As Russia’s full-scale war on Ukraine approaches its fifth year, drone incursions into the airspace of neighboring NATO countries have become alarmingly commonplace, with incidents happening on a weekly basis throughout the summer. Experts say the risks of an unintentional widening of the war into Europe due to the intrusions mean that the conflict is now entering a more perilous phase.

On Monday, The Wall Street Journal reported that drone infiltrations into NATO countries have occurred “almost every week this summer,” with 16 member countries reporting airspace violations over the past two years. The incidents included explosive drones found at Germany’s Leipzig airport as well as a naval drone sailing close to a Romanian gas platform in the Black Sea.

While NATO members say the rate of attacks falls below the threshold of justifying a collective military response, European officials are expressing increasing concerns about the dangerous territory that is now being entered. “We do not consider ourselves at war, but we are the daily target of hybrid warfare,” German Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt remarked earlier this month.

In response, NATO member countries like Finland, Estonia, and Poland are increasing their defense spending on drone detection systems and counter-drone technologies, partly in order to avoid having to respond to drone incursions with extremely costly fighter jet operations and related missile munitions.

Experts like Lt. Colonel (Ret.) Robert Maginnis, who serves as senior fellow for National Security at Family Research Council, say that the war is now entering “a more dangerous phase” even though it is unlikely that NATO member countries would formally enter the conflict.

“The most likely development is considerably greater European and NATO involvement on the defensive side — more air and missile defenses, counter-drone systems, intelligence and surveillance, protection of critical infrastructure, exercises, and forward deployments along the eastern flank,” he told The Washington Stand. “That is already happening. NATO says Russian drones and missiles are increasingly crossing Allied airspace, and its Eastern Sentry mission is specifically designed to strengthen surveillance and defenses from the High North to the Black Sea.”

As to Russia’s perceived intentions behind its repeated intrusions into NATO airspace, Maginnis argued that the Putin regime’s goal does not appear to be escalation. “I do not presently believe Moscow wants a conventional war with NATO, at least not on the immediate horizon. Russia is already heavily committed in Ukraine, and opening another front against the Alliance would entail enormous risks.”

“But that does not make these incursions harmless,” he continued. “Russia can probe NATO defenses, test response times, conduct sabotage and other gray-zone operations, and measure political cohesion without deliberately crossing the threshold into open war. The danger is that one of these episodes produces casualties or serious damage and creates an escalation neither side initially intended. These incursions may become something resembling a new normal, but NATO cannot afford to normalize them. There is a difference. Repeated incursions require stronger defenses and clearer consequences precisely so that Moscow does not conclude it can keep pushing the boundary without cost. NATO has already responded by strengthening air policing, integrated air and missile defense, and counter-drone capabilities.”

Maginnis further observed that the Trump administration’s recent sending of CIA Director John Ratcliffe to Russia is likely an attempt to avoid further escalation of hostilities. “Multiple reports say he warned Russia against attacking NATO territory, especially in the Baltics, according to some media reports. The Kremlin confirmed that he met Russian intelligence officials, although not President Putin, while President Trump publicly characterized the mission as ‘semi-routine.’ Whatever the precise private message, sending the CIA director to Moscow at this point provided a direct channel for communicating American concerns and reducing the possibility of catastrophic miscalculation.”

Meanwhile, Trump administration envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner met with Putin in Russia over the weekend to discuss possible avenues toward ending the war, which has now lasted longer than World War I. While Putin characterized the meeting as an “important peacemaking visit,” a Kremlin spokesman insisted that Ukrainian troops must withdraw from the Donetsk and Luhansk regions before a ceasefire could be negotiated — “a demand that Ukraine has rejected.”

Maginnis went on to emphasize that for there to be hope in ending the Ukraine war, “Europe will have to assume a larger and more direct role, but that does not necessarily mean European troops, including American soldiers, are going to enter the war against Russia. Ukraine is first and foremost a European security problem. European governments will have to provide more weapons, air defenses, ammunition, and industrial capacity; sustain economic pressure on Russia; participate directly in diplomacy; and, ultimately, carry much of the burden for whatever credible security arrangements follow a settlement.”

“The European Council has already said European states are prepared to contribute to security guarantees for Ukraine in cooperation with the United States and has specifically called for accelerated production and delivery of air defenses, ammunition, drones, and missiles,” he continued. “That fits the larger strategic requirement: the United States remains an essential NATO power, but European nations increasingly must provide the conventional strength necessary to deter Russia in Europe. Diplomacy is much more likely to succeed when Moscow sees that negotiations are backed by credible military power and that waiting out the West will not produce a better outcome.”

“The greatest danger today is therefore not that Russia has already decided to attack NATO,” Maginnis underscored. “It is that continual probing, inadequate deterrence, and miscalculation could turn a gray-zone confrontation into something neither Moscow nor NATO originally intended.”