What We Know Now About Missile Strike In Poland

When a missile struck a village in Poland yesterday killing two civilians, many social media commentators were quick to declare that this was a Russian attack on a NATO member state and NATO must now retaliate against Russia. The dangerous rush to judgement was short-lived; in a statement. President Joe Biden indicated that the missile was “unlikely” to have been fired from Russia, and that investigations are ongoing. So what is happening– deliberate provocation, false flag, accident or something else?

The missiles stuck outside the village of Przewodow, some four miles from the border, during a massive Russian missile assault on Ukraine. According to official Ukrainian reports, at least 90 missiles were fired during night. The explosions in Poland occurred just over the border from a Ukrainian power station; Russian attacks have focused on the power grid leading to suggestions that the Russians had simply missed their target rather than deliberately hit Poland. Many Russian missiles suffer guidance or propulsion problems, with some types reportedly having a failure rate of 60% according to U.S. officials.

First images of the debris have been tentatively identified as coming from an S-300 surface-to-air missile, a type made by Russian and operated by both Russian and Ukrainan forces. The Ukrainians say at least 73 of the incoming missiles in yesterday’s attacks were shot down, but it is likely that a number of defensive S-300 may have missed their targets.

That what goes up must come down can have lethal consequences in air defense. Ever since WW1, rounds from anti-aircraft artillery that miss their targets have fallen to earth and caused casualties – during some WWII German raids on London, it is claimed more civilians were killed by falling shells than the Luftwaffe’s bombs. And guided missiles do not necessarily go where they are supposed to. One video shows a Russian Pantsir missile hitting troops nearby, in another a Russian surface-to-air missile performs a boomerang maneuver and lands back near the launcher

However, some Ukrainians believe suggestions that it was one of their missiles is a conspiracy theory pushed by Russia. (Russia has for many years suggested that a Ukrainian missile brought down Malaysia Flight MH17 despite all evidence pointing to Russia as the culprit).

An S-300 hitting a ground target may not be an accident though. As Russia’s stocks of ballistic and cruise missiles run low, they have started using their S-300s against ground targets. UK Intelligence notes that one such missiles was used in an attack which killed 25 civilians in Zaporizhzhia on 30 September. The S-300 is not particularly accurate in this role, but its 300-pound warhead makes it a useful if expensive option when nothing else is available to hit ground targets. In this role it has a reported maximum range of just 120km, one reason why the U.S. may not believe it came from Russia.

Forensic examination of the wreckage is needed to determine whether the missile is an S-300 as suspected. Investigators may be able to obtain serial numbers from parts an determine whether this particular missile was issued to Russian or Ukrainian forces. Without this sort of information, it is impossible to reliably determine who was responsible. As many have pointed out though, ultimately the deaths in Poland are due to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Even if the missiles were fired by Russian forces, suggestions this means automatic triggering of NATO’s Article 5 are inaccurate. This is the part of the NATO treaty which means that all NATO members will join in to defend if one member is attacked, but it is not triggered automatically and there are likely to be lengthy discussions about the incident and appropriate responses.

The incident is a warning against the dangers of making assumptions and rushing into action. While there is clearly some appetite for greater involvement by NATO, any action must be based on valid reasons, not a knee-jerk response to may not be an attack.

“Calm is a good idea,” Justin Bronk of UK defense thinktank RUSI tweeted in the immediate aftermath, noting that it is impossible to draw firm conclusions . That continues to be good advice.