I don't know; I really don't know. I've been thinking about this quite a lot, and I can see different scenarios, but I don't have a clear answer. I think it will involve a political judgment about whether we've moved from this stage of just infrastructure to an attack on sovereignty and territorial integrity.
It's very difficult for me to answer that in a definitive way. In a way, this is analogous to some of the debates that we used to have about pre-emption. What can you take to be action with a hostile intent? As in the debate over pre-emption, my worry is that we may indulge in worst-case-scenario thinking and assume that a full frontal assault is about to hit us. Then we might act pre-emptively in a way that could be questionable from a legitimacy and legality point of view. The answer to your question is one that NATO strategists should be putting a lot of time into thinking through. I'm sorry that I don't have a better answer for you today.