Polish PM Tusk says there is no reason to think Poland was the target for the missile attack and the US is interested in taking part in the investigation into the missile

Statements of this kind, where a member-state leader publicly rules out deliberate targeting while an investigation is pending, follow a familiar de-escalation template: the priority is to slow the attribution cycle and avoid premature treaty language while facts are established. In past episodes of ordnance landing on allied territory, the market sequence has been a sharp initial haven bid into the incident headline followed by partial retracement as officials steer toward accidental or debris explanations, with the retracement typically incomplete until attribution is formally resolved. The operative distinction is between stray ordnance and deliberate strike: the former unwinds the risk premium over sessions, the latter invokes alliance consultation mechanics and a durable repricing of European assets. US participation in the investigation is the usual pattern, lending credibility to the eventual finding and shortening the window of contested narratives. What bears on pricing from here is the wording of any follow-on alliance or government statements, specifically whether 'deliberate' and 'attack' continue to be avoided, and any movement in Polish and regional defence postures. As long as official language remains in the de-escalation register, the precedent is mean reversion rather than escalation.