Russian military aircraft flying dangerously close to NATO airspace has raised serious concerns about the potential for miscalculations that could lead to severe consequences. These maneuvers, which appear intended to project strength and intimidate the alliance, have triggered a wave of intercepts by NATO forces and prompted discussions on the increasing risks involved in such confrontations.
On September 23, a particularly concerning event unfolded when the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) released footage showing a Russian Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jet buzzing a U.S. F-16 over international airspace. The maneuver, described by U.S. officials as “unsafe” and “unprofessional,” brought the two aircraft dangerously close to a collision, further escalating tensions between Russia and NATO.
The following day, the Russian defense ministry released footage of a Tupolev Tu-95MS strategic bomber flying near the western coast of Alaska. This demonstration of power by Russia was seen by many analysts as a bold message to NATO about Moscow’s enduring military capabilities, despite ongoing sanctions and challenges brought on by the war in Ukraine.
These incidents occurred in the Alaska Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ), which surrounds the sovereign airspace of the U.S. and Canada. While international law allows flights over neutral waters, aircraft entering this zone must declare their presence and flight path to avoid interception. However, Russia’s refusal to follow such protocols raises the risks of a serious accident.
In September alone, NORAD reported several Russian incursions near Alaska, including two Russian Ilyushin Il-38 patrol aircraft and two Tupolev Tu-142 maritime reconnaissance and anti-submarine warfare planes. These events have become part of a worrying pattern of provocations that, while not considered immediate threats by NORAD, clearly signal Moscow’s intent to challenge NATO’s boundaries and readiness.
Russia’s Strategic Messaging
The motivations behind these flights appear to be twofold. Experts argue that Russia is attempting to keep NATO on high alert while also showcasing its military reach. “Russian flights near Alaska and the Baltic region serve as both military provocations and strategic messages aimed at keeping NATO and the U.S. on alert while demonstrating Russia’s enduring military reach,” said retired U.S. Major General Gordon “Skip” Davis, who formerly served as NATO’s deputy assistant secretary general for its defense investment division.
Davis also emphasized that Russian military aircraft often fly without transponders or communication with civilian air traffic controllers, further increasing the risk of accidental collisions. The absence of transponder signals and flight plans makes it difficult for NATO forces to track these planes and assess their intentions, which only heightens the potential for miscalculations.
These provocations come at a time of heightened tensions between Russia and NATO, fueled by Russia’s ongoing invasion of Ukraine. Many experts believe the uptick in Russian air activity is linked to Ukraine’s calls for lifting restrictions on long-range munitions that could strike deep into Russian territory, as well as NATO nations’ decisions to sustain or even increase their military aid to Kyiv.
The spike in Russian airspace violations has been evident since the annexation of Crimea in 2014. According to NATO data, between 2013 and 2021, annual interceptions ranged from 290 to 350 instances of Russian military planes flying near or into NATO airspace without proper communication. This trend escalated in 2022 following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, with NATO scrambling jets approximately 570 times that year.
By 2023, however, the number of intercepts had returned to pre-invasion levels, with NATO forces conducting over 300 intercepts, primarily over the Baltic region. These incidents typically involved Russian aircraft flying close to NATO borders without filing flight plans or engaging with air traffic controllers, which significantly increases the risk of collisions with both military and civilian aircraft.
Military historian Sergey Radchenko explained that these incidents are a continuation of psychological operations (psyops) dating back to the Cold War. “These flights aim to keep rivals on their toes and force them to activate signal intelligence and radars to test the other side’s readiness,” Radchenko said.
While such maneuvers are designed to provoke and test NATO forces, Radchenko cautioned that the risk of inadvertent escalation is ever-present. The crowded airspace near NATO borders, particularly over the Baltic Sea and Alaska, creates conditions where a single miscalculation could have disastrous consequences.
The risks associated with such provocations are not just theoretical. One of the most infamous incidents in modern history occurred on September 1, 1983, when Soviet forces shot down Korean Airlines Flight 007, a commercial jet that had strayed into Soviet airspace. The downing of the civilian airliner, which killed all 269 passengers and crew, came amid heightened Cold War tensions and underscored the dangers of military confrontations in the air.
“Inadvertent escalation is a dangerous aspect of these missions,” Radchenko said. “The good thing is that we have more than 70 years of practice in managing these encounters, and there are rules of engagement that have been worked out.” Nevertheless, he stressed the importance of adhering to these rules to prevent future tragedies.
NORAD also acknowledged that Russian flights into the Alaska ADIZ are not uncommon, noting that such activity has been routine since the Cold War. While many of these encounters are handled without incident, the increased frequency of Russian provocations in recent years has put NATO forces on edge, especially as the war in Ukraine drags on with no end in sight.
Russian and Chinese Military Cooperation
Adding another layer of complexity to these incidents is the growing military cooperation between Russia and China. In July 2023, a joint Russian-Chinese bomber flight near Alaska prompted U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin to express concern over the two nations’ increased military collaboration. This cooperation has grown steadily since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, with China providing diplomatic and economic support to Moscow, while both countries conduct joint military exercises.
On September 23, just days before the Russian Su-35 buzzed a U.S. F-16, a Russian-Chinese flotilla entered the Sea of Okhotsk as part of joint naval exercises called Beibu/Interaction-2024. Such activities further heighten tensions and signal a closer military alignment between Beijing and Moscow, which could challenge the strategic balance in both Europe and the Indo-Pacific.
While most attention is focused on Russian activity near Alaska and the Baltic region, similar incidents have been reported in other parts of the world. Intercepts involving Russian aircraft have occurred over the Sea of Japan, the Norwegian Sea, the East China Sea, and the South China Sea. These encounters highlight Moscow’s desire to project power across multiple theaters, while also complicating diplomatic and military efforts to manage these tense situations.
Retired U.S. Vice Admiral Robert Murrett, now deputy director of the Syracuse University Institute for Security Policy and Law, noted the high level of professionalism required to handle such intercepts. “These intercepts in the air and on the water place a strong emphasis on cool heads and varsity-level airmanship and ship handling,” Murrett said. “Seamanship and airmanship are critical to avoiding incidents, and professionalism is essential in preventing accidents.”
Murrett pointed to the April 1, 2001 mid-air collision between a U.S. Navy EP-3E reconnaissance aircraft and a Chinese J-8 interceptor as a cautionary tale. The collision, which resulted in the loss of the Chinese pilot and the emergency landing of the U.S. plane on Hainan Island, caused a major diplomatic standoff between Washington and Beijing. Incidents like this serve as stark reminders of how quickly these encounters can escalate.
As Russia continues to engage in aggressive air maneuvers near NATO borders, the potential for a miscalculation with far-reaching consequences remains a pressing concern. The frequent intercepts near Alaska, the Baltic states, and other sensitive areas are a reminder of the delicate balance that NATO must strike in responding to Russian provocations while avoiding unnecessary escalation.
While rules of engagement and decades of experience have helped prevent major incidents thus far, the increasing complexity of these encounters, especially with the involvement of other actors like China, adds to the uncertainty. It is critical for both sides to maintain clear lines of communication and ensure that professionalism remains at the forefront of every encounter in the skies. With tensions between Russia and NATO already at a boiling point due to the war in Ukraine, the stakes could not be higher.
