this: we know what you are planning. Don’t do it,” Sikorski told reporters on July 3.

Colonel Pawel Szota, head of the Polish foreign intelligence agency, reiterated the severity of the threat in a public interview. He warned that NATO should prepare for “an armed conflict with Russia as a near-term prospect,” citing a high level of Russian hostility and a “real” risk of military confrontation.

Intelligence agencies in Poland and Latvia have reportedly entered a heightened state of alert amid warnings from the United States about a possible “limited-scale military provocation” targeting their countries or the Baltic states more broadly. Meanwhile, other European security sources have urged restraint, noting that no concrete evidence has surfaced to confirm plans for a direct Russian attack on NATO members. One official cautioned against alarmism, stating, “We don’t know, because we aren’t in [Putin’s] head. All we can do is add up the clues.”

Amid these divergent assessments, consensus is emerging among northern and central European NATO allies that the alliance is entering a particularly precarious period. Recent months have seen tensions exacerbated by U.S. criticism of European partners’ perceived lack of support for American and Israeli military actions against Iran. Former President Donald Trump publicly expressed frustration with what he described as a “one-sided” defense relationship, emphasizing the disproportionate scale of U.S. military spending compared to that of individual European allies.

Some European capitals fear that Russia might attempt to exploit any perceived weakening of the transatlantic alliance by intensifying its so-called “grey-zone” tactics—covert or indirect forms of aggression below the threshold of full-scale war. A recent Polish government study documented at least 19 sabotage or diversionary attacks coordinated by Russia and Belarus against NATO neighbors since 2022, with activity growing bolder in recent years. Polish intelligence officials suspect that the actual number of incidents may be several times higher, and a diplomat familiar with the situation estimated that serious Russian hybrid operations now occur roughly every two days across Europe. These range from arson and vandalism to large-scale cyberattacks, bombings, and even assassination attempts.

Researchers outlined that the next stage of escalation could involve a large-scale attack causing significant civilian casualties, potentially timed to undermine government credibility ahead of key elections in Sweden this September and in Finland and Poland next year. Anna Maria Dyner, head of national security at the Polish Institute of International Affairs, expressed concern that such an attack could be “especially difficult” to manage in an election context.

Between February 2022 and February 2026, the study tracked 28 hybrid attacks on land and nine at sea, along with 21 incursions into NATO airspace by Russian military aircraft and drones—though not all were conclusively attributed to Russia. Some incidents linked to Russia, such as last November’s bombing of the Warsaw-Lublin railway line, have been publicly documented and posed significant risks to civilian transport.

Dyner suggested that a coalition of NATO members willing to take more assertive action—potentially including Poland, the United Kingdom, and the Nordic and Baltic states—could send a stronger deterrent message. “Russia needs to understand we are ready to protect ourselves,” she said, emphasizing that readiness existed within security services and military forces, but political will was required to initiate decisive measures.