Artur Brzeskot: It is time to buy U.S. Patriot air defense missile system

The U.S.-Poland relation remains the cornerstone of Central Europe security. And with the new defense guidelines that Washington and Warsaw singed in 2016, the alliance has never been stronger and more capable of contributing to security around the region. The Pentagon is operationalizing the military part of the strategy on lethal weapons sales to Poland which will help our country’s armed forces get the equipment it needs.

During President Donald Turmp’s first state visit to Warsaw, the White House confirmed status quo Poland. That time the Polish Ministry Defense and the United States signed a memorandum on the delivery of U.S. Patriot missile systems. The designation does not mean a change of balance of power (as some observers see it), but only to facilitate defense trade and technology sharing with the country on a level that the United States reserves for its closest friends and allies. As a result on November 17 of last year the government of American decided to sell an advanced missile defense system Patriot to Poland – at the earliest possible date.

On that occasion we found out the price $ 10,5 billion. Although the first phase of negotiation has not yet ended it is difficult to hide Polish confusion. Some experts say the price is unacceptable. Actual value is much more than financial means at the Polish Ministry Defense’s budget plans in 2018. May be it is more than Polish state’s capabilities. In my opinion Poland’s ambitious aims are in a simply imitation of Great Britain and France’s strategies during the 1950s and 60s. It is very important that we are discerning this need, however, this question is open: will we be able to conform our actions to the patterns?

We have known for ages that research-intensive and modern weaponry have raised the barriers that states must jump over if they are to become members of the great powers club. For this reason unable to spend on anywhere near American, Russian or Chinese level for research, development, or production, small and middle powers who try to compete find themselves constantly falling behind. They are usually in the second ranking powers’ position of imitating the more advanced weaponry of their wealthier allies as well rivals. In sum this problem will not be resolved even If we abandon short of the extreme electronic, the cost and compilation of conventional warfare exclude middle states from developing the full range of weapons for land, air, and sea warfare.

Great Britain wished to bypass this problem by building a nuclear force, but Britain became more dependent on the United States. France did not want to lose independence so it decided to go ahead with its own nuclear program. France may have done so believing that missile-firing submarines were the world’s first permanently invulnerable force, that for them military obsolescence had ended. For the sake of argument that the French had the right given the small numbers of submarines France has planned, however, only one or two will be at sea at any given time. In the face of technological advance it makes their detection and destruction increasingly easy.

What am I getting? There are here two aspects. First, we have to agree that by the purchase of U.S. Patriot missile system Poland constrains its own independent. By virtue of it that the American are likely to refuse us an access to the top-secret technology so we will find in this situation just as the British during the Cold War – without strategic independence. Second, I think about the scale of the technological employment. Eight batteries of U.S. Patriot missile system will certain not sufficient for the complete defense. In a case of limited or unlimited aims war those systems will play a supporting role. In the same way like French submarines and missiles would not play much more the meaning in the face of war between NATO and Warsaw Pact. It is very important to note that both the British and the French despite unbearable difficulties they have taken some efforts in order to imitate the best military system in the world – the United States. Poland is in the same conditions nowadays.

Our country has no a principal influence on the objective facts of structural causes and military effects in Europe, such as Great Britain and France have not had since 1945. No third great power could lie between the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia (e.g. European Community, European Union, Germany, Three Seas Initiative … etc.). So, by these external conditions is only one of possible choices it is ever closer relation with the United States, alternatives are a buffer state or Russia’s domination. For this reason Poland should not drag out the purchase of U.S. Patriot missile system. Furthermore, international politics is not only a realm of socialization, but also as a competitive realm. The latter domain depends on construction solid deterrence and defense by copying of the best players. Otherwise, Poland will be doomed to strategic autarky and as a last resort to military deviancy.

We may look at the map of Europe our country is not outside the immediate arena of competition like America and Great Britain in XIX century – reversely Poland is in the middle of the area. Thus, it means simply that we have to conform to accepted and successful practices to rise to the top and to increase our chances for survival. The purchase of U.S. Patriot missile system does not give us guarantee to achieve this destination, but it gives us only warrant to the best pattern –  organization, procedures, technologies and arms.

In sum, these behaviors are returned by all history. Bismarck’s victories over Austria in 1866 and over France in 1870 have considerably exposed it and quickly led the major continental powers and some Asian states (e.g. Japan) to imitate the Prussian military staff system. Adolph Hitler’s victories in the early years World War II with blitzkrieg strategy were pattern for Israel in wars in the Middle East. After all America’s doctrine RMA Revolution Military Affairs (dance like butterfly sting like a bee) has taken much from German strategists.

We should remember about it, that is nothing new that contending states imitate the military innovations contrived by the country of greatest capability and ingenuity. Poland should go the same road, because it may give an opportunity to achieve the most important aim – national security. The purchase of U.S. Patriot missile system is a next step in order to copy the greatest military pattern in the world.

Photo: Raytheon


Link: mil.link/en/artur-brzeskot-it-is-time-to-buy-u-s-patriot-air-defense-missile-system/

Short link: mil.link/i/patriot


Polish version: Czas kupić amerykański system obrony powietrznej Patriot

Artur Brzeskot: What are Poland interests?

The overriding goal of Polish foreign policy is to ensure the safety and prosperity of the Polish people. In pursuit of that end, Poland has always considered the security of its territory to be of paramount importance. In recent decades, after ending the Cold War, Polish policy makers should also consider two another regions to contain strategic interests important enough to fight and die for: a) Central and b) Eastern Europe. These areas are important because they contain either concentrations of power and critical natural resources, and who controls them has profound effects on the European balance of power.

The Republic of Poland has three distinct strategic interests in the Eastern Europe. Because this region transfers a large percentage of global energy supplies, the most important interest is maintaining access to the critical oil and natural gas located in Russia and post-soviet republics. This objective does not require Poland to control the region itself; it merely needs to ensure that no other country, including Russia, is in position to keep Eastern Europe oil from reaching the Central Europe market. To do this, Poland will have to seek to prevent Russia and any local power from establishing domination in the Eastern Europe to deter outside powers from establishing control of region.

A second strategic interest is discouraging Eastern Europe states from acquiring Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) – especially Ukraine and Belarus. The risk here is not the remote possibility of deliberate nuclear attack, nuclear blackmail, or deliberate “nuclear handoff” to terrorist, because such threats are not credible in light of Poland’s membership NATO and America’s own nuclear deterrent. Rather, Poland opposes the spread of WMD in the region because it would make it more difficult to project power into the region and thus might complicate Polish efforts to keep Eastern Europe oil flowing. Furthermore, WMD proliferation also increases the danger of accidental nuclear use. Given the potential for instability in some countries in the area, it also raises the risk that nuclear weapons or other WMD might fall into the wrong hands in the event of a coup or revolt, or be stolen by terrorist from poorly guarded facilities. So, the above arguments, inhibiting the spread of WMD in the region is an important Polish objective.

Third, Poland has an obvious interest in reducing terrorism. This goal requires dismantling existing terrorist networks that threaten Poland and preventing new terror groups from emerging. Both objectives are furthered by cooperating extensively and effectively with countries in the region, mostly in terms of intelligence sharing and other law enforcement activities. It is also imperative that Poland takes all feasible steps to prevent groups like ISIS, al Qaeda and its branches from gaining access to any form of WMD. Terrorist armed with WMD would be more difficult to deter than states with WMD, and they are likely to use them against Poland or its allies. Encouraging political reform and greater democratic participation can assist this goal well. Of course, this requires good relations with key regional powers. Although Poland should be wary of humanitarian interventions, rapid transformation and certainly should not try to spread democracy at the point of a gun.

I believe that Poland should support Ukraine’s existence, because Ukraine’s security is ultimately of critical strategic importance to our country. In the event that Ukraine was conquered, which is extremely unlikely given its considerable military power and its national backlash, Poland’s territorial integrity, its military power, its economic prosperity and its core political values would be jeopardized. By contrast, if oil exports from Russia were significantly reduced, the effects on Poland’s well-being would be profound. Thus, Poland does not support Ukraine’s existence, because the Polish recognize the long history of Ukrainian suffering and believe that it is desirable for the Ukrainian people to have own state, but rather because it makes Poland more secure. There is a strong moral case for supporting Ukraine’s existence, and I believe Poland should remain committed to coming to Ukraine’s aid. But the Polish should do this not only because they think it is morally appropriate, but in the first place, because it is vital to their own national security.


Link: mil.link/en/artur-brzeskot-what-are-poland-interests/

Short link: mil.link/i/polint


Polish version: Jakie interesy ma Polska?