Poland MiG-29 deal flew to the brink of a disastrous war


There's a good reason U.S. officials on Monday quickly put the kibosh on Poland's plan to transfer its fighter jets to Ukrainians directly from a U.S. base in Germany — the proposal stood a good chance of drawing the United States and NATO directly into the fight with Russian and starting World War III.
"We do not believe Poland's proposal is a tenable one," a Defense Department spokesman said, just hours after the effort became public.
As long as Ukraine is able to stay in the fight against Russia, we're going to see plenty more debates and incidents like this. There's a real tension between helping Ukraine without helping it so much that the violence spills out across Europe. I've said it before: Prudence is hard. Escalation is easy.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Maybe too easy.
The Atlantic Council, a foreign policy think tank, has just published a survey of 37 experts — former diplomats and retired military officers — asking them to rank a baker's dozen of possible American interventions, evaluating options according to both their possible effectiveness and the potential risk they might escalate the conflict into a wider war between NATO and Russia. The menu included everything from humanitarian assistance to using special operations forces to "advise" Ukrainians to the establishment of the much-discussed no-fly zone.
Almost all of the options were considered at least somewhat risky by the experts. Just two proposals were ranked firmly on the "lower risk" side of the quadrant: Giving Ukrainians either unmanned drones or electronic warfare systems that can jam enemy communications and weapons while defending against such attacks. Even a proposed airlift of humanitarian supplies into the city of Lviv ranked on the riskier side of the spectrum.
"Any actions that involved U.S. or NATO personnel deploying to conduct operations inside Ukraine, even humanitarian operations, were rated as relatively more escalatory than militarily effective, with the riskiest being SOF [special operations forces] operations," the report's authors wrote. "The no-fly zone option was clearly identified as the one most likely to lead to NATO-Russia conflict — with all respondents saying it would entail a significant risk of escalation."
The experts were more bullish on providing weapons systems to Ukrainians to operate on their own. As it happens, that balance — give weapons, but don't get NATO personnel or facilities directly involved — is pretty much exactly what the U.S. and its allies are already doing. Even then, such actions are fraught.
By now, everybody should understand why a fight between the U.S. and Russia is a bad idea: You don't want two nuclear powers trading blows, at all. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be helping the Ukrainians. But it does mean that every judgment, every decision, is extremely delicate. This is not a moment for glib, cavalier decisions. The future of the whole world is at stake.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Joel Mathis is a writer with 30 years of newspaper and online journalism experience. His work also regularly appears in National Geographic and The Kansas City Star. His awards include best online commentary at the Online News Association and (twice) at the City and Regional Magazine Association.
-
Gandhi arrests: Narendra Modi's 'vendetta' against India's opposition
The Explainer Another episode threatens to spark uproar in the Indian PM's long-running battle against the country's first family
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK
-
How the woke right gained power in the US
Under the radar The term has grown in prominence since Donald Trump returned to the White House
By Chas Newkey-Burden, The Week UK
-
Codeword: April 24, 2025
The Week's daily codeword puzzle
By The Week Staff
-
The anger fueling the Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez barnstorming tour
Talking Points The duo is drawing big anti-Trump crowds in red states
By Joel Mathis, The Week US
-
Why the GOP is nervous about Ken Paxton's Senate run
Today's Big Question A MAGA-establishment battle with John Cornyn will be costly
By Joel Mathis, The Week US
-
Russia's spring offensive: what does it mean for Ukraine?
Today's Big Question Ukraine's military campaigner says much-anticipated offensive has begun
By Chas Newkey-Burden, The Week UK
-
'The idea of counties leaving a state is not as eccentric as it may seem'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Justin Klawans, The Week US
-
Ukraine nabs first Chinese troops in Russia war
Speed Read Ukraine claims to have f two Chinese men fighting for Russia
By Peter Weber, The Week US
-
Why are Finland and other nations leaving the land mine treaty?
Today's Big Question Russia's neighbors beef up their defenses
By Joel Mathis, The Week US
-
Bombs or talks: What's next in the US-Iran showdown?
Talking Points US gives Tehran a two-month deadline to deal
By Joel Mathis, The Week US
-
Kaja Kallas: the EU's new chief diplomat shaping the future of European defense
In the Spotlight The former Estonian Prime Minister's status as an uncompromising Russia hawk has gone from liability to strength
By David Faris