DONATE

Current News

Archives

Focus Areas

< Back

October 15, 2025

Institute for the Study of War: more suspected Russian drones over Poland

Institute for the Study of War

The Kremlin remains committed to its rhetorical effort to dissuade the United States from selling Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine amidst critical policy debates. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told Russian business outlet Kommersant in an interview published on October 15, entitled “Europe wants to turn the conflict in Ukraine into Trump’s War,” that a US sale of Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine “would be an escalation, and a very serious one at that.”[1] Lavrov claimed that such a move would “cause colossal damage” to the normalization of US-Russian relations and undermine the bilateral improvements made since the Biden administration. ISW continues to assess that the Kremlin is waging a reflexive control campaign to deter the United States from authorizing the sale of Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine by threatening a deterioration in US-Russian relations.[2]

ISW assesses that the US provisioning of Tomahawk missiles would not engender a significant escalation in Russia’s war against Ukraine, and instead that the provisioning of long-range Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine would mirror Russia’s own use of commensurate Russian long-range cruise missiles against Ukraine. Russia regularly leverages a wide variety of long-range cruise missiles that are comparable to the US Tomahawk missile, such as Kh-series cruise, Kalibr cruise, Kinzhal aeroballistic, and Iskander ballistic and cruise missiles that Russia uses in its regular weekly, sometimes nightly strikes against Ukraine. Russia has leveraged most of these missiles since 2022 to strike Ukraine and began deploying Iskander-K cruise missiles in 2023.[3] Russia escalated its war in Ukraine by conducting an unprecedented intermediate-range ballistic missile strike against Ukraine with its Oreshnik ballistic missile system with multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRV) in November 2024 and vowing to deploy Oreshnik systems to Belarus by the end of 2025.[4] US Tomahawk missiles’ long-range capabilities and sizable payload would enable the Ukrainian military to inflict substantial damage on key Russian military assets located deep within Russian territory, such as the Shahed drone factory in Yelabuga, Republic of Tatarstan, and the Engels-2 Air Base in Saratov Oblast, from which Russia sorties the strategic bombers that fire air-launched cruise missiles during Russian strikes on Ukraine.[5]

The Trump administration continues to voice support for additional military support for Ukraine ahead of the October 17 meeting between US President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Trump stated on October 15 that Zelensky “would like” the United States to sell Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine and that he has spoken to Zelensky about the issue.[6] US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth stated on October 15 that the United States “will take steps necessary to impose costs on Russia for its continued aggression” if Russia does not soon agree to negotiations to end its war in Ukraine.[7] Hegseth urged allies to increase military aid to Ukraine, stating that a ”combat-ready Ukrainian army and strong European-led NATO are critical for deterring Russian aggression” and that the United States “stands ready to do its part“ to aid Europe.

Dutch officials recently observed unidentified drones operating near a NATO military exercise in Poland that may have disrupted military-grade communication systems, marking the latest incident in a trend of drone incursions across Europe. Dutch outlet NOS reported on October 14 that the Dutch Ministry of Defense (MoD) confirmed that Dutch soldiers participating in a NATO military exercise in Poland observed unidentified drones flying overhead and reported communication system disruptions.[11] It is unclear whether the drones themselves or anti-drone countermeasures disrupted the communications systems. Authorities have yet to publicly identify the source of the drones or the identity of the pilots. Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) Spokesperson Maria Zakharova denied any Russian involvement on October 15 in the recent drone incident and claimed that Denmark has not submitted a formal inquiry to Russia regarding the event.[12] This incident marks the latest development amid an increasing trend of unidentified drones collecting actionable intelligence near NATO military facilities and civilian infrastructure across Europe.[13] ISW continues to assess that the unattributed drone sightings are likely associated with Russia’s “Phase Zero” campaign — the informational and psychological condition-setting phase — to prepare for a possible NATO-Russia war in the future.[14]

Key Takeaways

  1. The Kremlin remains committed to its rhetorical effort to dissuade the United States from selling Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine amidst critical policy debates.
  2. The Trump administration continues to voice support for additional military support for Ukraine ahead of the October 17 meeting between US President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
  3. The Kremlin continues to advance its messaging strategy designed to separate the United States from Ukraine and Europe to undermine NATO cohesion and support for Ukraine.
  4. Dutch officials recently observed unidentified drones operating near a NATO military exercise in Poland that may have disrupted military-grade communication systems, marking the latest incident in a trend of drone incursions across Europe.
  5. Ukraine’s European partners announced new military assistance to Ukraine amid the October 15 Ukraine Defense Contact Group (the Ramstein Format) meeting.
  6. European officials report that UK sanctions and NATO joint military operations are inhibiting Russia’s illicit shadow fleet.
  7. Russian forces advanced in eastern Zaporizhia Oblast and near Pokrovsk and Velykomykhailivka.
Share the Post:
Close

Wilson Center

Forced displacement represents one of the most pressing humanitarian issues of our time. Individuals and families, torn from the fabric of their communities, find themselves navigating a world of uncertainty, often without basic necessities or a clear path to safety. There are currently some 110 million forced displaced, and this number is growing by 10 million each year!

At the heart of this crisis are the political triggers. Armed conflicts, ethnic or religious persecutions, and systemic human rights abuses force millions to flee their homes in terror. Many are displaced within their own national boundaries, while others seek asylum abroad. If these factors change as a result of political shifts at home or the pressures from abroad, they can return to their homes. Forced displacement is thus different from environmentally driven displacement, as victims of climate change may never be able to return to their homes.

The ramifications of any sort of displacement are profound, not just for those directly affected, but also for host communities and countries. Overburdened infrastructures, socio-economic strains, and cultural tensions can arise, necessitating comprehensive strategies to foster harmony and integration. Yet the root causes of forced displacement can be remedied with a concerted focus by local players and international diplomacy.

Organizations like Refugees International play a crucial role in this arena, advocating for the rights and needs of the displaced, conducting on-the-ground assessments, and influencing policymakers to take informed actions. Their relentless work underscores the gravity of the situation and the urgency ofinternational cooperation. But they, too, are overwhelmed by the rapid expansion of the crisis.

International Humanitarian Law (IHL), with its core principles centered on the protection of civilians during conflicts, plays a pivotal role in this discourse. Yet, despite clear legal frameworks, compliance remains
inconsistent. This initiative emphasizes the importance of upholding and reinforcing these international standards.

It’s not just about recognizing the problem; it’s about active engagement. We urge governments, organizations, and individuals to prioritize the rights and needs of the forced displaced. Through collective efforts, informed policies, and sustained advocacy, we can shift the narrative from passive acknowledgment to proactive intervention.