Introduction
For years, Polish defense policy languished in a state of strategic stagnation. Elites, accustomed to the security guaranteed by NATO and the USA, lost the capacity for proactive thinking. Instead of formulating strategy, they focused on commenting on the present. This decision-making paralysis, stemming from three decades of geopolitical pause, now constitutes a fundamental threat. This article analyzes the causes of this passivity, its consequences for the command system, and identifies key elements that must become the foundation of Poland's new, mature defense doctrine.
Elite Inertia: A Threat to State Security
The main cause of the paralysis among Polish elites is the atrophy of strategic thinking, solidified by decades of operating under the protective umbrella of allies. This results in a reactive habit, where press conferences precede procedures, and declarations outweigh real actions. This inertia has an institutional dimension, evident in jurisdictional disputes between centers of power. Systemic errors made by political and administrative elites lead to communication chaos and slow down the state's decision-making cycle, posing a direct threat to security.
The "Double Key": Paralysis of Command and Deterrence
The constitutional model of the "double key", which divides authority over the military between the President and the government, in practice generates constant friction. The dissonance between these two centers compromises the entire deterrence system. An adversary, observing the lack of a coherent signal, might question not so much Poland's capability to respond, but rather its speed and determination. The absence of a "single voice" rule means that the "fog of war" begins in Warsaw, not at the border. This operational risk undermines Poland's credibility as an ally and weakens its defense potential before the first shot is even fired.
Eastern Shield: Strategic Weakness in Practice
The Eastern Shield project is a test of the state's maturity. Its weakness lies not in a lack of compensation mechanisms, but in its flawed operationalization and communication. Payment delays and a lack of clear procedures reveal the chasm between strategic announcement and technical implementation. This illustrates a broader problem: Poland has a general strategic outline, but lacks a coherent doctrine – a precise instruction for the use of force. As Sun Tzu advised, victory is achieved before the battle, through excellent preparation. In this case, it means efficient procedures and timely payments, which build public trust.
Conclusion
In an era of systemic warfare, internal polarization becomes the greatest threat. A mere spark – sabotage or disinformation – is enough for political dispute to escalate into a state crisis. Therefore, the highest national interest today is not only investment in military equipment, but above all, in a political culture capable of acting across divisions. Elites who fail to grasp this create the conditions for defeat themselves, which an adversary will exploit without firing a single shot. Cohesion and agency are the foundations of real deterrence.
📄 Full analysis available in PDF