‘Exceptionally serious’: Missile strike on NATO member Poland could escalate conflict, analyst says

Two Russian missiles reportedly landed in Poland, killing two people. Photo / @visegrad24, Twitter

Europe could be on the cusp of a major conflict after stray Russian missiles struck a neighbouring NATO country, an analyst says.

Whether the Ukraine-Russia war escalates could hinge on whether the missile strike in NATO member Poland was intentional or simply negligent.

According to a senior US intelligence official, two people were killed after Russian missiles crossed into Poland, hitting a village near the Ukraine border. It was the first time in the war that Russian weapons had come down in a Nato country.

Waikato University law professor Alexander Gillespie, who specialises in international law, said that for the NATO collective defence agreement to come into play, an armed attack has to have occurred against one of its members.

“The key thing here is intent - as in, an armed attack must be intentional. It is not something that can be done by accident, recklessness or negligence.

“If it is intentional, then we are on the cusp of a very major conflict.”

It was an “exceptionally serious” situation and the conflict risked spinning out of control if it was handled badly, he said.

Gillespie said it was possible the missile attack was intentional if it was aimed at the supply of Western weapons being transported into Ukraine.

“The provision of such weapons means a country is not neutral in a conflict, and attacking them en route, in theory, is possible.

“The problem is when any such attack occurs in the territory of another which is linked to a collective defence agreement - as in, exactly where we are now.”

University of Waikato law professor Alexander Gillespie. Photo / Supplied

A NATO official confirmed to international media that the alliance was looking into reports of a strike in Poland. The US National Security Council said it was also looking into the reports.

Russia would now be required to explain itself, based on evidence including the physical remains of the munitions and the tracked flight path of the missiles, Gillespie said.

Earlier today, the Russian Defense Ministry denied being behind “any strikes on targets near the Ukrainian-Polish border” and said in a statement that photos of purported damage “have nothing to do” with Russian weapons.

Gillespie said that in a best-case (but unlikely) scenario, Russia would admit it was wrong, apologise, and offer recompense for the damage it caused.

The more likely scenario was that Russia denied any wrongdoing and accused the West of trying to stir the pot, he said.

If the attack was accidental, reckless or negligent, NATO would still need to respond. Its options could include increasing collective defence measures in NATO countries, such as with air defence, or giving more assistance to the Ukraine.

It could also include a “proportionate” response, such as firing missiles into Russian territory - though that option had avoided so far because the war would only remain contained if borders were respected.

“The point about respect for borders and airspace is critical. You can imagine what would happen if two missiles from North Korea just landed in South Korea.”

Gillespie noted that the NATO agreement of 1949 had only been invoked once previously for defence reasons - after the September 11 terror attacks on the US in 2001.

In that case, the agreement was triggered very quickly, within 24 hours.