The prospect of the US abandoning Europe is raising profound questions in Warsaw.
Poland is nearing a crossroads. It has been there before and it didn’t end well.
All of Europe confronts the very real possibility of a US retreat from its traditional security role — a scenario further complicated by a Trump-era administration whose policies now appear to bolster or even support Russian ambitions. For Poles, that makes the issue existential.
The Polish nightmare is being left alone to fight alone. It does not yet face that stark reminder of its 18th or 20th-century history when it was partitioned and butchered by jealous neighbors. For now, it retains the guarantee of European NATO and especially a democratic Germany.
But the geopolitical landscape has shifted alarmingly. Ukraine is under pressure from the US to accept a peace deal and make concessions while its Russian invader is required to do nothing. Its security hangs by a thread.
As the entire European security architecture wobbles from the US change, Poland’s political class —both the right and the left — remains trapped in an outdated mindset, clinging to past assumptions and old grudges dating back to the age of Solidarity. In reality, the world is facing more profound questions. Poland has to adapt.
The country’s strategic assets remain significant. It has embarked on an enormous multi-billion military modernization program, investing in South Korean tanks and howitzers and US jet fighters and enhancing its domestic cybersecurity capabilities.
In theory, these efforts position Poland as NATO’s eastern linchpin. Yet behind these headline figures lies a chronic lack of a coherent foreign policy strategy. For decades, Poland’s parties of all colors have viewed the US as a distant and paternal figure—the ultimate guarantor of independence. The bitter echoes of World War II, of a France that once refused to sacrifice for Gdańsk, and of an England that allowed Russia to re-enslave it under Stalin, have all left indelible marks on public opinion.
This, coupled with the end-of-history and Pax Americana narratives, lulled policymakers into the false security that buying US equipment and sending troops to US-led conflicts was sufficient to ensure national sovereignty. It wasn’t, as Poles are now discovering.
This outdated strategic thinking persisted even after Russia’s 2014 Crimea annexation. Despite being among the few to sound the alarm over a resurgent Russian irredentism, Polish policymakers made few substantive adjustments to their doctrine. During the first (2005–2007) and second (2015–2023) periods of right-wing PiS rule, the prevailing idea was simple: remain loyal to the US and exhibit unwavering discipline as its protégé. In the subsequent years under the liberal Civic Platform, the same mindset endured, although the government also strived for better relations with Western Europe.
Polish politicians continue to relish compliments from US officials lauding Poland as NATO’s role model as it devotes nearly 5% of national wealth for defense spending—a figure largely spent on off-the-shelf US systems. Yet a significant portion of the current defense budget is earmarked for 96 Apache combat helicopters, even as Japan cancelled and South Korea reconsiders similar orders in light of hard-won lessons from Ukraine regarding the rise of drone-based warfare. Another major weakness is Poland’s limited satellite capabilities, which suffer from underdeveloped indigenous space infrastructure, reliance on foreign partnerships, and a lack of ground-based tracking and cybersecurity capabilities.
Behind the international image of a rising military power, Poland’s impressive defense budget remains largely unspent. A backlog of orders and an ineffective domestic military-industrial complex highlight persistent issues: incompetent management, an incoherent procurement strategy, nepotism, poor inter-institutional communication, and coordination. Successive defense ministers have taken pride in showcasing new contracts—often for equipment that has not been fully vetted and without the essential offset packages that would secure long-term benefits.
Beneath the veneer, the Polish military is in crisis. Poor staffing decisions, a shortage of professional commanders, and chaotic procurement processes have weakened the armed forces. The army has suffered from incompetent leadership and improper promotions, while a lack of coherent strategic planning has further eroded operational effectiveness.
Critical structures, such as the non-commissioned officer (NCO) corps, have deteriorated, leaving a shortage of experienced personnel. Experienced NCOs are scarce, and although units like the Territorial Defense Forces (WOT) have seen numerical increases, a lack of resources and skills continues to undermine true combat capability. Seasoned military leaders were purged for political reasons under the PiS government. A downward demographic spiral plagues Poland (and other) regional armies and makes its plan to bring its professional corps to 300,000 a pipe dream. Despite this, Prime Minister Donald Tusk announced on March 7 that this target will now rise to 500,000, including 200,000 reservists. He also wants male and female volunteers among the civilian population to undergo military training.
The military and bureaucratic malaise stands in stark contrast to Poland’s booming economy — a phenomenon driven by generations of industrious, wealth-building citizens. Yet, even as the nation prospers, its ruling class displays striking incompetence. It recently made the de facto admission that talent within government was lacking when Tusk appointed the head of one of Poland’s most successful firms to spearhead the reform effort.
Generations of Polish policymakers have gradually relinquished the ambition of crafting an independent foreign policy, overvaluing Poland’s geographic significance as a tool for regional control. In the ruthless realm of international politics, nature abhors a vacuum. Unless Poland clearly asserts its own vision and positions itself as an active rather than a passive object, it risks being marginalized in a game where adaptability and decisive action are the only currencies of power.
The upcoming Polish presidential elections offer little hope for a strategic pivot. One leading candidate, emerging from the government camp, is infamous for shifting positions as the political winds change, while the other conditioned his support for Ukraine to resolving historical “civilizational issues” between the two countries dating back to mid 20th-century. The outgoing incumbent, President Duda, despite being one of the few international leaders lauded by President Donald Trump, has notably never been invited to Mar-a-Lago. He flew across the Atlantic on February 23 but got only 10 minutes of the president’s time.
For Poland, the stakes are enormous. A US-brokered peace deal that forces Ukraine into territorial concessions without binding security guarantees would be a strategic disaster. It would embolden Moscow, destabilize Central and Eastern Europe, and upend Poland’s long-held objective of keeping Russia at bay.
Inspiration for Poland’s contemporary leaders should stem from a not-so-distant past. In the interwar period, its strategy was based on the concept of Intermarium—a vision of a bloc of sovereign Central and Eastern European states acting as a buffer against imperial ambitions, whether emanating from Russia or Germany. This idea, championed by interwar leader Józef Piłsudski, remains relevant as post-Cold War Atlanticism fades.
Poland must now decide whether to reduce overreliance on the transatlantic security framework and what an alternative might look like. This involves some tough decisions — there remains considerable distrust of Germany, the giant neighbor to the West, which is currently reawakening from its decades-long geopolitical lethargy.
This recalibration calls for forging stronger ties with regional partners such as the Baltic-Nordic Eight group of nations, Ukraine, and Turkey, as well as rethinking alliances with the United Kingdom and France.
Warsaw can no longer afford to pretend. A great reshuffling of the international order is underway, and Poland must seize the moment. It would be nice, reassuring even, to see Poland’s political leadership come together and agree on this at least.
By Maciej Bukowski. Maciej Bukowski is a non-resident fellow with the Digital Innovation Initiative Program at the Center for European Policy Analysis. He is a climate diplomacy and energy security expert, and a PhD candidate at the Institute of Political Science and International Relations at the Jagiellonian University in Cracow. Article and pictures first time published on CEPA web page. Prepared for publication by volunteers from the Res Publica - The Center for Civil Resistance.
