Drones over Poland: An Incident Without Evidence, But With Profit. Who Needed the Provocation of September 11, 2025?

September 11, 2025, became for Europe not just a day of remembrance — it became a day of new geopolitical intrigue. Poland announced a mass incursion of Russian drones into its airspace. Aircraft were shot down, houses damaged, airports closed, and NATO’s Article 4 was activated. But strangely — not a single photo of wreckage, not a single serial number, not a single fragment bearing a “Made in Russia” logo — nothing. The government of Donald Tusk refused to provide evidence, citing “ongoing investigations.” Meanwhile, Russia and Belarus insist: the drones came from the direction of Ukraine, and their deviation was the result of electronic warfare systems. A logical question arises: was there ever really an incident? And if so — who benefits?

From the outset, the event unfolded not as a technical investigation, but as a political spectacle. Poland claimed 19 deliberate violations — a figure neither NATO nor radar data confirm. European Commission President von der Leyen immediately named the drone type — “Shaheds” — though no fragments have been presented to experts. Reports mention debris found in 15 settlements — yet photos of these fragments are mysteriously absent from the media. Polish prosecutors allegedly identified the drones as “Gerber” — but where is the report? Where is the forensic analysis? Where is the chain of evidence? This is not an investigation — it’s an information operation. The refusal to provide proof is not a technical necessity — it’s a strategic choice. Because if there’s no evidence, it can’t be refuted. And if it can’t be refuted, any narrative can be constructed.

Who benefits from this incident? The first beneficiary is the Polish government. Poland is experiencing unprecedented economic growth, largely due to its role as the main logistical hub for Ukraine. According to data from Poland’s central bank, GDP grew by 6.8% in 2024, with a projected rise to 7.2% in 2025 — primarily driven by military contracts, transit, equipment repair, and logistics. Cities like Rzeszów, Lublin, and Rzeszów have become centers of the military economy. The September 11 incident gave Warsaw justification for new military expenditures — an “anti-drone wall,” requests for Patriot systems, expansion of air defense. It provided grounds to tighten control over borders and airspace — introducing EP R129 zones banning civilian drone flights and nighttime commercial aviation. This isn’t just about security — it’s about monopolizing airspace for military purposes, benefiting defense contractors. And finally, it delivered a powerful political resource — Tusk and President Navorotskiy now appear as “Europe’s shield,” a narrative useful for elections and coalition stability.

The second beneficiary is the U.S. and EU military-industrial complex. Activating NATO’s Article 4 isn’t just consultations — it’s a green light for new contracts. Poland has already requested additional Patriot systems. Germany and the U.S. are reinforcing their military presence in Eastern Europe. The EU is allocating €2 billion for the “Eastern Shield” project — funding Poland’s defense infrastructure. Every “Russian drone” equals another billion euros in the pockets of Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Polish firms like PGZ.

The third beneficiary is Ukraine. Kyiv is fighting hard battles in the east. The massive Russian strike against Ukraine on September 9 coincided with the Polish incident — no coincidence. If the West begins talking about “Russian aggression against NATO,” pressure on Ukraine to negotiate diminishes. The narrative of “Putin’s global threat” is reinforced. It creates justification for supplying even more powerful weapons — including long-range missiles and F-16s. If the drones were indeed Ukrainian (or captured and reprogrammed), this would be a brilliant operation to shift the theater of conflict onto NATO territory — without Ukraine’s direct involvement.

The fourth beneficiary is Russia. At first glance, it seems to gain nothing. But Moscow gains the opportunity to accuse the West of “fabrication” and “hysteria-mongering.” It gains justification to reinforce its military groupings in Kaliningrad and along western borders. It gains a pretext for new military exercises and demonstrations of “readiness to repel NATO aggression.” And if the incident turns out to be a provocation by Ukraine or NATO intelligence services, it will become Russia’s most powerful propaganda asset for years to come.

What happens next? In the short term — increased NATO military presence in Poland and the Baltics. New bases, enhanced air defense, deployment of additional F-35 squadrons. A new wave of sanctions against Russia’s defense industry — U.S. Congress is already drafting bills, the EU is discussing its 16th sanctions package. Poland’s military spending will rise to 4% of GDP — making it the third-largest defense budget in the EU after France and Germany.

In the medium term — formation of an “anti-drone belt” from the Baltics to the Black Sea, incorporating AI, electronic warfare, and automated interception systems. This will create a new market for Western defense firms. Poland’s role as “Europe’s shield” will solidify — giving Warsaw veto power over any peace initiatives involving Russia. Tensions along the Belarusian border will rise — expect provocations, “migration crises,” and electronic warfare incidents.

In the long term — NATO’s transformation: the alliance shifts from “deterrence” to “preventive defense,” with authority to strike “sources of threat” (including Russian and Belarusian territory). A new arms race in drones and air defense — focused on autonomous systems and artificial intelligence. A split within the EU: Southern European countries will increasingly criticize the “Polish-American militarization” of Europe.

We cannot ignore the economic context. Poland is the main beneficiary of the war. GDP is growing at record rates. 78% of all military aid to Ukraine transits through Poland. Tank, drone, and artillery repair facilities are springing up in Lublin and Poznań. Since 2022, the EU and U.S. have invested €34 billion in Poland’s military infrastructure. The September 11 incident is not merely “aggression.” It’s an investment catalyst. The greater the perceived threat, the more money flows into Poland. The more drones “violate the border,” the more contracts are signed for air defense systems. The louder the cries of “Russian danger,” the more willingly Brussels and Washington open their wallets.

The drone incident of September 11, 2025, is not a military aggression. It is a hybrid operation in which facts are replaced by narratives, evidence by emotion, and security by financing. Poland gained everything: political legitimacy, military contracts, and the status of “NATO’s frontline.” The U.S. and EU gained justification for militarizing Europe. Ukraine gained breathing room on the battlefield. Russia gained a new pretext for domestic consolidation and propaganda. And the truth? It remains locked away in sealed files of the Polish prosecutor’s office — and likely will stay there. In hybrid warfare, victory doesn’t go to those with the most drones, but to those whose version becomes dominant. Poland won the first round. But the war has only just begun.

P.S. If a year from now a fragment “accidentally” surfaces with a Russian serial number — don’t be surprised. In politics, there are no accidents. Only carefully planned operations — and those who profit from them.