“It is not NATO, Poland or Slovakia that are mounting ever more pressure, but Russia, which has invaded Ukraine. Russia, which is seizing its territories. Russia, which is killing its people. And Russia, which is abducting Ukrainian children. Therefore, either Ukraine will defend its independence today, or we will have to enter this conflict. Because our main values, which were the basis of our civilization and our culture will be threatened. Therefore, we will have no choice but to enter the conflict,” the Polish Ambassador to France, Jan Emeryk Rościszewski, stated in an interview on March 18.
There is nothing alarming or extraordinary about the statement except its level of clarity. Eastern European countries do not support the Ukrainian fight for its right to exist – its sovereignty and independence – out of kindness alone, but primarily as a defense of their own country.
They are doing their uttermost to avoid the dramatic consequences of a potential Ukrainian defeat.
As I have previously argued, this would result in Russian forces being deployed along their borders; Russian military power moving 1,000 kilometers closer to Warsaw, Berlin, Paris, Brussels and London; Russian air defense systems covering a greater part of Central Europe; the Black Sea turning into a Russian lake. It would create a belt of constant instability along the border of the EU and NATO.
Equally important, it would give Russia access to an immense wealth of rare minerals, gas, oil and coal resources, as well as the “breadbasket of Europe.” It would gain control over the Ukrainian defense industry helping it to restore its military power.
‘If They Cut, I Think We Will Lose’ – Ukraine at War Update for Nov. 20
Perhaps more importantly, a hypothetical Russian victory in Ukraine would be seen as a victory over NATO.
NATO discord
The statement by Ambassador Rościszewski follows the logic of NATO’s previous strategic concept, in which the Alliance undertook to stop conflicts that threaten the security and stability of its member states. The Russian conventional war in Ukraine and its hybrid war across Europe does exactly that: It threatens the security and stability of its member states.
This is why I have persistently argued in favor of what the ambassador implies: military intervention in Ukraine. I have listed eight objective arguments for why this is in NATO’s interest and described why intervention can prevent a nuclear disaster.
However, the statement by the Polish ambassador also highlights the discord within NATO.
While the U.S. stands firm on its policy of “no boots on the ground,” Eastern Europe is discussing doing just that. Whereas President Joe Biden stressed that the U.S. will not supply combat aircraft (F-16), President Andrzej Duda is donating combat aircraft (MiG-29) to Ukraine. When Eastern Europe asked NATO to do more (according to its strategic concept), NATO decided to do less. And when the EU highlights that its member states – most of which are also NATO members – are exposed to a Russian hybrid war, NATO limits itself to admitting that the Euro-Atlantic area is not at peace.
Polish arms build-up
The statement by Rościszewski is also in line with Polish security and defense policy. Polish actions reflect its statements.
Poland was allocating 2.42% of its GDP to its defense budget before the Russian full-scale invasion of Ukraine began. Only Greece and the U.S. were spending more. In January, Prime Minister Mateusz Morawieck declared that Poland will increase its defense spending to 4% of GDP.
Poland’s army has 170,000 soldiers presently. On par with Germany today, it plans to build “the largest land army in Europe” with 300,000 men and women comprising 250,000 professional soldiers and 50,000 civil defense personnel.
Last year, it bought 250 Abrams tanks, expected to be delivered in late 2024. In January, Poland approved the purchase of further 116 Abrams tanks due to arrive later this year. Additionally, it has announced plans to procure 180 South Korean “K2 Black Panther” tanks. It plans to acquire more than 800 of the K2PL variant of the tank, many of which will be produced in Poland from 2026. It has already received the first shipment of tanks that it bought from South Korea in December.
The country has also bought four dozen K9 howitzers, with the planned procurement of a further 600 to start in 2024. Domestic production is expected to begin in 2026.
In February, the U.S. State Department approved the sale of up to $10 billion worth of 18 HIMARS rocket launchers and almost 500 launcher loader module kits along with ammunition to Poland.
In 2020, Poland signed a contract to acquire 32 F-35s from the U.S. It is also buying 48 FA-50 light combat fighter jets from South Korea. The first 12 jets are to be delivered in 2023 and a further 36 aircraft from 2025 to 2028.
Poland is not only building the strongest Armed Forces in Europe (after Ukraine), but it is also building the defense industry needed to sustain it. It is also diversifying the suppliers, increasing the speed of delivery, and reducing its dependency on the U.S.
Eastern Europe knows Russia better
The bottom line is that Poland is thinking, planning, and acting according to NATO’s late strategic concept. It is building military power to do – if needed – what the U.S. and NATO will not: i.e., fight alongside the Armed Forces of Ukrainian to stop a war that threatens European security and stability.
That makes sense. After all, the latest NATO members understand Russia perfectly well. The oldest members do not.
According to Hanno Pevkur, the Estonian defense minister, NATO is responsible for assisting Ukraine because it’s fighting for the free world. Estonia has provided military assistance to Ukraine worth more than 1% of its GDP, making Estonia’s assistance the world's largest in this term.
“I could also ask why the others are not doing as much as Estonians,” Pevkur said. “Because we all understand that Ukraine is not fighting only for itself and for the Ukrainian people. They are fighting for a free world and a rule-based world. So this is why we have to help Ukraine as much as we can. Of course, we know that Ukraine needs that help desperately.”
In Madrid last year, NATO declared that “the Euro-Atlantic area is not at peace. The Russian Federation’s brutal war of aggression against Ukraine has shattered peace in Europe… and poses the most significant and direct threat to Allies’ security and to peace and stability in the Euro-Atlantic area.”
Eastern Europe is acting accordingly. Ukraine is fighting for its right to exist. And yet, 20 out of 30 NATO members are still not meeting their commitment to invest 2% of their GDP in defense. The defense industries are still not producing what is needed at a speed reflecting the urgency of the situation.
A month before the full-scale invasion I argued that the likelihood of a military escalation had increased because of the lack of political courage in the West – the lack of the Churchills and the surfeit of Chamberlains. Unfortunately, this is still the case.
In the absence of NATO resolve, President Xi Jinping is pondering China’s next move.
The views expressed in this opinion article are the author’s and not necessarily those of Kyiv Post.
You can also highlight the text and press Ctrl + Enter
