Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-25

[Tonitrus]

Looking more at the deets...this was over the water/Gulf of Finland north of Estonia...so their standard area (standard in the sense that the Russians love cutting the airspace corners out there when transiting aircraft to Kaliningrad) for airspace violations.  While still not ok...this would have been surprising if it were actually over land.

[Tonitrus]

Some follow-up...

https://apnews.com/article/russia-jets-estonia-nato-signals-ed46783ac2ce71622a9f3aa8f2ba9ad7

Russian jets over Estonia ignored signals from NATO pilots, officials say

By  EMMA BURROWS
Updated 11:51 AM PDT, September 20, 2025

TALLINN, Estonia (AP) — Russian pilots ignored signals from Italian jets responding from NATO's Baltic Air Policing Mission when they violated Estonian airspace, a senior Estonian military official said Saturday.

The 12-minute incursion was the latest test of the alliance's ability to respond to Russian airborne threats after around 20 Russian drones entered Polish airspace on Sept. 10.

Russia's Defense Ministry on Saturday denied its aircraft flew into Estonia's airspace, after Tallinn reported three fighter jets crossed into its territory on Friday without permission.

Estonian officials dismissed the denial, saying the violation was confirmed by radar and visual contact and suggested it could be a tactic to draw Western resources away from Ukraine.

The Russian MIG-31 fighters entered Estonian airspace between 9:58 a.m. and 10:10 a.m. local time Friday in the area of Vaindloo, a small island located in the Gulf of Finland in the Baltic Sea, the Estonian military said. A ministry statement said it was the fourth airspace violation by Russia this year.

It still "needs to be confirmed," if the border violation was deliberate or not, Col. Ants Kiviselg, the commander of Estonia's Military Intelligence Center, told The Associated Press. Regardless, he said, the Russian jets "must have known that they are in (Estonian) airspace."

But although they acknowledged communication from the Italian pilots flying F-35 fighter jets, they apparently ignored it and "didn't actually follow the signs," which is partly why they were in Estonian airspace for so long, he added.

"Why they didn't do it, that's a question for the Russian pilots," Kiviselg said.

'It could be big trouble'

The Russian jets came from an airfield near the city of Petrozavodsk, in northwestern Russia, and were heading to Kaliningrad, the Russian exclave on the Baltic Sea sandwiched between Lithuania and Poland. They were tracked by two Finnish fighter jets before being escorted by the two Italian jets, which took off from Estonia's Ämari Air Base and followed them into international skies, Kiviselg said.

U.S. President Donald Trump responded Friday by telling reporters he will be briefed by aides on the incursion. "I don't love it," he said, adding: "I don't like when that happens. It could be big trouble, but I'll let you know later."

Margus Tsahkna, Estonia's foreign minister, told AP the incident was "a very serious violation of NATO airspace." The last time Estonian airspace was violated for so long was in 2003, he said, "just before Estonia joined NATO."

Estonia's government responded by saying it would request consultations under Article 4 of NATO's treaty which allows a member to formally consult with allies whenever their territorial integrity, political independence or security is threatened. Poland also used the mechanism after its airspace was violated by Russian drones and, after that, NATO launched its Eastern Sentry mission to boost defenses along it's eastern flank.

Posting on X, Lithuania's Defense Minister Dovilė Šakalienė suggested NATO member "Turkey set an example" of how to respond to such incidents in 2015 when it shot down a Russian fighter jet which violated its airspace for around 17 seconds.

But that situation was "totally different," Hanno Pevkur, Estonia's defense minister said, adding that the "Russians actually killed Turks," when Moscow used fighter jets to target what they said were militant groups near the Syrian border with Turkey.

During Friday's incident, Estonia and its allies observed the Russian jets' route, communication and reaction from the pilots as well as the weapons systems they were carrying and were "very confident that there is no need to shoot them down," Pevkur said.

Czech President Petr Pavel said Saturday that NATO must respond adequately to Russian violations, including potentially by shooting down Russian jets, the Czech News Agency reported. "Russia will realize very quickly that they have made a mistake and crossed the acceptable boundaries. Unfortunately, this is teetering on the edge of conflict, but giving in to evil is simply not an option," Pavel said.

Estonian officials maintained Saturday that there was no need to trigger Article 5, NATO's collective defense clause, despite the repeated violations by Russian jets and drones as well as allegations from Western officials that Moscow is waging a hybrid war against the West including a sabotage campaign, cyberattacks and influence operations.

Radars and visual identification

In an online statement published Saturday, Russia's Defense Ministry said its fighter jets had kept to neutral Baltic Sea waters more than 3 kilometers (1.8 miles) from Vaindloo Island.

It said the three MiG-31 jets "completed a scheduled flight from Karelia to an airfield in the Kaliningrad region" and "did not violate the borders of other states."

Pevkur dismissed the statement, saying Estonia and its NATO allies have "multiple" radars and visual identification which confirm the Russian jets entered the country's airspace.

He suggested the "root cause" for the air violations, hybrid war and cyberattacks was to distract Western attention from Ukraine.

Moscow, Pevkur said, may be trying to provoke NATO nations into sending additional air defense assets to Estonia in the hope that Kyiv's allies do more "about our own defense," and less to support Kyiv.
___

Associated Press journalist Kostya Manenkov in Tallinn, Estonia contributed to this report.

[Josquius]

I hope there's a way this can be played that gets more Russian jets and air defence based along the NATO border.
Play the reverse card.
Can we probe them a bit?

[Tonitrus]

Another good idea for ya'll...hitting on the constant quibbling over drawing from seized/frozen Russian assets...

Every time NATO has to a fighter reaction/response to errant Russian aircraft/drones...deduct/take the actual cost of those responses, which are not cheap, for each event (better yet, maybe a 2-5x cost as a fine). 

Better yet, if it involves shooting them down, we can add in the cost of the ordinance.

[grumbler]

Another good idea for ya'll...hitting on the constant quibbling over drawing from seized/frozen Russian assets...

Every time NATO has to a fighter reaction/response to errant Russian aircraft/drones...deduct/take the actual cost of those responses, which are not cheap, for each event (better yet, maybe a 2-5x cost as a fine). 

Better yet, if it involves shooting them down, we can add in the cost of the ordinance.

I like this idea.

[crazy canuck]

I like the idea of giving the assets to Ukraine better, but it's a close second.

[Tonitrus]

I mean, once they take the money they can do whatever they want with it.

[crazy canuck]

I mean, once they take the money they can do whatever they want with it.

Yes, exactly so - I just don't think they need to wait to seize the assets.

[Tamas]

The fact that they haven't done anything with that money tells me our ruling classes are expecting to return to business as usual with the current Russian ruling class.

[Tonitrus]

I mean, once they take the money they can do whatever they want with it.

Yes, exactly so - I just don't think they need to wait to seize the assets.

Well, I already agree with that too.  The idea is more if they think they need some legal pretext.

[crazy canuck]

I mean, once they take the money they can do whatever they want with it.

Yes, exactly so - I just don't think they need to wait to seize the assets.

Well, I already agree with that too.  The idea is more if they think they need some legal pretext.

 

[Sheilbh]

The fact that they haven't done anything with that money tells me our ruling classes are expecting to return to business as usual with the current Russian ruling class.

I don't agree, I think it more reflects our structural weakness. It would be risky and in an increasingly multi-polar world where we're not dominant economies, I think those risks are serious.

I find that more defensible than the EU in 2024 spending more money importing Russian hydrocarbons than it gave to Ukraine. Again I get the economic hit but I think that's more directly hurting Ukraine and funding Russia than not expropriating seized, but inaccessible (and decreasing in value) assets.

[Josquius]

Yeah, I think the reasoning is more they want dodgy regimes to keep their money in our banks.

They're hoping that if/when the Ukraine war ends there can be legal proceedings for Russia to pay compensation for all the damage and that's when the Russian money will be given to Ukraine.

[Tamas]

Maybe but hey - if you are planning to seriously endanger the world order and create a big risk of nuclear war, perhaps you should not get to enjoy the Western banking system.

[Zoupa]

Copenhagen airport stops all flights. "Large" drones spotted nearby.