4 ms·

Bad move. This opens up Polish airbases to retaliation by Russian ballistic and cruise missiles. If push comes to shove, NATO Article 5 will not be invoked for

by trzy 5y ago

Bad move. This opens up Polish airbases to retaliation by Russian ballistic and cruise missiles. If push comes to shove, NATO Article 5 will not be invoked for Poland’s sake (Western European nations, the UK, and the US will not be willing to risk WWIII for country east of Germany and Poland should understand this by now). Poland will foolishly be left smarting while Germany and the UK press for rational dialog.

Maakuth 5y ago
Why do you consider it certain that NATO guarantees would not apply? Ukraine is not in the alliance.
- pxtail 5y ago
  This could be difficult to understand but in Poland due to the history there is sentiment that country was betrayed or abandoned, not helped by allies at the start of WWII by Britain, France. Of course it's not certainty as you wrote but the thought at the back of the head about history repeating itself and possibility of being considered as just the buffer zone and potential battle ground for western europe countries is there for many people - and that's why in addition to having borders with countries at war Poland may be perceived as treading twice as carefully in this situation.
alangibson 5y ago
AFAIK any NATO nation can invoke article 5. However, the other nations have latitude in how they respond
aaomidi 5y ago
If Poland gets attacked over this, and NATO doesn't step in, then that's the end of NATO. This is a really smart move to finally solidify the power of NATO - or get rid of it if it doesn't actually have that power.
gnulinux 5y ago
I find this thought of mine hard to explain to people because obviously no one including me wants WW3 and likely annihilation of our species. However, please note that in a hypothetical future where NATO doesn't even protect NATO soil (e.g. Poland) there will be no reason for Russia not to invade Baltic States, Poland, Romania etc. This effectively makes NATO non-existent and gives all the leverage and power to Russia. I understand this is a very sensitive issue, but from this perspective I believe NATO should immediately retaliate if Russia even dares to attack Poland.
- trzy 5y ago
  Reasonable-sounding people in the West will — already are — argue that the combined economies of Poland, the Baltic States, Romania, etc. are not worth WWIII and that a comfortable and secure Russia will want to reintegrate into the global economy and can be reasoned with. From a purely rational perspective, they are not wrong. Even if it means the end of NATO, that’s preferable to Armageddon. The Germans have long belittled Poland, the Balts, etc. as irrational and irrelevant in their pursuit of a stable equilibrium with Russia. And the US? Even more removed from this conflict with an increasingly difficult set of its own domestic challenges and institutional decline.
  - Etherlord87 5y ago
    You think that US is "removed from this conflict"? They don't send weapons to Ukraine, they don't share intel and advice with Ukraine, they don't train Ukrainian soldiers and they don't influence other countries to help Ukraine? You think that Germany considers Russia a reasonable partner? German newspapers that used to praise Merkel now don't criticize her for making Putin stronger? The government doesn't drop plans with Nordstream 2, also no plans appear to search for an alternative to russian gas? I'm sorry if the rhetoric I've chosen here sounds passively aggressive, but the "purely rational perspective" you described is very far from what I consider rational.
tejohnso 5y ago
I think the Article 5 protection is exactly why Poland feels comfortable doing this. If they shared your concern they wouldn't have done it. And as other people have mentioned, it would be political disaster for Article 5 not to be invoked.
- blagie 5y ago
  No, I don't think Poland feels comfortable in doing this. The West broke alliances with Poland over and over, as convenient, and just broke the Budapest Manifesto with Ukraine. See the Phoney War and the Warsaw Uprising for a good history. Poland feels _more_ comfortable doing this than the alternative, though. If Russia stands unopposed in Ukraine, who do you think is next?
  - bcrosby95 5y ago
    > and just broke the Budapest Manifesto with Ukraine. No they didn't. The only country that broke it is Russia.
    - blagie 5y ago
      Yes. They did. E.g. "4. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used;" We've had plenty of nuclear threats at this point; fear of escalating to nuclear war is precisely what limits Ukraine's ability to get aid. A condemnation, as the US raised, is not "action."
thesuperbigfrog 5y ago
>> Bad move. This opens up Polish airbases to retaliation by Russian ballistic and cruise missiles. If push comes to shove, NATO Article 5 will not be invoked for Poland’s sake (Western European nations, the UK, and the US will not be willing to risk WWIII for country east of Germany and Poland should understand this by now). Poland will foolishly be left smarting while Germany and the UK press for rational dialog. There are US forces in Poland: https://news.yahoo.com/us-fighter-jets-land-poland-173812228.html https://news.yahoo.com/us-fighter-jets-land-poland-173812228... Poland is a member of NATO. An attack on Poland would invoke NATO Article 5 without question.
- larnik 5y ago
  Poland's history causes folks to be cautious about such statements. If you are not familiar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_betrayal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_betrayal
- trzy 5y ago
  No, NATO has plenty of wiggle room to decide not to retaliate in order to prevent further escalation. And furthermore, you might see a flat out refusal to honor treaty obligations to avoid “the unthinkable”. EDIT: and remember 1939. They can simply drag their feet on actual military retaliation until the immediate threat subsides. A Russian invasion of Poland is highly unlikely. It’s not an objective of theirs. And without the threat of an invasion that would directly threaten larger economic powers, is a conflict with Russia even rational? NATO will simply absorb the hit.
  - thesuperbigfrog 5y ago
    >> No, NATO has plenty of wiggle room to decide not to retaliate in order to prevent further escalation. And furthermore, you might see a flat out refusal to honor treaty obligations to avoid “the unthinkable”. If Russia attacks Poland with ballistic missiles and cruise missiles and NATO failed to respond then it would effectively make the NATO articles nothing more than words on paper. An attack on any NATO member would cross the line. The NRF has been activated and stands ready to act: "Following Russia’s unjustified and unprovoked attack on Ukraine, February 2022, and in line with its defensive planning to protect all Allies, NATO is taking additional steps to further strengthen deterrence and defence across the Alliance. This includes the activation of elements of the NRF for the first time in a deterrence and defence role. Allies have placed thousands of additional troops – along with armoured vehicles, artillery units, ships and aircraft – at high readiness earmarked for the NRF, ensuring that it continues to have the speed, responsiveness and capability to defend NATO territory and populations." Source: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm >> EDIT: and remember 1939. They can simply drag their feet on actual military retaliation until the immediate threat subsides. 2022 is not 1939. NATO did not exist in 1939. >> A Russian invasion of Poland is highly unlikely. It’s not an objective of theirs. And without the threat of an invasion that would directly threaten larger economic powers, is a conflict with Russia even rational? NATO will simply absorb the hit. Neither an invasion nor economic threats are required to trigger Article 5. Conflict with Russia is not rational, but neither is Putin's invasion of Ukraine.
Xylakant 5y ago
Poland is sending the aircraft to the largest American Airbase in Europe, located in Western Germany close to the French border. I’d assume that Ukrainian pilots will somehow transfer there to pick them up. The distances involved are not unmanageable - it’s around 1000 - 1500 km from there to Lviv, well inside Ukrainian territory. The ferry range of a MiG-29 is around 2000 km according to Wikipedia. Either Russia bombs Rammstein or they kill the planes when they land in Ukrainian space. Targeting Polish airfields makes no sense.
- trzy 5y ago
  The planes themselves are irrelevant. Poland supplied them and retaliation would be punitive.
stjohnswarts 5y ago
If Russia attacks Poland it's the same as directly attacking the United States (or any other NATO nation) and will be treated as such

by trzy 5y ago

Maakuth 5y ago

Why do you consider it certain that NATO guarantees would not apply? Ukraine is not in the alliance.

pxtail 5y ago
This could be difficult to understand but in Poland due to the history there is sentiment that country was betrayed or abandoned, not helped by allies at the start of WWII by Britain, France. Of course it's not certainty as you wrote but the thought at the back of the head about history repeating itself and possibility of being considered as just the buffer zone and potential battle ground for western europe countries is there for many people - and that's why in addition to having borders with countries at war Poland may be perceived as treading twice as carefully in this situation.

alangibson 5y ago

AFAIK any NATO nation can invoke article 5. However, the other nations have latitude in how they respond

aaomidi 5y ago

If Poland gets attacked over this, and NATO doesn't step in, then that's the end of NATO. This is a really smart move to finally solidify the power of NATO - or get rid of it if it doesn't actually have that power.

gnulinux 5y ago

I find this thought of mine hard to explain to people because obviously no one including me wants WW3 and likely annihilation of our species. However, please note that in a hypothetical future where NATO doesn't even protect NATO soil (e.g. Poland) there will be no reason for Russia not to invade Baltic States, Poland, Romania etc. This effectively makes NATO non-existent and gives all the leverage and power to Russia. I understand this is a very sensitive issue, but from this perspective I believe NATO should immediately retaliate if Russia even dares to attack Poland.

trzy 5y ago
Reasonable-sounding people in the West will — already are — argue that the combined economies of Poland, the Baltic States, Romania, etc. are not worth WWIII and that a comfortable and secure Russia will want to reintegrate into the global economy and can be reasoned with. From a purely rational perspective, they are not wrong. Even if it means the end of NATO, that’s preferable to Armageddon. The Germans have long belittled Poland, the Balts, etc. as irrational and irrelevant in their pursuit of a stable equilibrium with Russia. And the US? Even more removed from this conflict with an increasingly difficult set of its own domestic challenges and institutional decline.
- Etherlord87 5y ago
  You think that US is "removed from this conflict"? They don't send weapons to Ukraine, they don't share intel and advice with Ukraine, they don't train Ukrainian soldiers and they don't influence other countries to help Ukraine? You think that Germany considers Russia a reasonable partner? German newspapers that used to praise Merkel now don't criticize her for making Putin stronger? The government doesn't drop plans with Nordstream 2, also no plans appear to search for an alternative to russian gas? I'm sorry if the rhetoric I've chosen here sounds passively aggressive, but the "purely rational perspective" you described is very far from what I consider rational.

tejohnso 5y ago

I think the Article 5 protection is exactly why Poland feels comfortable doing this. If they shared your concern they wouldn't have done it. And as other people have mentioned, it would be political disaster for Article 5 not to be invoked.

blagie 5y ago
No, I don't think Poland feels comfortable in doing this. The West broke alliances with Poland over and over, as convenient, and just broke the Budapest Manifesto with Ukraine. See the Phoney War and the Warsaw Uprising for a good history. Poland feels _more_ comfortable doing this than the alternative, though. If Russia stands unopposed in Ukraine, who do you think is next?
- bcrosby95 5y ago
  > and just broke the Budapest Manifesto with Ukraine. No they didn't. The only country that broke it is Russia.
  - blagie 5y ago
    Yes. They did. E.g. "4. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used;" We've had plenty of nuclear threats at this point; fear of escalating to nuclear war is precisely what limits Ukraine's ability to get aid. A condemnation, as the US raised, is not "action."

thesuperbigfrog 5y ago

>> Bad move. This opens up Polish airbases to retaliation by Russian ballistic and cruise missiles. If push comes to shove, NATO Article 5 will not be invoked for Poland’s sake (Western European nations, the UK, and the US will not be willing to risk WWIII for country east of Germany and Poland should understand this by now). Poland will foolishly be left smarting while Germany and the UK press for rational dialog. There are US forces in Poland: https://news.yahoo.com/us-fighter-jets-land-poland-173812228.html https://news.yahoo.com/us-fighter-jets-land-poland-173812228... Poland is a member of NATO. An attack on Poland would invoke NATO Article 5 without question.

larnik 5y ago
Poland's history causes folks to be cautious about such statements. If you are not familiar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_betrayal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_betrayal
trzy 5y ago
No, NATO has plenty of wiggle room to decide not to retaliate in order to prevent further escalation. And furthermore, you might see a flat out refusal to honor treaty obligations to avoid “the unthinkable”. EDIT: and remember 1939. They can simply drag their feet on actual military retaliation until the immediate threat subsides. A Russian invasion of Poland is highly unlikely. It’s not an objective of theirs. And without the threat of an invasion that would directly threaten larger economic powers, is a conflict with Russia even rational? NATO will simply absorb the hit.
- thesuperbigfrog 5y ago
  >> No, NATO has plenty of wiggle room to decide not to retaliate in order to prevent further escalation. And furthermore, you might see a flat out refusal to honor treaty obligations to avoid “the unthinkable”. If Russia attacks Poland with ballistic missiles and cruise missiles and NATO failed to respond then it would effectively make the NATO articles nothing more than words on paper. An attack on any NATO member would cross the line. The NRF has been activated and stands ready to act: "Following Russia’s unjustified and unprovoked attack on Ukraine, February 2022, and in line with its defensive planning to protect all Allies, NATO is taking additional steps to further strengthen deterrence and defence across the Alliance. This includes the activation of elements of the NRF for the first time in a deterrence and defence role. Allies have placed thousands of additional troops – along with armoured vehicles, artillery units, ships and aircraft – at high readiness earmarked for the NRF, ensuring that it continues to have the speed, responsiveness and capability to defend NATO territory and populations." Source: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm >> EDIT: and remember 1939. They can simply drag their feet on actual military retaliation until the immediate threat subsides. 2022 is not 1939. NATO did not exist in 1939. >> A Russian invasion of Poland is highly unlikely. It’s not an objective of theirs. And without the threat of an invasion that would directly threaten larger economic powers, is a conflict with Russia even rational? NATO will simply absorb the hit. Neither an invasion nor economic threats are required to trigger Article 5. Conflict with Russia is not rational, but neither is Putin's invasion of Ukraine.

Xylakant 5y ago

Poland is sending the aircraft to the largest American Airbase in Europe, located in Western Germany close to the French border. I’d assume that Ukrainian pilots will somehow transfer there to pick them up. The distances involved are not unmanageable - it’s around 1000 - 1500 km from there to Lviv, well inside Ukrainian territory. The ferry range of a MiG-29 is around 2000 km according to Wikipedia. Either Russia bombs Rammstein or they kill the planes when they land in Ukrainian space. Targeting Polish airfields makes no sense.

trzy 5y ago
The planes themselves are irrelevant. Poland supplied them and retaliation would be punitive.

stjohnswarts 5y ago

If Russia attacks Poland it's the same as directly attacking the United States (or any other NATO nation) and will be treated as such