Poland to place banned mines on borders
Poland has announced plans to deploy anti-personnel landmines along its border with Russia and Belarus, citing concern about a potential Russian assault. Moscow has repeatedly denied having any intention of attacking the EU or NATO countries.
Earlier this week, NATO members Poland, Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania called for exiting the Ottawa Treaty, which prohibits anti-personnel mines, pointing to what they call a growing military threat from Russia. Before that, Warsaw had also announced a $2.6 billion 'Eastern Shield' project to beef up its borders.
Speaking to local radio on Tuesday, Polish Deputy Defense Minister Pawel Bejda explained that Warsaw plans to place landmines along the country's frontiers with Belarus and Russia as part of the 'Eastern Shield' initiative.
Poland shares a 144-mile border with Russia's Kaliningrad exclave.
'We have no choice,' Bejda told RMF24, adding that it will allow the country's defense industry to produce up to one million landmines.
The Polish government has also announced plans for additional fortifications along its borders, including anti-tank obstacles and reinforced defensive positions.
Beyond landmines, Poland has also considered other measures in response to the supposed Russian threat. Earlier this month, Prime Minister Donald Tusk suggested that Warsaw should acquire its own nuclear weapons.
Moscow has repeatedly ridiculed Western claims that it intends to attack NATO or EU states, and Russian President Vladimir Putin has dismissed such statements as 'nonsense.' He has also suggested that the supposed threat of a Russian attack is being used by European politicians to scare their citizens in order to extract more resources from them and justify increased military spending.
Meanwhile, Russian officials have also blasted the EU's increasing militarization as reckless and escalatory. Earlier this month, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov noted that the confrontational rhetoric and plans coming out of Brussels and European capitals could hamper the chances of finding a peaceful resolution to the Ukraine conflict.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
18 minutes ago
- Russia Today
Ukraine's most reckless attack: Was NATO behind it?
While Western headlines celebrated Operation Spider's Web as a daring feat of Ukrainian ingenuity, a closer look reveals something far more calculated – and far less Ukrainian. This wasn't just a strike on Russian airfields. It was a test – one that blended high-tech sabotage, covert infiltration, and satellite-guided timing with the kind of precision that only the world's most advanced intelligence networks can deliver. And it begs the question: who was really pulling the strings? Let's be honest. Ukraine's Main Directorate of Intelligence didn't act alone. It couldn't have. Even if no Western agency was directly involved in the operation itself, the broader picture is clear: Ukraine's Main Directorate of Intelligence, its military, and even its top political leadership rely heavily on Western intelligence feeds. Ukraine is deeply embedded within NATO's intelligence-sharing architecture. The idea of a self-contained Ukrainian intel ecosystem is largely a thing of the past. These days, Kiev draws primarily on NATO-provided data, supplementing it with its own domestic sources where it can. That's the backdrop – a hybrid model that's become standard over the past two years. Now, let's look more closely at Operation Spider's Web itself. We know the planning took roughly 18 months and involved moving drones covertly into Russian territory, hiding them, and then orchestrating coordinated attacks on key airfields. So how likely is it that Western intelligence agencies had a hand in such a complex operation? Start with logistics. It's been reported that 117 drones were prepped for launch inside Russia. Given that numerous private companies in Russia currently manufacture drones for the war effort, it wouldn't have been difficult to assemble the necessary devices under that cover. That's almost certainly what happened. Components were likely purchased domestically under the guise of supplying the 'Special Military Operation.' Still, it's hard to believe Ukraine's Main Directorate of Intelligence could have pulled off this mass procurement and assembly alone. It's highly likely Western intelligence agencies played a quiet but crucial role – especially in securing specialized components. Then there's the explosives. If the operation's command center was located in the Ural region, as some suggest, it's plausible that explosives or components were smuggled in via neighboring CIS countries. That kind of border-hopping precision doesn't happen without outside help. In fact, it mirrors tactics long perfected by intelligence services in both the US and Western Europe. Because make no mistake: this wasn't just the CIA's playground. European services – particularly those in the UK, France, and Germany – possess the same capabilities to execute and conceal such an operation. The NATO intelligence community may have different national flags, but it speaks with one voice in the field. The real giveaway, however, lies in the timing of the strikes. These weren't blind attacks on static targets. Russia's strategic bombers frequently rotate bases. Commercial satellite imagery – updated every few days at best – simply can't track aircraft on the move. And yet these drones struck with exquisite timing. That points to a steady flow of real-time surveillance, likely derived from signals intelligence, radar tracking, and live satellite feeds – all tools in the Western intelligence toolbox. Could Ukraine, on its own, have mustered that kind of persistent, multidomain awareness? Not a chance. That level of situational intelligence is the domain of NATO's most capable agencies – particularly those tasked with monitoring Russian military infrastructure as part of their day job. For years now, Ukraine has been described in Western media as a plucky underdog using low-cost tactics to take on a larger foe. But beneath the David vs. Goliath narrative lies a more uncomfortable truth: Ukraine's intelligence ecosystem is now deeply embedded within NATO's operational architecture. Real-time feeds from US and European satellites, intercepts from British SIGINT stations, operational planning consultations with Western handlers – this is the new normal. Ukraine still has its own sources, but it's no longer running a self-contained intelligence operation. That era ended with the first HIMARS launch. Western officials, of course, deny direct involvement. But Russian investigators are already analyzing mobile traffic around the impact sites. If it turns out that these drones weren't connected to commercial mobile networks – if, instead, they were guided through encrypted, military-grade links – it will be damning. Not only would that confirm foreign operational input, it would expose the full extent of how Western assets operated inside Russia without detection. At that point, no amount of plausible deniability will cover the truth. The question will no longer be whether NATO participated – but how deep that participation ran.
Russia Today
5 hours ago
- Russia Today
EU financing ‘extremism'
Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze has accused the EU of inciting and financing extremism in his country. The claim comes amid a deepening rift between Tbilisi and Brussels over alleged 'democratic backsliding.' Kobakhidze insisted on Thursday that his government has 'indisputable' evidence that Western actors are backing anti-government protests in the country. 'We prove this with facts, videos, and [EU] financing practices. We have direct facts about how these people are financing extremism in our country. We talk to them with facts, but they respond with general phrases, and more often lies. This is sad,' Kobakhidze said, as cited by Rustavi 2. Parliament Speaker Shalva Papuashvili echoed the charge, stating that 'extremism in Georgia is supported and financed from the budgets of the EU.' He added that he had written to EU Ambassador Pawel Herczynski detailing the accusations but had yet to receive a reply. The ruling Georgian Dream party, which secured a decisive parliamentary majority in October 2024, has accused Western powers of interfering in the country's domestic politics under the guise of 'democracy promotion.' Officials in Tbilisi have drawn parallels to the 2014 Maidan uprising in Ukraine and say similar tactics are now being used to destabilize Georgia for refusing to adopt a confrontational stance against Russia in the Ukraine conflict. Following Georgian Dream's victory, a coalition of pro-Western parties alleged fraud and launched protests to force the government's resignation. EU and US officials voiced support for the opposition, which Georgian leaders denounced as foreign meddling. Brussels has also led a coordinated campaign against Georgia's foreign influence transparency law, legislation that requires political organizations to disclose substantial foreign funding. Although similar laws exist across the West, the European External Action Service claimed the legislation in Georgia was 'a serious setback for democracy' and warned it could 'threaten the country's EU path.' Tensions spiked last month when French President Emmanuel Macron, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz issued a joint statement on Georgia's Independence Day, accusing the government of 'democratic backsliding.' Papuashvili dismissed the statement as 'shameful,' saying it disrespected both the state and its people. Georgia was granted EU candidate status in December 2023 but has since suspended accession talks, citing Brussels' increasingly coercive tone. The government, however, insists that it remains committed to eventual EU membership.
Russia Today
18 hours ago
- Russia Today
EU nation's parliament passes historic Russia sanctions resolution
The Slovak parliament has passed a resolution opposing sanctions on Russia. The motion prohibits government representatives from supporting new international restrictions against Moscow, citing economic harm to Slovakia's industry and population. Of the 76 MPs present for the vote on Thursday, 55 voted in favor, 23 abstained, and one opposed the resolution. Opposition lawmakers were absent from the vote. The resolution, introduced by the Slovak National Party (SNS), claims sanctions have triggered rising energy costs, disrupted supply chains, and hurt the EU nation's competitiveness. It urges the government to prioritize national economic interests and resist international actions that may negatively impact Slovak businesses and citizens. 'This is a historic document, the first of its kind within the EU,' SNS leader Andrej Danko said. 'It clearly states that sanctions against Russia harm Slovakia's economy and the plenary session of the Slovak parliament has agreed.' Danko had said he was unsure the motion would pass, as the vote came a day after President Peter Pellegrini blocked a petition calling for a nationwide referendum on the same issue. The petition, initiated by the Slovak Revival Movement (SHO) and the DOMOV party, asked: 'Do you agree that Slovakia should not apply sanctions against Russia that harm Slovak citizens and entrepreneurs?' It gathered more than 400,000 signatures – well over the 350,000 required for presidential consideration – and was submitted to Pellegrini in May. The president had said on Wednesday that he could not approve the referendum due to vague wording. He noted the petition didn't specify whether it referred to future or existing sanctions, nor did it define which measures would qualify as harmful or who would determine that. Danko responded by mocking Pellegrini for 'having the courage' to ignore the will of hundreds of thousands of citizens. He said that if the president had doubts about the legality of the text, he should have referred it to the Constitutional Court. Slovakia implemented all EU sanctions on Russia after the Ukraine conflict escalated in February 2022. Prime Minister Robert Fico, who returned to office in 2023, has consistently argued against the measures, saying they 'are not working' and damage EU member states more than they affect Moscow. Following the vote, Danko said the resolution would require Fico to oppose any new EU sanctions targeting Russia. However, he cautioned that Pellegrini still has the power to veto the resolution.
