The U.S. leader announced on the social media platform Truth Social that the United States would send an additional 5,000 troops to Poland. But are these really additional troops? Or will the long-planned rotation of a U.S. brigade simply take place as originally scheduled? Poland’s Ministry of National Defence seemed to be preparing us for this turn of events after a meeting with Gen. Christopher Mahoney, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the U.S. Armed Forces.
Photo: Truth Social
“What matters most is that there is no decision to reduce the presence of U.S. forces in Poland. From the very beginning, I sought to calm the situation and said that no such decisions had been made. Yesterday, this was officially confirmed by the American side. We are pursuing a calm, rational and strategic policy of cooperation ‒ one not based on emotions or passing events. No information noise will disrupt these relations. The statement that was published clearly indicated that decisions made in the United States may only temporarily delay the deployment of some U.S. forces to Poland. This is not about reducing the presence, but about a temporary pause related to the planning process. Poland remains a model ally,” ‒ Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of National Defence Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz said on May 20.
However, despite the optimistic information that appears to be coming from Washington, the disruption during the rotation of American units to NATO’s eastern flank is a far more important event than politicians and some commentators are trying to portray today. Not because several thousand soldiers arriving late will automatically change the military balance in Europe. The problem lies elsewhere. Poland has received a signal from Washington that even the most loyal ally, if it does not match America in importance, will always be viewed through the lens of broader, global U.S. interests, and will find it difficult to count on becoming the main point of reference in a superpower’s policy.
This lesson is particularly painful for the current political class, which over the past decade has built its entire security narrative around exceptional relations with the United States. Poland was supposed to be the United States’ closest ally in Europe, a country that met Washington’s expectations in exemplary fashion, bought American equipment without major political or financial disputes, maintained high defense spending, and consistently supported the U.S. military presence.
The problem is that Washington clearly does not view this relationship in equally emotional terms. Poland has done a great deal for the U.S. military presence. It has practically fallen to its knees before Uncle Sam. It financed the expansion of infrastructure for the U.S. Army, prepared equipment storage facilities, airfields, logistics centers, and training ranges. Maintaining U.S. forces costs Polish taxpayers more than 550 million PLN a year.
As if that were not enough, Warsaw decided to make enormous arms purchases from the United States. F-35A aircraft, AH-64E Apache helicopters, and M1 Abrams tanks are now making their way to Poland. Equally important, most of these purchases are being carried out under a model that is highly favorable to the American side. Loans, interest rates, and reliance on American servicing, spare parts, and support systems mean that Poland has tied its armed forces to the United States for decades.
Warsaw assumed that such far-reaching political and financial loyalty would translate into a special status for Poland in relations with Washington. Yet the events of recent weeks show something else. In American policy, we seem to be perceived not as an independent and important piece of the puzzle, but merely as part of Europe. And only Europe as a whole may deserve to be regarded as a worthy partner ‒ or adversary? ‒ for Donald Trump. Even the supposedly excellent relations between Karol Nawrocki and Donald Trump have done little to help. Of course, Poland and Romania cooperate very closely with the Pentagon militarily, but from the U.S. perspective this seems to be more of a lever within the EU than recognition of these two countries as key partners in transatlantic policy. Trump talks to Europe, not to a small country, even one that is strategically located.
The rotation of the American brigade was delayed practically while it was already underway. Some soldiers were already being moved to Europe, and logistical preparations were in progress. It is difficult today to determine exactly what happened, although the confusion appears to be a consequence of internal Pentagon policy, as it seeks savings through more effective management of its units. Yet even that is not the main problem. The political dimension of this situation is far more worrying.
The entire process took place without properly informing allies on NATO’s eastern flank. In addition, Donald Trump is now talking about sending an additional 5,000 soldiers, which raises further questions: if this is the long-planned rotation, where are these additional soldiers coming from? Or perhaps the rotation really was canceled, and American units are now planned to be sent under an entirely new format? It is no surprise that there has been consternation in Poland in recent days. The public asked questions, and politicians looked for answers, because behind the scenes it is said that neither the government nor the president knew anything about the rotation being suspended.
President Karol Nawrocki meeting with soldiers of the U.S. Army’s 598th Transportation Brigade in Gdynia, October 17, 2025 / Photo: Mikołaj Bujak, Chancellery of the President of the Republic of Poland
A brutal collision with great-power politics
President Karol Nawrocki recently publicly emphasized his very good relations with Donald Trump and presented them as one of the pillars of Polish security. Recently, however, nervousness has taken hold in Warsaw, contradictory messages have appeared, and unofficially it has been suggested that the Polish side was unable for some time to obtain clear answers from Washington.
This, moreover, is not solely Poland’s problem. The Trump administration is making it increasingly clear that it treats allied relations in purely transactional terms. Costs, current interests, and the ability to secure specific political behavior are what count. European countries are expected to buy American equipment, increase defense spending, and take on a greater share of the burden of the continent’s security. At the same time, Washington wants to preserve the option of limiting its military presence whenever it considers that politically or financially convenient.
For decades, Europe became accustomed to a situation in which the presence of U.S. troops was treated as a permanent element of the security architecture. Even as administrations changed, the strategic direction remained stable. Meanwhile, current U.S. policy is beginning to resemble the management of a global portfolio of interests, in which individual regions compete for Washington’s attention. And Europe is losing importance for the White House.
America-centric thinking
It is also worth noting one more aspect of the whole situation. In recent years, Poland’s security policy has been built almost entirely around the American axis. Relations with the European defense industry have often been pushed into the background, the development of some domestic industrial capabilities has been neglected, as in the case of helicopters, and enormous financial resources have been directed mainly to American corporations.
Of course, some of these purchases were operationally justified. The F-35A and AH-64E are very modern weapons systems. The problem, however, is that Warsaw apparently believed that the sheer level of purchases would guarantee political influence over how the United States treats Poland in a global context.
The history of U.S. relations with its allies shows that investing billions across the Atlantic does not automatically mean that the recipient will be treated as an equal political partner.
And this is precisely what should be the most important lesson for Warsaw from recent weeks. Poland still needs strong relations with the United States, and the rotation will most likely take place, but we must finally begin to build security policy more realistically and less emotionally. Alliances are not based on declarations of friendship, joint photographs, or political marketing. They are based on a lasting convergence of interests.
That is why it is worth returning to the turn of the 1990s and 2000s, when building transatlantic and Euro-Atlantic relations was not reduced to publishing memes, but constituted a multi-level, in-depth debate. This applied both at the political level and among expert institutions and academic centers. The key to success is mutual understanding, not wishful thinking.
Stoję i będę stać na straży sojuszu polsko-amerykańskiego – ważnego filaru bezpieczeństwa każdego polskiego domu i całej Europy.
Dobre sojusze to sojusze oparte na współpracy, wzajemnym szacunku i dbaniu o nasze wspólne bezpieczeństwo.Dziękuję Prezydentowi Stanów Zjednoczonych…
— Karol Nawrocki (@NawrockiKn) May 21, 2026
Decyzja prezydenta D. Trumpa o wysłaniu do Polski 5 tysięcy dodatkowych żołnierzy potwierdza, że relacje polsko-amerykańskie są bardzo silne, a Polska jest modelowym i żelaznym sojusznikiem 🇵🇱🤝🇺🇸
Dobrze, że o sprawy fundamentalne dla bezpieczeństwa naszej Ojczyzny walczymy…
— Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz (@KosiniakKamysz) May 21, 2026
Wiadomość z ostatniej chwili – Donald Trump ogłosił, że dodatkowe 5 tysięcy amerykańskich żołnierzy trafi do 🇵🇱 Polski! pic.twitter.com/y6xurhno0s
— Cezary Tomczyk (@CTomczyk) May 21, 2026
See also: