It’s time to get real. The United States is not pulling any of its troops out of foreign entanglements in Afghanistan or Syria so that it can put them in a big, fat “Fort Trump” in eastern Poland.
At the very least, when President Donald Trump tweeted it’s time to bring “our boys” home, the lightbulb should have gone on in Warsaw. America is disengaging from overseas commitments and focusing on growing rivalry with China. The U.S. army doesn’t have a spare combat brigade, let alone an armored division, to tie down in Central Europe waiting for the Russians to come.
For a Polish government to bet the store on securing a permanent U.S. army base to guard against Russian aggression is bound to lead to disappointment. All the more so if the quest is coupled with confrontation with the European Union over the rule of law; souring relations with the main Western European powers, Germany and France; a weakening of its armed forces and security services through repeated purges; and memory politics that upsets neighbors and allies.
Poland, the biggest Central European country with a strong military tradition, should be the sword and shield of NATO in the defense of northeastern Europe. Yet offering to pay for extra U.S. protection suggests that Warsaw regards NATO’s Enhanced Forward Presence (EFP)—rotating multinational frontline units in Poland and the Baltic States to ensure that any Russian incursion would immediately encounter allied forces—as inadequate.
NATO agreed on the reassurance plan at its 2016 Warsaw summit at Poland’s request, following Russia’s military action in Ukraine, to reinforce the principle that an attack on one ally is an attack on all. The EFP includes American boots on Polish soil, in addition to an existing air force presence and headquarters staff. On average, the United States has about 4,000 military personnel in the country.
Nevertheless, Warsaw is effectively signaling it doesn’t trust either NATO or the European Union to come to its aid in a crisis and putting all its eggs in the basket of its bilateral defense relationship with Washington. It is happy to overpay for Patriot air defense missiles as an extra insurance premium.
For sure, Poles have historical grounds rooted in 1795, 1939, and 1945 to fear being abandoned by Western powers. But those reasons should prompt Warsaw to seek to bind NATO and the EU more closely into its security rather than alienate European allies. As the EU is increasing its defense ambitions and capabilities, Poland should become more fully involved in the process. That way, the Common Security and Defense Policy, PESCO, and the European Defense Fund can reinforce collective defense in Eastern Europe, and not just be used for EU operations outside Europe.
There are other ways to strengthen NATO’s eastern defenses without a hulking permanent U.S. base. Use EU funds to expand dual-use road, rail, energy, and airport infrastructure to facilitate faster military mobility. Give NATO’s supreme commander pre-delegated authority to set in motion crisis response measures. Both the EU and NATO are investing in improved cyber defenses and better early warning of hybrid threats and disinformation. Poland lags in these areas. A joint U.S.-EU initiative would be more attractive to the United States.
It would make more sense to encourage the United States to build up enablers in Poland—such as pre-positioned equipment, pre-surveyed landing sites, and a bigger team of advance planners for rapid military reinforcements—rather than pressing for a base.
Of the threats to Polish national security, direct Russian military aggression is not the most likely. Warsaw needs to focus on a wider range of challenges, including the possibility of state failure in Ukraine, which could send refugees and possibly armed militias across its border, or of instability in Belarus, as well as cyberattacks or information warfare that could cripple key infrastructure and inflame its polarized domestic politics.
The biggest danger to Poland’s economic and political security in the long run is a deterioration of its relationship with the EU, the foundation of its post-Cold War prosperity, or a possible disintegration of the union. While public support for membership remains high and Poles are net beneficiaries of the EU budget, growing estrangement could eventually lead to a “Polexit,” as Britain’s experience shows.
To optimize its security policies, Poland should start by settling the dispute with the EU over judicial independence, repair ties with Berlin and Paris (notably by dropping the divisive campaign for war reparations from Germany), engage actively in European defense and industrial cooperation, and pursue additional ways of strengthening NATO’s eastern reinforcement strategy (short of a permanent U.S. base) in consultation with all allies.
In return, Berlin and Paris should look to boost political and industrial cooperation with Poland, reviving the Weimar Triangle formation that offered the promise of a seat in Europe’s inner leadership circle, and including Warsaw in future defense projects such as a next generation tank. Germany, as Poland’s neighbor, should be much more involved in Poland’s defense, as should France, which tends to focus more on Africa and is not leading any of the NATO forward deployed battalions in Eastern Europe.
It’s not too late for Poland to let go of the mirage of “Fort Trump” and pursue a more realistic security policy in collaboration with its European and NATO allies.
Paul Taylor is a contributing editor at POLITICO Europe and a senior fellow at Friends of Europe. He is the author of ‘Fort Trump’ or Bust, published by Friends of Europe in December 2018.
Comments(10)
All of the above will happen if the government changes this year and PiS loses its power. If it remains in power the pro US government will continue its bilateral ties which will be leveraged by United States. PiS is basing their policies based on history. Poland has been betrayed by Western allies many times before and USA is the reason independent Poland exist.
The current government is in fact basing its policies with an eye to reality. The problem for Poland regarding the EU is that the EU is demanding blind ideological conformance while ignoring threats to its security. Even if the Polish-USA alliance does not last more than a few years, it may be enough time for the EU to become a true partnership of nations vice a Franco-German "continental system".
Judy, do not think that way any more, please. Reason for America’s military presence in Poland and Central Europe is for defensing independence and sovereignty that region or is projection of USA’s interests? Be realistic, please Bad relation between Poland and some of Polish neighbors not depends on Polish position but it is a result of Germany’s aspirations to govern EU and exploit it for Germany’s global ambitions. Germany's global ambition is wrong thing. But Poles do not recognize it as its own interests and they do not want to be second or third rank Germany’s partner and the same rank of EU Membert. Please appreciate Polish ambitions, too. Maybe Poles know that being important USA's partner they could stranghten their position?
Europe is haunted by history, not just Poland (adapted citation from “Fort Trump or bust”). Poland saved the West in 1683, Vienna, Islamic State invasion; stopped Lenin text book advance into Europe, Miracle at the Vistula; Battle of England pilots; the Orzel; Rejewski’s Enigma breakthrough, worth many divisions, seldom mentioned; Monte Casino. In 1939 they waited and waited for the superior French tanks to attack in the West, a war on two fronts the Wehrmacht might have lost; Katyn followed. They didn’t even make it to the napkin exchanged between Churchill and Stalin, not that Churchill could have done more in the waning days of the night watchman Empire. Romania made it to the napkin, at 0%, another strong supporter of the Versailles treaty; Romania, whose oil eventually fueled the binome panzer-dive bomber that obliterated the Allies in 1940 in a matter of days. It isn’t a coincidence that both countries have been looking for anything that would bring to their soil material proof that the US will fight with and for them. The Aegis Ashore ABM systems deployed in both countries (protecting NATO EU against Iran’s wrath, officially), the Patriot missiles purchases and more, are seen by both as a guarantee. They are also correct in betting that fancy acronyms like PESCO mean little. Perfect prof, the rebuke of the trigger-happy Williamson by May and The Guardian (well-deserved or not is a different story). The author is correct in identifying that direct Russian military aggression isn’t the most likely. Worse, if somehow war begins again in Europe, a local tradition never to be discounted, it will quickly escalate to a full strategic nuclear exchange which will end the northern hemisphere and probably us all. Russia’s escalate to deescalate strategy, an adaptation of NATO’s in the days of Warsaw pact glory, is feasible just on paper. The author is correct in identifying that after Brexit, the Munich of our time, others might follow. The bickering between France and Italy, Farage and Bannon, the intellectual devastation inflicted by the US advertisers located in Silicon Valley, these are bad omens for the EU survival. In the killing fields called Europe, good or bad, the EU is the best chance for survival for small/medium powers like Romania and Poland. It is time for both to become net contributors to the EU budget. It is also time for pressure groups like the V4 and the Weimar triangle to go away. In 2100 a united Europe is the last chance, the East has risen again.
Poland need to be Independent on order to protect itself without submission to Germany because Germany has interests that are their own.So history says. Do thank you, we will not be your vasals
Basically you're ssuggesting that to defend from Moskva Poland shoud surrender to Berlin. Not going to happen.
Germany has no seaworthy subs, less than half of their tanks a working, they have four fighter jets, a main battle rifle that gets inaccurate once you start firing it, and is spending 1.2% of their GDP on defence, maybe Poland knows what they are doing..
@author: You might be right that Poland's reliance on the USA is short-sighted. But the alternatives you indicate are dubious. Poland's bad relations with Germany has nothing to do with Polish attitudes, but Germany's increasingly cozy relations with Russia (we do remember the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact) and disregard for the interest of all East-Central Europe (including Germany's imperial rule in the UE. I do not understand why it is bad to demand reparation from Germany, considering Poland's devastation during the war. A serious alternative to America is Poland's relying on itself, which means the necessity of military spending on the level of Israel and USA.
Poland realizes that it cannot trust anyone to come to it's aid should the "Russian" gangsters make another attempt to attack the country. And that includes US, and certainly the western so-called "allies" which have a long proven history of betrayal (You left out 1920/21 when newly re-born Poland, if given only a minimum support, could've crushed "Russia" and burned it to the ground). "Ford Trump" is certainly not a permanent or only solution Poles are looking at, cognizant as they are that even if the current US administration would remain committed to alliance with Poland, the next one will almost certainly not. Fort Trump, Fort Juncker, Fort Merkel or Boudoir Macron are simply short term band-aids coaxed into place as Poland is re-building it's own military.
As much as US help is not sure to materialize... French/German/UK help is sure to not materialize. For the simple reason. Lack of tanks. Those essential workhorses of modern battlefield, three biggest powers of Western Europe have in numbers barely able to secure own capitals in case Putin drops paratroopers nearby. Decades of "peace dividend" and focusing on combating variety of muslim non-state actors from Afghanistan to Syria has left the ground forces of European powers hollow to the point that even Poland has more tanks than those 3 major powers taken together. Coupled with German society developing pacifism disease to the point most of them would not fight for own country in case of invasion, let alone helping allies, we are left with little choice - it is US as ally or go Israeli way and develop own nuclear deterrence.
Comment Policy
Comments that include profanity, personal attacks, or other inappropriate material will be removed. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, steps will be taken to block users who violate any of the posting standards, terms of use, privacy policies, or any other policies governing this site. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.