NATO Article 5? Romania Firmly Rejects Ukraine Claim That Russian Drone Hit Its Territory

• NATO Article 5? Romania Firmly Rejects Ukraine Claim That Russian Drone Hit Its Territory
  by Tyler Durden, https://www.zerohedge.com/
  In November of 2022 the Ukrainian government tried to encourage its NATO backers to invoke an Article 5 situation which would require the Western alliance to go to war against Russia (Article 5: “an attack against one Ally is considered as an attack against all Allies.”). This is because a missile had hit a Polish border village and killed two people, which Kiev insisted was fired by Russia. But it was later proven that it was actually an errant Ukrainian air defense missile which fell on the residential area, and the crisis of potential major escalation with Russia was avoided.
  –
  On Monday, a very similar situation happened, but once again Ukraine’s attempt to drag the West into direct shooting war with Russia has failed. Ukrainian Foreign Ministry spokesman Oleg Nikolenko claimed in a public written statement that a Russian suicide drone struck Romanian territory.
  –
  He cited Ukraine’s state border service to claim that a Russian drone “fell and detonated on the territory of Romania” amid broader strikes on the port of Izmail. And that’s when he suggested it marked an attack on a NATO country and thus presented a threat to the entire alliance…
  –
  “This is yet another confirmation that Russia’s missile terror poses a huge threat not only to Ukraine’s security, but also to the security of neighboring countries, including NATO member states,” Nikolenko said.
  –
  “We urge partners to accelerate the provision of Ukraine with additional modern anti-missile and anti-air defense systems, as well as combat aviation, which will strengthen the protection of Ukraine’s infrastructure and neighboring countries,” he added, in an obvious attempt to at least get more military ‘toys’ from the West.
  –
  But NATO-member Romania quickly rejected this narrative, with its defense ministry directly refuting the claim, saying:
  –
  read more.

end