Poland

2012 Wroclaw Global Forum

Jason Harmala — Thu, 31 May 2012 15:04:34 -0500

From May 31 – June 2, the 2012 Wroclaw Global Forum will bring together important decision-makers and business leaders from the United States and Europe to discuss Central Europe’s role as a critical partner in US efforts to promote political, security and economic ties across the Atlantic. The 2011 WGF featured the participation of US Senator John McCain; former US National Security Advisor General James Jones; Prime Minister of the Republic of Moldova Vladimir Filat; and top ministers and CEOs from the region. The 2012 Forum will include high-level presentations by top US and European political figures and business leaders including Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski and former President of Poland Lech Walesa, as well as working sessions with leading experts, and a rich variety of networking and cultural opportunities. Click here for highlights and videos from last year’s Forum or visit www.wgf2011.eu for more information.

Atlantic Council Freedom Awards

Recognizing Poland’s unique role in spreading the message of Solidarity and Freedom around the world, the Wroclaw Global Forum is also the European home of the Atlantic Council’s Freedom Awards, which will be celebrated this year on the evening of June 1. The Freedom Awards recognize extraordinary individuals and organizations that defend and advance the cause of freedom around the world. Last year, we presented awards to Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs Radoslaw Sikorski, Moldovan Prime Minister Vladimir Filat, journalists Adam Michnik and Helena Luczywo of Gazeta Wyborcza; Egyptian activist Esraa Abdel Fattah; Belarusian dissidents Ales Byalyatski, Natalia Kaliada, and Zhanna Litvina; and US Senator John McCain. We also presented a posthumous award to Ronald Asmus of the German Marshall Fund. This year, we will present Freedom Awards to former Polish Foreign Minister Wladyslaw Bartoszewski and Carl Gershman on behalf of the National Endowment for Democracy, along with other illustrious individuals.

SAVE THE DATE - 2012 WROCLAW GLOBAL FORUM (PDF)

INFORMATIONAL FLYER - 2012 WROCLAW GLOBAL FORUM (PDF)

Most security experts believe cyber arms race is on

Jorge Benitez — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 13:34:10 -0600

From Rachel King, ZDNet: The digital arms race is already underway, according to many global experts and their opinions included in McAfee’s global cyber defense report.

At least 57 percent of the study participants concurred with this point, while another 36 percent went so far as to argue that cyber security is more important than missile defense.

For reference, the report, conducted by the Brussels-based Security & Defense Agenda think tank, is based upon responses from 80 policymakers and cyber-security experts in government, business and academic sectors in 27 countries — not to mention anonymous surveys of more than 250 world leaders in 35 countries.

Out of the 23 nations ranked within the study, the smaller ones proved to be more prepared for cyber threats — most notably Israel, Sweden and Finland. The least prepared were found to be China, Russia, Italy and Poland. (graphic: McAfee)

Russia 'to deploy missiles on EU border this year'

Jorge Benitez — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 11:22:19 -0600

From AFP: Russia plans to deploy Iskander missiles on the European Union's border later this year, a source in its western Baltic Fleet told the Interfax news agency on Wednesday.

A source told the news agency that senior naval staff had confirmed plans to assign personnel for a naval unit set to service the missile complexes in the Kaliningrad exclave that borders EU members Poland and Lithuania. (photo: RIA Novosti)

NATO concerned about build up of Russian forces near its borders

Jorge Benitez — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 11:03:27 -0600

From AFP: NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen Thursday urged Russia to refrain from building up its military near the alliance’s borders, saying it was a concern for the 28-nation organization.

Rasmussen questioned Russian moves to bolster its forces in its Kaliningrad territory, which borders NATO members Lithuania and Poland, both part of Moscow’s Cold War-era stamping ground.

“These Russian statements are of course a matter of concern for NATO allies,” he told reporters in Lithuania’s capital Vilnius. “It is a complete waste of Russian financial resources, because it is a buildup of offensive military capacities directed against an artificial enemy, an enemy that doesn’t exist,” he said.

“NATO has no intention whatsoever to attack Russia,” he added, speaking alongside Lithuania’s President Dalia Grybauskaite.

Moscow has warned that it plans to deploy Iskander missiles in Kaliningrad, and earlier this month, Russian media reported that an S-400 Triumph anti-aircraft missile system would go into service there in April. . . .

Rasmussen said it was time for a reality check.

“It doesn’t make sense to build up offensive military capacities in the Kaliningrad region. I would encourage the Russians to face a new reality, we are not enemies, we are not adversaries, we should be partners and it would be of mutual benefit if we develop peaceful cooperation,” he said. (photo: Office of the President of Lithuania)

Polish General: "We are not very happy that the U.S. military involvement in Europe will be smaller"

Jorge Benitez — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 11:07:26 -0600

From Marcus Weisgerber and Vago Muradian, DefenseNews: Gen. Mieczyslaw Cieniuch last week made his first official visit to the U.S., where he met with a number of U.S. leaders, including Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The general also met with Missile Defense Agency leaders to discuss the planned European missile defense shield, in which Poland plays a critical role; leaders of U.S. Central Command and U.S. Special Operations Command; the NATO Supreme Allied Commander Transformation; and an Air National Guard base in Tucson, Ariz., that trains Polish F-16 pilots. . . .

Unlike many European nations, Poland's military budget is not declining; 1.95 percent of the country's gross domestic product is put toward defense. However, the country's defense industrial base is becoming more focused.

Q. U.S. President Barack Obama announced a new U.S. defense strategy that calls for the Pentagon's posture in Europe to "evolve" over the next decade. It hints at a shrinking U.S. presence in the region. What is your reaction to the strategy?

A. Budget constraints are a normal situation nowadays, especially in Europe nobody is surprised that we would have some budget problems. However, now we have a situation when the [Defense Department] budget is decreasing even in the U.S., which is quite unusual. Of course, we are not very happy that the U.S. military involvement in Europe will be smaller than today's, especially from the Polish point of view, because we are a border country of the [NATO] alliance. However, I don't think that we have direct threats emanating from any of our neighbors, but the absence of U.S. troops in Europe might create some problems in the future. The U.S. is going to decrease the number of the land forces – but it will continue to modernize the services which is, from our point of view, good news.

Q. A number of Eastern European nations have privately expressed concerns to the Pentagon about its troop drawdown. That said, the U.S. has said it would have time to respond to a crisis in the region. Is that a satisfactory answer for you?

A. For us, it's better to see U.S. troops in Europe, but we understand that the U.S. military potential is significant enough to maintain the capability to project power of forces to any region of the world.

Q. The Pentagon has said that it wants to do innovative engagements around the world for training and partner building. What does that mean to you as Poland's chief of staff?

A. The Polish military traditionally values training and military exercises with the U.S. forces. Whenever we can, we invite the U.S. to take part in military exercises on Polish territory and we continue cooperation on many fields.

Q. Do you think that the countries in Eastern Europe are going to play an increasing role in security on their own?

A. Generally, countries in our region are looking at defense very seriously. Because of history and their own experience, they try to keep their armed forces at a proper level. At the same time, countries from Western Europe have different threats. Most of their threats are linked more with domestic issues such as immigration, terrorist attacks or extremism, whereas, countries from Central-Eastern Europe while realizing those challenges, are also thinking in terms of traditional threats, which are very much connected with NATO article 5. . . .

Q. Is it important where the remaining U.S. troops in Europe are based, and how would Poland like to see that happen? What will you bring up with Gen. Dempsey during your meetings?

A. The best military bases for U.S. troops are in the Polish territories, of course. But I understand that if you have existing military bases it is difficult to change. We should start the discussion: What are U.S. troops in Europe for? For contingency plans. From that point of view, Germany is a good enough location for American troops. The Polish territory is good as well, but we don't have American bases in our territory. The future will show.

Excerpts from interview with Gen. Mieczyslaw Cieniuch Chief of the General Staff, Polish Armed Forces. (photo: Polish Ministry of National Defense)

U.S. Likely to Press On With Missile Defense in Poland

Jorge Benitez — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 17:36:25 -0600

From Marcin Sobczyk, the Wall Street Journal: The U.S. will likely keep its commitment to place missile interceptors in Poland to counter a military threat from Iran regardless of any opposition from Russia and despite defense cutbacks, a U.S. senator said Thursday.

U.S. President Barack Obama in 2009 scrapped the missile-defense plan drafted by his predecessor, George W. Bush, under which Poland would host a base near its border with the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad. The U.S. later proposed a new system envisaging 24 interceptors in Poland at the same location.

“Indications are that despite defense cutbacks, we’re going to maintain the commitment to build the Polish missile-defense system, and that is because the threat from Iran is growing, it’s clear that Iran’s nuclear programs are accelerating,” Illinois Republican Senator Mark Kirk told reporters in Warsaw.

“My hope is that we stay on schedule for a 2018 full operational capability of 24 interceptors at Redzikowo to defend NATO and the United States,” he added. “The Russians have been pretty hostile to missile defense. They say that in some way this threatens their nuclear deterrents, but we’re going to build only 24 interceptors in Poland and last I checked Russia has more than 24 nuclear weapons. … We need to defend a free, sovereign and independent Poland regardless of what Russia thinks.”

Abandoning the missile-shield project in 2009 had irked Polish officials, who saw the move as part of Mr. Obama’s effort to improve relations with Russia while ignoring Poland’s strategic defense choices. . . .

The revival of the Polish missile-defense site plan provoked a Russian response last year, including from President Dmitry Medvedev, who in November 2011 threatened to deploy ballistic missiles to Kaliningrad if the U.S. proceeded with its plan. (photo: Getty)

Poland: NATO can't keep subsidising Afghan army

Jorge Benitez — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 15:06:14 -0600

From Gabriela Baczynska, Reuters: Afghanistan cannot expect current levels of Western financial aid for its armed forces to be sustained beyond 2014, when NATO forces plan to pull out, Poland's defence minister said on Thursday.

European members of the alliance have been coming under pressure to help sustain the Afghan armed forces after NATO's planned withdrawal.

But Tomasz Siemoniak signalled that Poland, the largest ex-communist NATO member with nearly 2,500 troops in Afghanistan, was not willing to pass on the so-called "transition dividend" - money it now spends on maintaining its presence there - to Kabul after 2014.

"No country can be subsidised indefinitely," he told Reuters in an interview.

He said Afghanistan needed to be focused on building political stability to attract investors.

"My perspective is more political and military than economic. I believe what will be going on in Afghanistan beyond 2014 will depend on political stability. Now it's hard to imagine somebody investing money in such an unstable country," Siemoniak said. . . .

NATO's mission to Afghanistan and international aid currently account for more than 60 percent of the country's gross domestic product (GDP), Siemoniak said.

European Union defence ministers will discuss the issue in Brussels next month, before a meeting of NATO heads of state and government in Chicago in May, he said. (photo: AP)

A new kind of NATO

Jorge Benitez — Wed, 11 Jan 2012 16:42:12 -0600

From Sean Kay, Foreign Policy: NATO needs a radical new kind of American leadership if Europe is to be incentivized to assume new responsibilities in effective ways. . . .

What, then, might be done to align next steps policy with what the new guidance calls "a strategic opportunity to rebalance the U.S. military investment in Europe?"

First, declare victory! Europe is experiencing unprecedented sustained peace. If there ever was a moment to take advantage of that climate, it is now. The risks of defense re-nationalization are next to zero and potential conventional threats far over the horizon. Meanwhile, austerity programs are incentivizing Europe to economize military spending via deeper integration -- as Britain and France commenced in 2010. The European security dilemmas that required a heavy American military presence have long been resolved. As but just one recent example, late in 2011, Polish Foreign Minister Radislaw Sikorski stated that: "I will probably be the first Polish foreign minister in history to say so, but here it is: I fear German power less than I am beginning to fear German inactivity."

Second, the United States can, in recognizing this unique opportunity, lead NATO towards a new force structure which puts European allies squarely in the lead. This would be done by:

1. A clear statement from President Obama that over the next 2-3 years, America will work with the NATO allies to help them develop the integrative capacity they need to simultaneously conduct a Libya-style war and a Balkans-style peace support operation -- without the United States. Europe must now assume primary responsibility for security provision in and around its area.

2. Make clear that America's role in NATO will be limited to Article 5, collective defense, contingencies. In the current environment this means placing America's participation in reserve, as a hedge against great power tensions or shocks to transatlantic security interests. Operationally, this means limiting America's role in Europe to missile defense and liaison activity for consultation, intelligence sharing, planning, exercising, and base-access and deployment logistics.

3. Logic follows that this approach means major reductions in American military personnel stationed in Europe from many tens of thousands down to very low thousands or even hundreds. Some forces based at home would be allocated as reserves available to European contingencies.

4. Major American bases would be closed or transferred to allies for operation and funding and storage of pre-deployed equipment where appropriate. A symbolic start would be to relocate EUCOM from Germany to the United States with American command structures similar to CENTCOM.

Sean Kay has written extensively on NATO, including his first book NATO and the Future of European Security (1998). A professor of international relations at Ohio Wesleyan University he is Mershon Associate at the Mershon Center for International Security Studies at the Ohio State University. His most recent book is Global Security in the Twenty-first Century: The Quest for Power and the Search for Peace (2011). (photo: Daniel Berehulak/Getty)