The interceptions took place on May 10 and 11 and were related to modified PC-12 turboprop aircraft that the U.S. military uses primarily for signals intelligence and scouting operations. The U.S. designation for the aircraft is U-28.

Contrary to initial reporting in German-language media, no aircraft seems to have illegally violated Austrian airspace. The U.S. Air Force had filed for an overflight permit for two aircraft on May 10, but didn’t use it. When later that day two different USAF aircraft approached Austrian airspace unannounced, jets were scrambled to meet them – but they turned back before crossing the border, Austrian military spokesperson Michael Bauer said in a statement on X on Wednesday.

The U.S. refiled the overflight permit for the following day and used it then. The Austrian air force sent fighter jets to confirm that the aircraft overflying the airspace matched what had been approved. “Some things you have to see for yourself,” Bauer said in a reply on X

Austrian jets were scrambled in a “priority A intercept” on May 11, Bauer said on Tuesday, marking the highest urgency in the Austrian air force’s nomenclature.

Later reporting by the major Austrian daily Der Standard cited the Austrian government as saying that, as of Wednesday, the verdict was still out on whether the planes that overflew Austrian airspace were the ones for which a permit had been issued. No further details were provided on what was taking so long for the verification.

Austria is not a member of the NATO alliance and has perpetual neutrality enshrined in its constitution. Transits by foreign militaries – whether by land or by air – require prior approval and are generally granted only if they are unrelated to a war. Austria was the fifth European country to close its airspace to U.S. activity related to the war in Iran, with the country’s vice chancellor, Andreas Babler, saying that Austrians want “nothing to do with Trump’s politics of chaos and his war.”

The May 11 intercept reportedly took place over the Totes Gebirge mountain range in Upper Austria, over 60 kilometers from the German border. The American planes were met by Eurofighter Typhoons.

Swiss news portal “20 Minuten” first reported on the incursion and it was later confirmed by other German-language media, although initial reporting stated that unpermitted airspace violations had taken place – a claim that was refuted by the Austrian military on Wednesday

“This flight took place after an administrative error in the overflight clearance paperwork was corrected,” an official from U.S. European Command told Defense News in an email. “The United States continues to work closely with Austrian authorities on any questions regarding overflights and fully complies with Austrian laws and procedures.”

Publicly available reporting of unauthorized U.S. overflights is rare, and permissions are generally granted in peacetime. Austria’s location and geography – a thin sliver of land between major NATO allies Germany and Italy, and dividing northern from southern Europe – makes it a prime transit route. Neighboring Switzerland has similar neutrality policies.

The most remarkable precedent is a case in October 2002, when the U.S. attempted to smuggle two F-117A Nighthawk stealth attack aircraft through Austrian airspace by filing a flight plan only for the accompanying KC-10A tanker aircraft. Austrian Draken fighter jets identified the undeclared aircraft and Vienna later lodged a formal diplomatic complaint.

The recent incidents, too, will be addressed through diplomatic channels, Bauer said.

Editor’s note: This story was updated with new information from the U.S. military and the Austrian government refuting initial reporting that the airspace incursions were unauthorized.

Meanwhile, Ukraine on Tuesday predicted the total costs for its defense at $120 billion for 2026, of which half would have to come from foreign support.

According to Zelenskyy and Ukrainian officials, the discussions in Berlin focused on a package of five documents that would underpin an eventual peace deal, several of which are dedicated to long‑term security guarantees for Ukraine. Kyiv says parts of the package are intended to be legally binding, with an “Article 5-like” mutual‑defense commitment, a reference to NATO nomenclature, requiring U.S. congressional approval and backed by additional European pledges.​

German officials describe Washington’s offer on legal and material guarantees as “truly remarkable” and a “very important step forward.” The conference marks the first major EU‑hosted attempt to shape the emerging security architecture around a potential ceasefire.

Europe, the U.S. and Ukraine “achieved a common sense of purpose” on Monday in their quest to end the war in Ukraine, German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said during his opening remarks for the Ukraine Defense Contact Group on Tuesday. There had previously been significant differences between Europe and the U.S. regarding a peace plan proposed by Washington, which was perceived across the Atlantic as a capitulation to most of Moscow’s war aims.

The center of gravity has shifted toward Europe in the past months, as the continent is now single-handedly financing Ukraine’s continued defense against Russia following Washington’s suspension of military assistance since March 2025. Total European allocated aid since the start of Russia’s invasion now more than doubles U.S. support for Ukraine, according to the Kiel Institute, a Germany-based research organization.

Besides progress on security guarantees, negotiators reported no tangible advance on the question of territorial concessions.

Russian demands for formal recognition of its hold over parts of eastern Ukraine remain incompatible with Kyiv’s public position, and Berlin officials describe the road ahead on these questions as “very long.”

Ukrainian government officials have repeatedly stressed that suggestions of ceding Ukrainian-held territory remain off the table and that any deal must avoid freezing the conflict on terms favorable to Moscow.​ European leaders have said only Ukrainians can decide on a path forward in territorial questions, despite U.S. pressure in recent weeks for Kyiv to give up about a fifth of its land to Russia.

Zelenskyy has signaled that once the five‑document package is finalized with U.S. and European partners, Kyiv expects a direct meeting with President Donald Trump to test whether Moscow will accept the emerging framework.

European and U.S. officials alike are portraying the Berlin talks as “very positive,” saying there is consensus on key issues even if the outcome stopped short of a formal ceasefire proposal.

A European-led multinational peacekeeping force to be deployed in Ukraine once the war ends is a key pillar of the proposed deal.

On Tuesday, British Defence Minister John Healey reaffirmed his country’s commitment to such a mission, saying that London continues “to direct funding to prepare our U.K. troops and armed forces so that we are ready to deploy when peace comes, with troops on the ground and jets in the air.”

Ten European leaders, along with EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, issued a joint statement after the talks proposing a “multinational force for Ukraine” led by Europe and backed by the United States. The European proposal additionally called for “sustained and significant support to Ukraine to build its armed forces, which should remain at a peacetime level of 800,000.”

In the meantime, Ukraine will be reliant on support from its Western partners. Speaking at the Ukraine Defense Contact Group meeting on Tuesday, Denys Shmyhal, the Ukrainian minister of defense, said his country expected the war costs to total $120 billion next year, of which Ukraine would be able to cover half on its own.

“The remaining $60 billion must come from our partners,” Shmyhal said, asking the countries present to each allocate at least 0.25% of their 2026 economic power to Ukraine’s defensive effort. Air defense remains a priority, according to the defense minister.

“Strong and coordinated decisions will accelerate our path toward a just and lasting peace,” Shmyhal said. “Now is the moment to bring it closer.”

While attending celebrations for Russia’s Navy Day on Sunday, Putin said that his country would take “mirror measures to deploy” these weapons, which may be able to carry nuclear warheads, “taking into account the actions of the United States, its satellites in Europe and in other regions of the world.”

Putin pointed out the perceived threat that American plans to deploy medium-range missiles to Germany by 2026 pose to Russia.

“The flight time to targets on our territory of such missiles, which in the future may be equipped with nuclear warheads, will be about 10 minutes,” he said.

The White House on July 10 said that the U.S. was planning to “begin episodic deployments” of conventional missiles to Germany in 2026. The statement added that “these conventional long-range fires units will include SM-6, Tomahawk, and developmental hypersonic weapons, which have significantly longer range than current land-based fires in Europe.”

It remains unclear which missiles Moscow would seek to use or deploy, Nikolai Sokov, a senior fellow at the Vienna Center for Disarmament and Nonproliferation who researches Russian missiles and arms control, said in an email to Defense News.

The ground-launched Kalibr was the “obvious” choice, he said, adding that it “will be easy to develop and test in time for 2026.” Increasing the range of Iskanders or even reviving the mothballed Rubezh project may also be on the table.

Iskander missiles are already stationed in Kaliningrad and Belarus, while longer-range systems could be stationed deeper in Russian territory, increasing early warning times on both sides.

“There is also the 9M729 cruise missile, which the US believes entered service in the 2010s,” Michael Duitsman, a research associate at the California-based James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, said in an email to Defense News.

He pointed out that Putin explicitly mentioned the “coastal troops” in his Sunday speech, which include coastal artillery forces.

“The Russian military has used two of these systems, Bal and Bastion, to strike land targets in Ukraine,” said Duitsman, remarking that both could be upgraded with missiles of increased ranges. “With Oniks-M missiles, [the Bastion unit based in Kaliningrad] could hypothetically strike throughout the entirety of Poland in addition to their assigned anti-ship mission,” he said.

The USSR and U.S. in 1987 signed the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty, which outlawed this entire class of weapons with a range of 500 to 5,500 kilometers. By 1991, both countries had destroyed their entire stockpiles — a combined total of 2,692 missiles.

The Trump administration pulled out of the treaty in early 2019, alleging repeated Russian violations; in response, Russia, too, suspended its participation.

In his Sunday speech, Putin said that if the U.S. follows through on its missile deployment plans, Russia “will consider ourselves free from the previously imposed unilateral moratorium on the development of intermediate and shorter-range strike weapons.” The creation of such systems, he said, was “in its final stage.”

“We are entering a new Euromissile crisis,” said Nikolai Sokov, the senior fellow at the VCDNP. He added that, unlike Gorbachev, who was instrumental to the INF treaty’s success, Putin was less likely to make concessions. “A stand-off is more likely, and an agreement is less likely than was the case in the 1980s,” Sokov said.