hw_9525f5c055d295cd
NATO intercepts Russian An-12, Su-35 and Su-30 aircraft operating near the Baltic states without normal flight-safety compliance.
NATO fighter aircraft were scrambled to identify and escort one Russian An-12 and one Su-35 flying from mainland Russia to Kaliningrad through international airspace. The Lithuanian Ministry of National Defence reported that the An-12 had its transponder switched off, although it maintained radio communication with the regional air traffic control centre. The Su-35 had no flight plan, its transponder was switched off, and it was not maintaining radio communication. NATO aircraft also intercepted one Russian Su-30 flying from Kaliningrad and back through international airspace, again with the transponder off, no flight plan, and no radio communication. This makes the 5 May incident more complex than a single-aircraft interception because it involved multiple Russian military aircraft and repeated unsafe aviation behaviour. The presence of combat aircraft such as the Su-35 and Su-30 gives the incident a sharper military character than a transport-only flight. Although no sovereign airspace violation was reported, the lack of normal aviation compliance created operational risk and required NATO response. The route between mainland Russia and Kaliningrad is strategically sensitive because it passes close to NATO’s Baltic flank. From a hybrid-warfare perspective, the incident fits the pattern of repeated airspace pressure and readiness testing.
E/M/R/S scores
- EExistence0/4 · Not assessed
- MIntent0/4 · Not assessed
- RRussian actor link0/4 · Not assessed
- SRussian state responsibility0/4 · Not assessed
Facts
No facts
Sources
-
- Role
- discovery_lead
- Date
- 2026-05-05T18:09:14Z
NATO fighter aircraft were scrambled to identify and escort one Russian An-12 and one Su-35 flying from mainland Russia to Kaliningrad through international airspace. The Lithuanian Ministry of National Defence reported that the An-12 had its transponder switched off, although it maintained radio communication with the regional air traffic control centre. The Su-35 had no flight plan, its transponder was switched off, and it was not maintaining radio communication. NATO aircraft also intercepted one Russian Su-30 flying from Kaliningrad and back through international airspace, again with the transponder off, no flight plan, and no radio communication. This makes the 5 May incident more complex than a single-aircraft interception because it involved multiple Russian military aircraft and repeated unsafe aviation behaviour. The presence of combat aircraft such as the Su-35 and Su-30 gives the incident a sharper military character than a transport-only flight. Although no sovereign airspace violation was reported, the lack of normal aviation compliance created operational risk and required NATO response. The route between mainland Russia and Kaliningrad is strategically sensitive because it passes close to NATO’s Baltic flank. From a hybrid-warfare perspective, the incident fits the pattern of repeated airspace pressure and readiness testing.