Across much of Eastern Europe, being a Trump whisperer has become an overnight job requirement. Aside from Viktor Orbán and a few other examples of genuine giddiness, leaders right across the former Soviet bloc have rushed to show their value to Washington generally and to the blonde businessman in particular. In Lithuania, for instance, Gitanas Nausėda emphasised that his country currently allocates 3.5% of GDP to defence. Politicians from Romania to Estonia have made similarly servile sounds, pleading that they long served as model US allies.
In Warsaw, however, politicians struck a rather less sycophantic tone. “The wind of history is blowing even stronger,” proclaimed Radosław Sikorski, the Polish foreign minister, soon after Trump’s victory. “Poland’s leadership will rise to the occasion.” And why not? Poland already leads Europe on defence spending as a percentage of GDP, and boasts the third-largest army in Nato. And, especially if Trump makes good on his threat to abandon his transatlantic allies to their fate, the country might yet have an opportunity to become a military powerhouse right across the continent — one that could yet evoke the country’s bygone days of geopolitical dominance.
Trump’s election is already transforming Polish politics. With the country’s 2025 presidential election looming, Sikorski, who threw his hat into the ring to become the nominee for the ruling Civic Platform party shortly before the US election, has now recalibrated his campaign around Trump’s victory. Among other things, Sikorski argues that what Poland needs now is someone with the diplomatic experience to weather the vagaries of a Trump presidency. Just as important, the foreign minister points out that he has a good working relationship with Trump, distinguishing himself from Rafał Trzaskowski, the mayor of Warsaw and Sikorski’s rival for the job.
In reality, though, Trump’s victory is about far more than day-to-day political bickering. For while capitals across Eastern Europe are unsurprisingly worried by the security implications of America First, they equally know that whatever happens, they’re going to have to take care of themselves. And if that means filling a US-shaped void in terms of national security, not least when it comes to Russia, the disappearance of American power may also bolster the presence of the Poles or Romanians on the wider Europe stage.
That’s clear enough West of the Oder. The recent collapse of Olaf Scholz’s government in Germany was partly triggered by arguments over support for Ukraine and the prospect that US assistance might end, even as the chancellor has been criticised by other Nato members for speaking to Vladimir Putin for the first time in years. Not that the chaos in Berlin should surprise the generals in Tallinn or Sofia. Since the start of the war in Ukraine, Nato’s centre of gravity has gradually shifted eastwards. It’s no coincidence that ministerial talks on the future of European defence were lately held in Warsaw. And though Emmanuel Macron has lately started making bold statements about deploying Nato forces to Ukraine, he was only following Poland’s lead.
To put it differently, then, only the Eastern Europeans have concrete incentives to take Trump’s security threats seriously: and only Poland has the wealth and expertise to actually drag its neighbours towards an independent defence policy. And, in a sense, that’s wholly appropriate. For while Western observers are more familiar with Poland’s years of subjugation — first by Prussia and the Tsar, later by Hitler and the Soviets — there was once a time that the country dominated the continent. In 1683, it was chiefly through the intervention of King Jan III Sobieski that Catholic armies defeated the invading Ottomans at the Battle of Vienna. Pope Innocent XI swiftly proclaimed Sobieski the “saviour of Western civilisation” for the timely arrival of the famed winged hussars. Around the same time, Polish kings, ruling over the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, flanked the Baltic and Black Seas, and dominated Central and Eastern European affairs all while maintaining an inventive (if imperfect) system of elective monarchy.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeInteresting perspective, including aspects of Polish and European history i wasn’t familiar with. The link to a description of the Hussars was also worth following – i can recommend it, but not for the faint-hearted!
A new realism seems to be taking hold in northern Europe about moving on from the post-WW2 settlement under the aegis of the US, and about time too.
Good luck to Poland with all this. They more that most know that the Russians can never be trusted, and will never be “friends”.
Things of importance for Europe’s future being decided in fearless and prosperous Warsaw? Yes please.
If decadent, daydreaming, do-we-like-Russia-or-don’t-we Berlin was the sole leading light in this, I’d be a lot more concerned about European security than I am.
Actually Polish U.S. political influence is a thing plus Poles stand up. By contrast, German’s play Hamlet and Macron is a comic opera star singing up a mythic EU army. Neither contribute quite 2% to their own defense while U.S. pays 7 plus. Is this EU leadership? Sadly Biden lent them a short, false sense of US acquiescence to their military incapacity. Reality was coming with or without Trump.
I think Michal Kranz misses the point of Trump’s foreign policy. The US simply wants Europe to contribute adequately to their own defense. He is not in favor of abandoning Europe. This is more Trump Derangement Syndrome, and It’s stunning how people cannot see the difference. Perhaps because some still believe Trump is in collusion with Russia, and nothing could be further from the truth.
If there was wild talk about abandoning NATO in the U.S., the Eurozone should worry but there isn’t. And Trump doesn’t like to lose and a deal making Putin look like a big winner short or long term is unlikely. Worth mentioning that he hasn’t criticized Biden’s decision to strike inside Russia nor have surrogates He has berated European nations that don’t pay their share but Obama did that. Trump is much more provocative. He will raise the ante to 3% and bait the French and Germans who have never complied and obviously hate him. Fear of both Trump and Putin might actually wake them up..
Good article – but poor headline. Poland is already fast transforming itself into the country that the article describes. Trumps presidency will merely add some extra momentum to the journey.
Let’s hope that the rather mediocre and German-sympathasing PM Tusk won’t hinder the investments needed for such transformation. At the present some ambitious infrastructure development projects are on hold, ever since Tusk’s opportunistic government coalition won the last electon…
It kinda looks like he isn’t; on the contrary, Poland seems to push the pedal to the metal on the rearmament front with him at the reins. In my opinion, that means that the trek Poland has embarked on (and, to a lesser extent, my country, Romania) is one that it will stay on for quite a while. Poland is now in the major league and, to be honest, the Poles have earned that spot (and then some).
Also, there’s more and more talks of Poland getting nukes; maybe they should, as the US’ pivot towards Asia is increasingly obvious and necessary. We, Eastern Europeans know how fickle Berlin is when it comes to defending their partners and how idiotic, double-faced the French are…
Trump’s victory is about far more than day-to-day political bickering.
Yes, it is. It is mostly a repudiation of the dysfunctional DC cabal that is responsible for the problems people like Harris and most other entrenched Dems and Repubs claim they will fix. Once more, there is an obtuseness about what happened. The republic is not healthy. That is what makes a Trump, or a Milei or others, possible.
Trump is not going to abandon Europe; he just expects it to contribute to its own defense. People love to point out how US military spending is more than the next however many nations combined. That’s true. It is true because most of Europe outsources the job to us, and this country can longer afford that.
I first went to Poland 21 years ago. I visited a very large factory as a Technical Auditor. I had to decide if their manufacturing systems were good enough to supply Western Europe. Their systems were fine but they had far too many people for each job function. They had Soviet-style planning where every decision had to be passed from manager to manager for another signature and another…
Today they are like we used to be – modern and efficient. Trump will make no difference at all, except to supply confidence for further growth.
Poland has always been regarded as a possible Eastern Europe power.
For that reason alone throughout the centuries Russia & Austria ( in their various guises ) have sought to combine in order to subdue or control Poland
The actual danger to Poland comes if the US abandon Europe & NATO because it is unlikely German will interfere with Russian policies towards Poland ( and France most certainly wouild follow suit )
Britain would come to Poland’s aid, as would Ukraine, CEE and Baltic countries. In any case Poland would probably defeat Russia such is its preparation (far greater than Ukraine’s was). far better equipped and more intelligent military.
If such (God forbid ) a scenario did occur Poland is not a nuclear power
That’s almost funny. Poland’s history tells a different story.
Another ‘journalist’ that has demonstrated his critical thinking is less important than his creative thinking when it comes to Donald Trump.
Even without its NATO allies, Poland would defeat Russia in a land and sea war.
OMG, where do you get your information?
What I have not read here is how old, tired and sick this country has become. It was Blair who invited in the East Europeans, many of them Poles, who contributed a great deal to us and have now returned to their own countries, because they are more vibrant and prosperous. Here, Starmer worries about gender and assisted dying, rather than defence and (dare i say it) food security. Meanwhile we are taking in 50,000 + illegal immigrants per annum. Basically, we are moribund.
Great article.
Trump wants Europe to pay its way by meeting NATO spending commitments with US spending levels as a secondary yardstick.
Putin would like to restore the USSR structures, which include a strip of buffer countries under his control, of which Poland would be one. But Poland has made the most of its freedom and lights the path for others in Europe.
Putin would like to restore the USSR structures, which include a strip of buffer countries under his control, of which Poland would be one.
That doesn’t make a lot of sense. If Putin had control of Poland, as a buffer, then he would be right up against Germany. How does that act as a buffer? If Poland becomes part of the USSR, right up against Germany, then it’s like having Ukraine as a NATO state. A buffer would be a non NATO state. As was, and is, Ukraine. Changing Ukraines potential NATO status would remove it as a buffer zone. Hence the fight over eastern Ukraine, which would never join NATO and as a consequence be a buffer zone.
As I said above, Poland wouldn’t be part of the Russian super state, it would be a buffer state, but of course under Moscow’s control and conforming to Russian living standards. The buffers can’t prosper – the real purpose isn’t security (Russia’s nukes provide that a hundred fold) – it is to shield Russians from the evidence of the fruits of democracy and free markets.
That’s what Putin would like, though he can no longer have it as the old buffer zone – East Germany down to Romania – very gladly joined the West as soon as possible, with Hungary and to some extent Slovakia the only ones to lean back the other way.
His vision with Ukraine was probably to absorb it over time – one day it would have voted to join the CIS or something similar. But it moved away from him with the Maidan crisis in 2014. The 2022 invasion was an attempt to change the government to a Russian puppet regime, which failed, leaving him where he is.
East and South Ukraine isn’t much of a buffer. Putin has lost the rest of Ukraine – for obvious reasons – so if it can prosper in the future it will pose problems for Moscow. But he won’t be able to do anything about it other than another attack, which is why the world will have to be on its guard as he rebuilds.
Surely the first man made migration crisis was Angela Merkel’s “wir schaffen dass”
The EU ran with it. Poland stood firm against their accusations of racism by stating that they’d had no terrorist attacks on their soil and were also able to take a huge number of Ukrainian refugees.
Earlier this year, the US granted loans to Poland and Romania, totalling $2 billion and $920 million respectively, all to buy American weapons.
What a business.
These Eastern Europeans whose fears and fantasies have been indulged and megaphoned by Beltway Neocons need to understand that they’ll be on their own in any conflicts they now seek or provoke.
Western Europeans will not be piling in to rescue -or even bankroll- them. We are preoccupied with the threats posed to our livelihoods by America First, which are much larger and more immediate than any supposed menaces from the east..
An interesting article, if somewhat Russophobic. I don’t believe for a moment Russia purposely aimed missiles at Poland. Most missile parts that landed in Poland were the results of Ukrainian air defences shooting down incoming munitions.