As the US government confirmed plans to pull 9,500 soldiers out of Germany, and at the same time there are signals, coming from Washington DC, that the pool of forces deployed to Poland may be increased. Here is my take on (now in English) #Thread 1/12:
reuters.com/article/us-usa…
reuters.com/article/us-usa…
2) It's vital interest of Poland to "keep Americans in" Europe. Germany is the key state in this regard. The biggest chunk of US forces deployed to Europe is based in Germany. Further, these units are the key for the credibility of NATO’s defence & deterrence and Polish security.
3) Poland has been striving for more US – and other Allies! – military presence on its soil for two decades, incl. “hard” military infrastructure. But as PM Morawiecki said: "It is not our intention to achieve this goal at the expense of reducing the US contingent in Germany".
4) It's an illusion to think that any Polish/Estonian/Romanian "pressure" could make Trump change his mind and resign on a move, which he himself considers a fulfilment of pledges made during the 2016 campaign. But, Poland may have influence on HOW the decision is implemented.
5) Here, a room for diplomacy and dialogue opens up. Trump’s administration is not the first one, which cut military presence in Europe. It was done also by Bush jr. and Obama. There are “experiences” in this regard – it is worthwhile to use them to the benefit of whole NATO.
6) US military presence in Poland has always had two fold function: a military one, to reinforce deterrence, and a political one, to make it difficult for some Allies to use security interests of the Eastern Flank countries instrumentally, as a card in their own game with Russia.
7) We should not forget, that some Allies signalled their "openness for dialogue" with Russia by slowing down NATO adaptation to the Russian threat after 2014 or by hampering attempts to increase Allied military presence in the Eastern Flank.
8) It's worthwhile to recall how some Allies were reacting, when more then 10 years ago, the US proposed to deploy elements of its Ballistic Missile Defence system to Poland and Czech Republic, how the very same Allies blocked contingency planning for the Eastern Flank of NATO.
9) So, Polish approach toward the issue of US military presence in Poland has long tradition. It’s a continued policy of all subsequent governments and presidents. Consequently, in current circumstances, for which Poland is not responsible, it has to be implemented rationally.
9) So if US soldiers are indeed withdrawn from Germany, it will be better for the transatlantic bond if the biggest part of them stay in Europe (in Poland or Baltic States) rather than return to US homeland for good.
10) Of course, it may have consequences for relations with a potential democratic US administration. But this issue belongs to the future while we have the problem to deal with now.
11) The way, how the Obama administration withdrew from BMD project in indicates, that any new president is a new chapter. Thus a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
nytimes.com/2009/10/06/opi…
nytimes.com/2009/10/06/opi…
12 At the same time, we need an honest dialogue with the Democrats. Poland is a responsible Ally and wants the transatlantic bond to remain strong, so if the Dems want a better transatlantic relationship, they should take the lessons learned in 2009 and the BMD decision. #END
