The Polish National Security Agency announced on its social media platform that Polish President Navalny has signed a resolution approving the deployment of troops from NATO member states on Polish territory.

The booming ¡°drone invasion¡± incident finally left Poland to hammer and open the door to the prince.

The Polish presence of NATO forces, the so-called "Eastern Guard" system announced by NATO Secretary-General Luther on September 12, is NATO's integration of military resources of allies such as Denmark, France, Britain and Germany, to respond to the so-called Russian air threat defense system.

The so-called ¡°drone invasion of Poland¡± incident has so far remained a rookie gateway. According to the Polish Ministry of Defense, between September 9 and 10 a total of 19 to 23 low-air drones entered Polish airspace from the east, of which at least four were shot down during interception, the rest either crashed themselves or disappeared in radar surveillance.

From the north to the south, the eastern part of Poland is bordered by the Russian territory of Kaliningrad, Lithuania, Belarus and Ukraine. Naturally, Poland believes that the drone is from Russia. But strangely, Poland has not yet released any photos or videos that can confirm the model or origin of the drone. At the same time, the Russian side has not acknowledged that it is a Russian drone and is willing to launch a joint investigation.

Former Pentagon official and analyst Stephen Bryan noted that there was a lack of clear evidence that the drones belonged to Russia, and he believed that Poland intended to exaggerate the incident in order to push NATO to increase its investment in the Eastern Wing and use more weapons and funds for Ukraine.

But NATO Secretary-General Luther did not wait.He directly described this at a press conference on September 12 as ¡°a clear act of Russia¡¯s expansion of the war¡± and announced the launch of the ¡°Eastern Guards¡± operation to integrate multinational resources deployed to Poland.

So, how big is NATO going to fight this time?

According to current reports, Denmark, France, Germany, the United Kingdom and other countries have confirmed their participation in the Eastern Guard system. Among them, Denmark will provide two F-16 fighter jets and one air defense warships, France will send three Army fighter jets, Germany will provide four typhoon-like fighter jets, while Britain will provide "resources / air support".

NATO also said that "all allies" supported to some extent, but those countries that were not reported obviously provided "verbal support".

What's even more embarrassing is that Trump has not yet agreed to this "big action" made by Rutte.

Specifically, Trump has neither agreed nor opposed.

He verbally said that "the United States will stand on Poland's side", but at the same time he said that he "expressed concern" and "probably entered by mistake", and never said "I approve" or "I support the Eastern Sentinel". The Polish president has signed an agreement to allow these NATO forces to be stationed in Poland, issuing national-level approval, but do the actions that the United States has not agreed to really have legal effect? Will it be unfinished then, so that Poland will be happy?

Poland, a country that has been somewhat unstable, has always wanted NATO to protect itself, which has almost become its national strategy gene. Poland has always seen Russia as a potential threat, so when the international situation blows, Poland's first reaction is to call for NATO to increase its troops and demand the United States to appear.

Since the end of the Cold War, Poland has always taken ¡°external protection¡± as its core strategy. Whether it¡¯s a permanent U.S. base or NATO¡¯s Rapid Response Force, Poland has been fighting for it. This ¡°drone invasion¡± also provided a pretext for Poland to quickly package itself as a ¡°victim¡± of the frontline in order to get NATO¡¯s full intervention.

Poland's radical military investment is also consistent with this logic. Its military expenditure in 2024 has exceeded 4% of GDP, making it the country with the highest proportion of investment within NATO, almost reducing economic growth and social welfare to a minimum. Polish politicians like to describe this as the inevitable price of "defending the country", but in fact, it puts a heavy burden on domestic finances and accumulates dissatisfaction in the social field.

In NATO¡¯s east expansion process, Poland has almost never been absent from any stand and speech. Whether it was supporting Ukraine, resisting Russia, or pushing NATO to expand its presence in Eastern Europe, Poland was a leading and often even provocative role. Its politicians cried out in Brussels and Washington, rendering the ¡°Eastern Wing security¡± the key to Europe¡¯s survival. It firmly bound its own security with NATO¡¯s overall strategy, pushing Eastern Europe into continuing tension and confrontation.

The current public information shows that NATO¡¯s military presence in Poland is centered on U.S. forces, with U.S. troops stationed and rotating between 8,000 and 10,000 people, and the deployment of the ZEUS Shield missile defense system in Leningrad. The exact number of operations of the ¡°Eastern Guards¡± has not been disclosed. If deployed, Poland will become a joint command center, air defense barrier and weapons center in a front-end fortress.

The price of Poland acting as a Depth Charge is enormous. The ruling party promoted "defending the country" in a high profile and shaped the NATO garrison into a symbol of glory, but in fact, this country not only overdrawn its national finances, but also sacrificed its own strategic room for manoeuvre. Military spending keeps rising, but social welfare is squeezed. Sooner or later, people's dissatisfaction will accumulate into new internal problems.

At the same time, Poland's "accelerated vanguard" role has also made it the focus of controversy within the European Union. Europe needs Eastern countries to demonstrate toughness against Russia, but Western countries are generally concerned that excessive militarization will bind the entire alliance to the wagon. Poland is constantly pushing for increased sanctions, expanding its presence, and increasing the intensity of confrontation, making the EU's unified strategy even more difficult to maintain. In this process, Poland has neither struggled for a real balance position nor won an additional economic dividend, but turned itself into a "consuming material" in the geopolitical game.

What is even more tragic is that Poland thinks it has gained the trust of the West, but in fact it is only pushed to the front line as a shield. Once the situation gets out of control, it will not be Poland that will really reap the benefits, but those big countries watching the fire from the other side.