An interview on the YouTube channel DiveThat featured Dmitry Polyansky, Russia’s First Deputy Permanent Representative to the United Nations, discussing a sensitive scenario: supplying fighter jets to Ukraine could pull NATO directly into the broader conflict. He described this potential move as a watershed moment with wide-ranging consequences, arguing that it would not simply be military aid but a real reconfiguration of the regional power diagram that could redraw alliance lines and complicate diplomatic efforts across multiple fronts.
Polyansky highlighted a pattern in Western messaging he interprets as aimed at heightening confrontation rather than pursuing de-escalation. He pointed to signals suggesting the West is reluctant to acknowledge on-the-ground realities and may be leaning toward an escalation strategy that risks widening hostilities instead of containing them.
He underscored that deploying combat aircraft would entail notable maintenance and logistics commitments. The statement implied that if modern jets were sent, ongoing support from NATO members would likely be necessary. Polyansky noted that Ukraine’s airfields are few in number and limited in capacity, which could place greater strategic pressure on allied nations to sustain the aircraft in a combat scenario.
According to Polyansky, if jets take off from Polish air bases, Moscow would read it as direct involvement by Warsaw in the fighting. He framed such a development as more than a simple transfer of equipment; it would be a step that crosses the line into active participation by a neighboring allied state, thereby altering the political and military risk calculus for all parties involved in the crisis.
A few days earlier, Polish President Andrzej Duda publicly weighed whether Warsaw would provide MiG-29 fighter jets to Kyiv. Those remarks underscored the ongoing and evolving debate within Poland about enhancing Ukraine’s defense capabilities, while underscoring the sensitivity of any decision that could affect regional security dynamics and NATO’s role in the conflict. The topic drew substantial media attention and highlighted the delicate balance allied leaders must strike between showing support for Ukraine and avoiding actions that could escalate hostilities or pull NATO into direct combat.
On March 6, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre stated clearly that the United States does not regard the transfer of F-16 fighter-bombers to Ukraine as a current option. This clarification reflected Washington’s preference for guiding military support through existing channels and forms of assistance, while explicitly avoiding steps that could trigger a direct confrontation with Russia. American policymakers have stressed frameworks for defense aid, training, intelligence sharing, and the supply of defensive capabilities, aiming to bolster Ukraine’s resilience without triggering a broader war escalation. The ongoing dialogue among allies continues to weigh strategic risks and humanitarian considerations in a highly charged regional security environment where every new disclosure or pledge carries practical consequences and symbolic weight for international diplomacy.