In February 2009, I wrote an op-ed for the European Voice about Poland’s decision to pull some of its troops out of UN missions in the Middle East:
Whenever European governments need extra troops for Africa or Afghanistan, it’s rarely long before they’re on the phone to Warsaw. Poland may not match the deployment levels of the UK, France, Spain and Italy – but it has a reputation for sending soldiers pretty much anywhere, and with fewer quibbles than many of its more cautious NATO allies.
But the commitments stack up: 1,130 personnel in Afghanistan, 400 more in Chad, 200 in Bosnia… At some point something was going to have to give. Last week it did. Poland declared that it would pull 800 troops out of UN missions in Lebanon and the Golan Heights, and not participate in a planned UN follow-on mission to the EU force in Chad. [RG notes: in the end, the Poles did stay on in Chad.]
This was down to money and politics. The defence minister admitted the prime cause was budget cuts – and with hard choices looming, “NATO and EU missions are Poland’s priority”. This was bad news for UN officials, short on high-quality forces and concerned that the financial crisis will drive other governments to follow the Polish lead.
Now, as Simon Tisdall points out today, the Poles are going wobbly on NATO too:
Nato’s Lisbon summit in November will hear a call from Poland’s prime minister, Donald Tusk, for “a relatively quick and precise plan for ending this intervention” – an idea with growing appeal for other allies. The Dutch and Canadians have already decided to leave. Now David Cameron and defence secretary Liam Fox are hinting that Britain, too, will seek to draw down its troop presence next year.
I’m not blaming the Poles for their decision – they are still some of the hardiest of the Europeans. So if Warsaw wants out of Afghanistan, I doubt other Europeans are going to hang around. Beat the retreat!
