A “drone war” – that is how some observers describe the conflict in Ukraine. Yet drones are no longer confined to Ukrainian territory. In recent weeks, incidents involving drone incursions – allegedly Russian – have multiplied within the European Union’s borders, fuelling anxiety and speculation about their origin and what this might mean for the future of the conflict on the bloc’s doorstep.
Euronews dived into those events to find out what it means for Europe and its security.
Several incidents across Europe
September was marked by a series of incursions and violations of European airspace by unidentified flying objects.
On 9 September, 19 Russian drones reportedly entered Polish territory, four of which were intercepted. Four days later, similar aircraft were observed in Romania, while last week flights were disrupted at Copenhagen and Oslo airports after drones were spotted nearby.
Those drones are believed to be small distance drones according to Robert Garbett, founder and chief executive of Drone Major Group: “It is likely that the drones used in this attack were Hybrid VTOL systems purely due to the length of the incursion. Rotary winged systems can generally only operate for up to one hour unless powered by hydrogen or petroleum” -meaning that the drones were piloted from nearby the zone of incursion.
Even if no attacks happened, Garbett noted that such drone incursions always represent a risk: “They could carry explosive devices for release or detonation by kamikaze action. These incursions could disrupt and damage our economies, gather data on our Critical National Infrastructure (CNI) and sew fear and division amongst Western populations.”
In France, during the night of 21–22 September, drones flew over a military base. For now, it remains unclear whether the operators were hostile actors or amateur onlookers.
An origin hard to prove
This ambiguity is precisely what makes such incidents so complex.
Christophe Gomart, French MEP and former national director of military intelligence, suggested three possible explanations: “Interference that causes drones to lose control, deliberate provocations designed to test reactions, or attempts to assess the defensive capacities of Poland, Romania, and by extension the EU and NATO.”
For Michel Liégeois, professor of international relations at the University of Louvain, fostering doubts over the origin smacks of Russian strategy.
“Hybrid warfare aims to destabilise European countries and disrupt key infrastructures, such as public transport. Slowing air traffic causes economic losses and fuels public frustration,” he said.
But he cautioned against jumping to conclusions: not every incident can automatically be linked to Moscow, though the frequency suggests deliberate destabilisation.
While drones identified in Poland and Estonia were confirmed to be Russian, those observed in Denmark and Norway are still under investigation.
“Violations of Polish airspace and the disruptions at Danish airports were deliberate and coordinated actions,” Estonian MEP Riho Terras, vice-chair of the European Parliament’s Security and Defence Committee, said more directly.
But he acknowledged that definitive proof is elusive – a familiar pattern in the Baltic region, where suspected Russian sabotage has often gone unproven.
General Gomart noted that Denmark’s strong support for Ukraine could make it a likely target, while also warning that curiosity or attention-seeking behaviour by individuals cannot be excluded: “Some so-called ‘useful idiots’ might launch their own drones, which only heightens legitimate fears.”
For Liégeois, the very uncertainty is part of the strategy: “The lack of clarity over motives and perpetrators magnifies public anxiety.”
Russia has denied any involvement – but several experts believe it has much to gain.
Political messages rather than military objectives?
Italian MEP Salvatore De Meo argued that President Putin is “testing the reactions of EU countries and the West in general. I do not think there are specific military objectives, rather political messages. I do not believe Putin wishes to trigger a third world war.”
Despite repeated provocations, Europeans have remained relatively united, Liégeois noted, with Russia surprised at the EU’s cohesion and rapid reaction since the start of the war in Ukraine.
Duquesne echoed this view: “Drone incursions in Europe show that civil societies are now targets in their own right. The challenge is not only to neutralise a technical threat, but to preserve citizens’ trust and sense of security.”
Is the EU prepared for drone incursions?
Estonian MEP Riho Terras is concerned about EU preparedness. “Europe’s peacetime drone defences are worryingly poor,” he said, adding: “Countries on the eastern flank were not prepared to respond to low-cost provocations with appropriate tools. We cannot afford to counter cheap drones with expensive missiles or jets.”
Some countries, such as France, have demonstrated their ability to protect against drones – notably with the anti-drone system deployed during the summer of 2024 for the Olympic Games. But such measures are not widespread.
There are disparities between member states: while some have advanced counter-drone systems, others rely on limited surveillance. Threat perception also varies across the bloc, with eastern countries viewing Russia as the main danger, while southern states focus on issues such as irregular migration.
General and lawmaker Gomart stressed that Europe must “first build up its muscle before showing it. At present, Europe is not particularly fit.” He pointed to the need for investment in new technologies such as laser weapons capable of neutralising drones without harming civilian populations.
The EU’s ‘drone wall’
Last week, the European Commission floated the idea of a “drone wall” – a detection and response network along the EU’s eastern flank. This system would, supposedly detect and destroy suspicious drones entering the EU.
This initiative brought together ten member states: Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Finland – with the participation of Ukraine, the country with the most advanced drones’ capabilities.
MEP Riho Terras compared the concept to Israel’s Iron Dome, which has proven effective against Iranian air attacks. But he called on other members to join the initiative and share the burden, acknowledging the difference in security priorities.
The initiative was indeed greeted with misgivings by lawmakers from Western countries –Italian De Meo told Euronews. “This remains an evolving policy line and not yet a fully deployed operational system,” he noted. While the French General Gomart warned against relying too heavily on the ‘wall’ metaphor: “A wall is always capable of being bypassed. It never lasts forever,” he said. Liégeois added that protective measures should also focus on threats emerging from within EU territory, not only at its borders.
Unity as the ultimate defence
Looking ahead, Farah Duquesne Weber, from the Brussels-based agency Sierra Tango, stressed that the challenge is as much societal as military: “Each incursion is a test of Europe’s cohesion. These actions seek to divide public opinion and fuel anxiety. Unity is the most effective defence.”
A vision echoed by the European Commission spokesperson Thomas Regnier. “Building a wall with holes will not work. We need one shield stretching from north to south,” he said during a press briefing.
Heads of state and government are expected to discuss implementation of the “drone wall” at Wednesday’s informal summit in Copenhagen. That they will be protected by a drone ban imposed in Denmark for the duration of their meeting and the deployment of multiple security measures by several cooperating member states’ armies, speaks to the tone and urgency of the discussion.
Read the full article here
