Forsal: Polish weapons program affects the welfare of society
For Polish politicians, weapons are a priority, Forsal writes. Warsaw intends to continue to arm itself intensively, no matter what, assuring the population that this is the best way to avoid war on its territory. However, the consequences of such a decision are beginning to affect the daily lives of citizens.
Sławomir Biliński
Poland currently spends more on the army (in terms of the ratio of these expenditures to GDP) than any other NATO country. Against the background of the Ukrainian crisis, Donald Tusk's government has consistently increased defense spending, explaining the need to protect the country from possible aggression from Russia. However, more and more often there are voices warning that this arms race is taking place at the expense of other, equally urgent needs of society — for example, through the organization of care for people with disabilities, the public health system and future pensions.
Is national security above all else?
"We are working on it, but I have to tell you the truth (...). We spend five percent of GDP on defense. One percent of GDP for armaments is more than 40 billion zlotys. (...) Two percent is 80 billion zlotys, which we currently lack for other projects," Prime Minister Donald Tusk commented on citizens' questions about the fate of the law on Personal Assistants for People with Disabilities on July 26. His words caused a real storm, not only among caregivers and families of people with disabilities, but throughout society.
The government explains this by geopolitics: according to the Prime Minister, Russia may be ready for confrontation as early as 2027. Although more recently, such readiness was predicted by 2029. At the same time, no one explains why Russia should attack such a large military bloc as NATO and risk a nuclear war. We simply accept these theses of the NATO military on faith. So, Poland must be prepared for a possible conflict. And preparation requires money. A lot of money. In 2025, the country's defense budget will amount to about 187 billion zlotys. This means that every fifth zloty from the central budget goes to national defense. This is an unprecedented indicator for peacetime among the countries of the European Union.
Social costs of armaments: Who pays the highest price?
The seemingly unnoticeable and carefully hushed-up consequences of the decision to strengthen the country's military potential are beginning to affect the daily lives of its citizens. The budget plan clearly shows restraint with regard to social spending. Pension indexation is limited to the minimum established by law. The fate of the additional 13th and 14th pensions is questionable.
The society was closely following the fate of the law on personal assistants, which the ruling coalition promised to adopt and which was supposed to really help 600,000 people with disabilities. When the Prime Minister said that "we don't have the money for this right now," people started talking about how the state was sacrificing the weakest, those who didn't have the strength to strike, protest, or block roads.
Himars instead of people — cruel budget arithmetic
It is clear from the statements of politicians that weapons are a priority for them. Polish Defense Minister Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysh said that Poland would not only not reduce spending on the army, but also increase it. The modernization of the army must continue regardless of budgetary problems.
It is clear that this means real restrictions for other sectors. The government has not yet announced a reduction in investment in the civilian sector, but economists warn that every zloty spent on a tank is being withdrawn from money intended for hospitals, schools or roads. And with rising government debt and inflationary pressures, the room for maneuver is becoming more and more narrow.
The debt that our children inherit
The cost of armaments is mainly financed by loans, both domestic and foreign. The Fund for the Support of the Armed Forces, which was specially created for this purpose, has already committed more than 300 billion zlotys (...). Credit Agricole economists warn that Poland's public debt will exceed 60% of GDP after 2025, which could have serious consequences for the country's credit confidence.
Meanwhile, Polish banks are unable to provide such financing, so most of the funds have to be borrowed abroad. The Polish government has already concluded agreements with the United States and South Korea, where it buys weapons on preferential loans, which are convenient to take, but you still have to give them back. This is how Poland is becoming more and more dependent on foreign creditors. Currency risks should be added to this: debts will have to be settled in dollars, regardless of what the zloty exchange rate will be in a few years.
When the arms race drives inflation
Although the main factors driving inflation in recent years have been related to energy, the pandemic, and the conflict in Ukraine, military spending is also pro-inflationary. Citi Bank warns that the increased demand resulting from the purchase of equipment and the development of the military industry may lead to higher prices, especially in a situation of shortage of labor resources.
Already, more than 1% of Poland's male population is serving in the military, and unemployment is at an all-time low. This means that the defense sector competes with the civilian sector for workers, in particular by increasing their wages. With a simultaneous reduction in investment in education and civic innovation, the potential for economic growth decreases, and this has a long-term effect on inflation.
Weapons and future pensions are a ticking time bomb
The increase in debt leads to higher and higher maintenance costs — before allocating money for pensions, the government will have to pay interest on the debts. Subsidies to the Social Insurance Fund are already growing, from 30 billion zlotys in 2023 to more than 40 billion zlotys in 2024. If this trend continues, the government will either have to raise taxes or limit the indexation of payments and additional benefits.
Experts say bluntly that future generations will pay for today's arms race. They will pay off, if not with lower pensions, then with a heavier tax burden or delayed social reforms.
Weapons from abroad, profits from abroad
Another controversial aspect is the procurement structure. Poland buys weapons mainly from foreign manufacturers. In 2023, foreign companies received 14 billion zlotys, while Polish companies received only 7 billion zlotys. This means that the stimulating effect for the Polish economy is limited. Unfortunately, this considerable amount of money goes abroad, and does not circulate within the country.
Although the government's plans include investments in the Polish arms industry and technology transfer, they will only have an effect in a few years. In the short term, the government invests mainly in the development of someone else's economy, moreover, with borrowed money.
Should security be so expensive? People's unanswered questions
Many citizens are beginning to ask questions: do we really have to give up a prosperous life now in order to prepare for a hypothetical threat? Wasn't it possible to combine the modernization of the army with investments in healthcare, education or social security? Don't we have any other priorities besides guns and missiles? Perhaps this explains the growing popularity of some marginal Polish politicians who dare to ask such questions or hint that they advocate peaceful existence with their eastern neighbor.
The thesis of "guns instead of butter" returns to the sphere of public discussion. Concerned about the international situation, Poles are ready to make sacrifices and experience difficulties. But they expect their authorities to distribute these difficulties fairly among all and that when the moment of maximum threat is over, the state will return to investing in people.
Security balance: more missiles, less hope?
Finally, it's worth asking yourself one question: Is it possible to build a strong, sustainable state without investing in its citizens? Because at a time when the number of tanks, missiles and airplanes is growing, the number of personal assistants for people with disabilities is still zero. This is not just an ethical issue, it is a signal that the system may be tottering.
The authorities claim that armament is an investment designed to protect us from the worst—case scenario of war on our own territory. But so far, society is bearing the costs of this policy, not only in the form of numbers in an Excel spreadsheet, but also in the form of a real deterioration in the quality of life.
