{"id":304083,"date":"2025-10-06T12:01:18","date_gmt":"2025-10-06T11:01:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=304083"},"modified":"2025-10-05T15:57:26","modified_gmt":"2025-10-05T14:57:26","slug":"dont-be-fooled-others-could-have-more-interest-in-sending-drones-to-the-nordic-countries-than-russia","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2025\/10\/dont-be-fooled-others-could-have-more-interest-in-sending-drones-to-the-nordic-countries-than-russia\/","title":{"rendered":"Don\u2019t Be Fooled: Others Could Have More Interest in Sending Drones to the Nordic Countries Than Russia"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Drones over Nordic airports. No damage. No trace. No answers. Most assume Russia\u2014but what if that\u2019s not so? Why is there so much we are not told?<\/em><\/p>\n

This article explores the strategic ambiguity behind recent drone incursions and asks: Who else might benefit from sending drones into NATO airspace?<\/em><\/p>\n

From Ukraine\u2019s surprising drone supremacy to Russia\u2019s possible signalling, the silence itself may be the loudest message.<\/em><\/p>\n

These are the kinds of questions decent, intelligent investigative journalists and commentators could easily research. Why don\u2019t they?<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

29 Sep 2025 –\u00a0<\/em>Did you, dear reader, know or think of this? That the most powerful weapon in today\u2019s conflicts might be the one that leaves no trace \u2013 and no answers. Just enough fear to justify the next move?<\/p>\n

Recently, drones have repeatedly appeared over Nordic airports and near some military facilities. They cause no damage \u2013 for which reason the designation \u201chybrid <\/strong>attack\u201d <\/strong><\/em>is misleading<\/strong> but serves a purpose. These drones appear out of nowhere, leave no trace, and disappear. They seem not even to have been photographed, pushed away, or shot at. Yet airports shut down, headlines flare, and defence budgets will likely increase further \u2013 as will hatred against those pesky Russians whose evil they unfortunately can not show us any evidence of.<\/p>\n

No one claims responsibility. No drones are intercepted. No origin is confirmed. This isn\u2019t a technical failure. It\u2019s a tactic. A pattern of engineered ambiguity<\/strong>, where the absence of attribution becomes the trigger for escalation<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

We\u2019ve seen this logic before. The Nord Stream<\/strong> pipeline was sabotaged. Russia was blamed. But no hard evidence ever appeared. Still, the consequences were immediate: energy decoupling, deepened economic crisis, NATO buildup, and hardened public opinion.<\/p>\n

Now, drones seem to do something similar. They don\u2019t attack. They just appear. And disappear. And leave behind fear \u2013 as well as speculation, and a growing appetite for military readiness. But let\u2019s try an interest <\/strong>analysis which nobody does for reasons you can imagine.<\/p>\n

Who might be behind it \u2013 and why?<\/p>\n

Russia?<\/strong><\/h3>\n

Can\u2019t be excluded, of course. It could be testing NATO\u2019s airspace defences, sowing confusion, or signalling reach. But it\u2019s risky. If proven, it could justify NATO retaliation or deeper involvement in Ukraine. So far, Russia denies everything \u2013 and no country has presented hard proof.<\/p>\n

And What If It <\/strong>Is<\/strong><\/em> Russia?<\/strong><\/h3>\n

Suppose the drones are<\/em> Russian. What then?<\/p>\n

It could be a signal, a quiet warning. A way of saying: This is just a taste of what you\u2019ll get if you keep building US bases, funding Ukrainian weapons factories, and buy new weapons that you know very well that we see as a direct threat -as you would if you were us.<\/em><\/p>\n

Denmark<\/strong>, for example, has just announced it will acquire long-range strike weapons<\/strong> for the first time, perhaps including systems like the Tomahawk cruise missile<\/strong> and JASSM-ER<\/strong> for its F-35s. This marks a major shift: from defence to offensive deterrence, from shielding cities to striking deep into enemy territory.<\/p>\n

From Russia\u2019s perspective, this isn\u2019t just military modernisation \u2013 it\u2019s provocation and encirclement. And drone incursions, if they are Russian, could be a way to test airspace<\/strong>, disrupt readiness<\/strong>, and remind NATO<\/strong> that escalation cuts both ways.<\/p>\n

But again \u2013 no one claims responsibility. No one confirms origin. And that silence is the loudest part of the message.<\/p>\n

Ukraine?<\/strong><\/h3>\n

Surprisingly, yes\u2014Ukraine now has the technical ability to carry out such missions<\/strong>. You are not told that its drone industry has grown at an astonishing speed and out-competes that of Russia:<\/p>\n

\u2013 Over 500 manufacturers<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

\u2013 Monthly output of 200,000 FPV drones<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

\u2013 Long-range systems reaching up to 750\u2013800 km<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

\u2013 AI-assisted swarms trained on thousands of combat missions<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

Ukraine\u2019s drones have already struck targets deep inside Russia. Reaching Nordic airspace is well within their range. If launched from a NATO country \u2013 say, Poland or a Baltic republic \u2013 they could be untraceable. And if they don\u2019t cause damage, they leave only questions.<\/p>\n

Would NATO ever tell you if Ukraine were behind such incursions?<\/strong> Certainly not \u2013 NATO would have endorsed it and even participated in this false flag operation. It would fracture alliances, expose covert coordination, and undermine the West\u2019s narrative. Silence is safer.<\/p>\n

Britain?<\/strong><\/h3>\n

It\u2019s possible. Britain has deep ties to Ukraine\u2019s drone programs and a long history of covert operations. It could provide logistics, tech, or strategic framing \u2013 especially if the goal is to provoke Russia without direct confrontation.<\/p>\n

Why airports?<\/strong><\/h3>\n

Because they\u2019re symbolic. Civilian infrastructure. Dual-use hubs. Shutting down an airport causes panic, grabs headlines, annoys travelling citizens and sends a message: \u201cYou\u2019re vulnerable.\u201d And in radar-heavy zones, drones are harder to track \u2013 perfect for plausible deniability.<\/p>\n

What\u2019s the Bigger Picture?<\/strong><\/h3>\n

This isn\u2019t just about drones. It\u2019s about shaping public perception. Creating fear and justifying even higher defence spending. And preparing the ground for NATO\u2019s deeper involvement in Ukraine \u2013 possibly under the label of \u201cpeacekeeping,\u201d even though Russia would never accept NATO troops on Ukrainian soil, and NATO has no experience or capabilities in the field of peacekeeping.<\/p>\n

The drones don\u2019t need to explode. They just need to appear and vanish to make their masters\u2019 point. And leave behind the \u2013 nasty \u2013 story used e.g. by the Danish PM about \u201cwe do not have the evidence that it is Russia, but we know Russia is the largest threat to Europe.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

But don\u2019t be fooled. Someone knows exactly who staged this drone spectacle. <\/strong>The Nordic leaders know it too\u2014and they know precisely what they want you to think and not to think.<\/p>\n

And if they genuinely don\u2019t know, then their military and civilian \u201cintelligence\u201d services are incompetent. To put it mildly.<\/p>\n

Why this <\/strong>could<\/strong><\/em> be a false flag<\/strong><\/p>\n

I\u2019ve got a nasty mind\u2014and a few decades in the trenches of so-called security politics.<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s my hypothesis: When Zelensky met Trump at the UN, The Independent<\/em> reports he got the green light to strike deep into Russia. Special Envoy Keith Kellogg confirmed the White House \u201cdoes not object.\u201d NATO\u2019s Matt Whitaker echoed it: deeper strike capabilities to pressure Russia into negotiations. This marks a radical shift\u2014a reckless escalation masquerading as strategy. And it\u2019s madness \u2013 a madness that has to be justified.<\/p>\n

In that light, the drone \u201cattacks\u201d look suspiciously like a false flag \u2013 designed to justify the next step up the escalation ladder.<\/strong> Media people and politically correct commentators focus on the here-and-now event, not on complexity and how events relate to each other.<\/p>\n

The elites of MIMAC \u2013 the Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex<\/strong> \u2013 know nothing but military moves. They abandoned diplomacy, conflict resolution, and confidence-building \u2013 not to mention peace \u2013 long ago.<\/p>\n

They operate in an echo chamber so thick with self-righteous groupthink that they can\u2019t imagine that they could be wrong.<\/p>\n

But they could well be. Fatally wrong \u2013 because they are more loyal to other elites than their own citizens and largely ignorant about the consequences of their deeds: After all they think it is about \u201cus\u201d winning and \u201cthem\u201d losing. Because they do not have the intellectual capacity to solve problems, only to use hammers where none are needed.<\/strong><\/p>\n

In summary, watch events over the next 1\u20133 weeks. Then<\/em> you\u2019ll see what the drone \u201cattacks\u201d were really about.<\/p>\n

__________________________________________<\/em><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a> Prof. Jan Oberg, Ph.D. is director of the independent <\/em>Transnational Foundation for Peace & Future Research-TF<\/a>F<\/a> in Sweden and a member of the <\/em>TRANSCEND Network for Peace Development Environment<\/a>. CV: <\/em>https:\/\/transnational.live\/jan-oberg<\/em><\/a>
\n<\/em>https:\/\/transnational.live<\/em><\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Go to Original – thetransnational.substack.com<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

29 Sep 2025 – Drones over Nordic airports. No damage. No trace. No answers. Most assume Russia\u2014but what if that\u2019s not so? Why is there so much we are not told? Who else might benefit from sending drones into NATO airspace?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":166625,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[40],"tags":[3033,1106,1268,1284,950,91,3077,278,639,961],"class_list":["post-304083","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-transcend-members","tag-denmark","tag-drones","tag-european-union","tag-false-flag","tag-invasion","tag-nato","tag-nordic-countries","tag-russia","tag-uk","tag-ukraine"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/304083","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=304083"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/304083\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":304085,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/304083\/revisions\/304085"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/166625"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=304083"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=304083"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=304083"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}