Russia could attempt a limited incursion into Estonia to test the resilience of NATO and the alliance’s commitment to its mutual defence pledge, according to a new scenario from the Institute for the Study of War.
The Washington-based think tank has outlined how Moscow could seek to seize part of the Estonian border city of Narva without immediately launching a full-scale invasion, creating a crisis designed to test whether NATO activates Article 5.
The scenario comes amid heightened tensions between Moscow and Tallinn and growing concern across the Baltic region over Russian drone incursions, airspace violations, sabotage and other forms of hybrid activity.
The ISW stressed that its analysis is not a forecast that Russia will attack Estonia. It said there is currently no evidence of a large Russian military build-up near the Baltic states and that a full-scale Russian invasion of NATO remains extremely unlikely while Moscow is heavily committed to the war in Ukraine.
However, the think tank argued that a limited operation could require far fewer forces and could allow the Kremlin to probe NATO’s response without immediately committing to a wider war.
The scenario has gained urgency following a September 16 decision by Russia’s FSB to restrict movement on the Russian side of the border opposite Narva. The measures included restrictions on movement along the Narva River, a firearms ban and a partial curfew.
Read more related news:
Europe already in a form of ‘World War III’ as Burnham faces pressure to strengthen defences
Russia prepares for ‘stealth’ mobilisation as Europe readies for hybrid attacks on NATO
Brits on holiday in NATO hotspot warned of Russian explosive drones
Kremlin accuses UK of being a ‘Russophobic’ state, but Putin’s war did the damage
Estonia has also warned that it would close its border with Russia if Vladimir Putin ordered a new involuntary mobilisation, potentially creating pressure for Russians seeking to leave the country.
Narva, a predominantly Russian-speaking Estonian city directly opposite Russia, features prominently in the ISW scenario.
The think tank envisages Moscow first attempting to create an information environment in which Estonia is accused of mistreating its Russian-speaking population and of participating directly in Ukrainian attacks on Russia.
Russian agents already inside Narva could then seize key municipal buildings and other strategic locations before declaring a so-called “Narva People’s Republic”.
The Kremlin could subsequently claim that Russian citizens had requested protection and insist that Russian military forces had not entered Estonian territory.
Instead, Russian drone and air-defence units positioned inside Russia could provide support from across the border, while Russian forces could threaten further escalation if Estonian forces attempted to retake the seized territory.
The ISW said Russian forces could use FPV, fibre-optic and radio-controlled drones, alongside longer-range one-way attack drones, to strike Estonian forces and obstruct reinforcements moving towards Narva.
Such an operation could leave Estonia facing a difficult choice: attempt to retake its territory while risking a broader confrontation with Russia, or allow Moscow to establish a temporary foothold and challenge the credibility of NATO’s collective defence commitment.
The most significant strategic test would come at the alliance level.
Estonia could seek activation of Article 5, under which an armed attack against one NATO member is treated as an attack against all. But the ISW warned that negotiations between the US and European allies could delay a political decision and that Russian information operations would seek to exploit divisions inside the alliance.
The think tank said the scenario would present NATO with “a series of complicated challenges and decisions”, particularly if the alliance lacked sufficient counter-drone systems, electronic warfare capabilities and other equipment close to Narva.
Susan Lilleväli, director general at Estonia’s foreign affairs ministry communications department, stressed that the scenario should not be mistaken for an intelligence warning of an imminent attack.
The “ISW rightly points out that a full-scale Russian invasion of a NATO member state is highly unlikely, and that the scenario of limited operation by Russia is notional. We must not turn possible scenarios into facts.”
“If there is a real reason to believe that the threat of a military attack has increased, we will say so,” she added.
Lilleväli nevertheless said Estonia remained alert to the wider Russian threat.
“This does not mean that we underestimate Russia’s long term strategic threat: Russia remains the most serious and long-term threat to European security, but we must remain calm, vigilant and prepared.”
“The Allies have demonstrated both the readiness and the capability to respond and, when necessary, have shot down drones that entered NATO airspace,” she added, “this confirms that violations are met with a decisive response.”
The ISW’s analysis therefore presents Narva not as evidence that Russia is preparing an imminent invasion, but as a stress test for NATO: a deliberately limited crisis in which Moscow could seek to exploit uncertainty over where an act of aggression begins and how quickly the alliance is prepared to respond.
Leave a Comment