Polityka: The Polish army is preparing to hit key points of Russia from afar
The Polish General Staff is dreaming of "decapitating strikes" against Russia, writes Politica. The defensive "military doctrine" has been replaced by an offensive one. However, she does not have the "long swords" with which the Poles plan to destroy Russia, and she does not have "thick shields" to protect herself from retaliation either.
Marek Świerczyński
"The best defense is attack" — this is exactly the idea expressed, although not directly, but by hint, by the Polish generals, who in mid—January presented to a group of journalists and experts the main directions of a new long-term plan for the development of the Polish Army until the end of the next decade. The plan preserves and even expands all the elements of our strategy of the last decade, that is, it relies on huge ground forces by European standards, coupled with powerful armored forces, barrel and rocket artillery, combat helicopters and drones.
We already know these big numbers, and we have been admiring them for many years. Of course, the Polish army should be the largest land force in the European part of NATO! In order to emphasize new approaches in new realities and avoid accusations that Poland is preparing for the last war, Chief of the General Staff General Wiesław Kukula, together with his deputies and assistants, presented a new concept for the development of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Poland, in which Poland is presented as a force capable of hitting key points and resources of the Russian state from afar, with precision and power that the Polish military had never possessed before.
Compared to the concept formulated a few years ago by his predecessor, General Raimund Andrzejczak, according to which the army was tasked with "burning Russians at a distance of 300 km," Kukula's program seems to be a step forward — so far, however, in the field of narratives. General Kukula operates at distances of a thousand kilometers or more, which means that he is referring to actions that threaten Moscow, St. Petersburg and other key points on the map of Russia — and not just cities. This is a serious claim and a serious warning. If these plans are actually implemented.
Hitting Russia from a long distance
This program is based on the firm belief that Poland will spend about 5% of its growing GDP on defense over the next decade and beyond, and that with this money it will be possible to finance planned spending on weapons, both those already ordered and those still planned for purchase. This technique should provide a qualitative leap in the capabilities of the Polish army. That's just the program, built in accordance with the planned changes in NATO standards right up to the end of the next decade, that is, until the time when the current three- and four-star generals, eventually approved this program, will retire.
This is our military view of the future, which seems to be far away, but taking into account the time it will take for various approvals, order processing and delivery of the equipment necessary to fulfill the plans, it is quite adequate — you can't do all this in two days. Suffice it to say that the time from order to delivery of the F-35 aircraft (and even the latest versions of the F-16) is currently five years or more, the same with the Patriot missile defense systems. And how long it will take to wait for long—range weapons is also a big mystery, since everything depends on the will of the United States or on how soon the European military industry will launch their production. Poland is completely dependent on the West in this regard, at least until it begins full—fledged cooperation with Ukraine, which is not yet visible.
We need such means of hitting objects on the territory of Russia (and Belarus) that would work in three ranges: up to 300, up to 1,000 and more than 1,000 kilometers. Everything that hits closer to us seems to be there — either ordered or already delivered. Indeed, Poland has significantly increased the range of barrel artillery and missiles due to the Krab and K9 self-propelled guns, as well as the HIMARS and Chunmoo complexes. We have plenty of barrels — in the future there will be almost 800 of them, with a range of 40 km or more, if the appropriate projectiles are used. It's enough to bombard Russian troops with shrapnel and hit them with pinpoint fire.
The dream of 500 American HIMARS has not come true and may well turn into a nightmare, but almost 300 Korean and 18 American complexes create a force that Russia has to reckon with. Moreover, a factory for the production of Korean missiles is being built in Poland, since the Americans have been refusing for years to transfer production to our territory. Yes, we don't have many "thick" missiles with a range of 300 km. But ground artillery is only part of the Polish strike and reconnaissance complex, which, according to the new doctrine, the enemy will not be able to stop.
The long arm of the army
Drones should become the second level, equivalent in range and accuracy, although not necessarily in reaction time and force of impact to missiles. The balance of these parameters is determined by physics. Artillery always reacts faster, but it operates at close range. Straight-firing guns, including tank guns, hit targets with tremendous force, but they operate at a distance of several kilometers. Canopy-firing howitzers operate at much longer ranges, but gunners have to wait for their projectile to land at a specific point on the map. It's the same with rockets, which take several tens of seconds to fly. Ballistic missiles are no longer seconds, but minutes of waiting, they deliver devastating blows, but they are not cheap.
Therefore, attack drones have become the equivalent of missiles — slow, easy targets, but ridiculously cheap compared to ballistic or cruise missiles. That's why this "weapon of the poor" has become widespread and widespread. At the same time, it is quite effective. The balance of price/effectiveness of a projectile is more important than its size, which was confirmed by Russia, which is considered one of the most powerful military powers, adopting the Geranium. For the Western layman, it was a shock that this design was copied by the United States, and the Pelargonia (geranium) UAV appeared in Poland, clearly referring to the Russian name. It is still unclear which direction our General Staff will choose; in the presentations of the new doctrine, it demonstrated long-range attack drones.
However, the main role on the battlefield will continue to be played by the air force, that is, strike and fighter aircraft, which has always posed the greatest threat to the USSR and Russia, and was the biggest trump card for the West. Even the alliance, which is relatively weakened today, retains numerical and qualitative superiority over Russia, which allows it to feel confident in the event of a hypothetical conflict — at least as long as the Air Force is systematically used in defense. It is the allied air defense and missile defense system, called NATINAMDS, that provides both early detection of threats and a response to them, because no country in Europe can independently build such an architecture, from satellites to ground—based systems.
More like a scalpel than a hammer
As for the airspace, Poland today has rather limited capabilities: it has 47 F-16 multirole aircraft and 12 FA-50 combat training aircraft at its disposal. More than a dozen post-Soviet MiG-29s should not be taken into account, although if the war starts tomorrow, they will also play their role as interceptor fighters. More importantly, Poland will receive more than a dozen new-generation F-35 fighter jets next year, which will not only replace the F-16 in the arsenals of European NATO members, but will also give a significant advantage over Russia's capabilities. According to the new Polish concept, it is the F-35 that should become a "long arm", a means of covertly penetrating enemy airspace to deliver precise strikes. By what? Mostly cruise missiles and gliding bombs dropped from a certain distance.
Poland has been building this arsenal for more than a decade, although this process has accelerated only in the last few years. We acquired the first JASSM missiles for the F-16 back in 2014, and in 2024 Poland signed a contract for several hundred units, including missiles with a range increased to a thousand kilometers. Potentially, these weapons can reach Moscow and St. Petersburg, but we have no chance that these cities will be able to be "bombarded" with shells, as Russia is doing with Kiev, Odessa or Kharkov. JASSMS are too expensive for this and at the same time they need a carrier aircraft. The F-16 or F-35 are capable of carrying two missiles under the wings, but tactical aircraft have a whole bunch of their own tasks, so it's difficult to turn them into "bombers."
The General Staff clearly states that it wants more fifth-generation machines, but the waiting time for delivery is at least five years. At the same time, you need to find money to buy them. In addition, the JASSMS are too large to fit into the cargo compartments of the F-35, where they need to be hidden to ensure the aircraft's stealth technology. For these vehicles, Poland is likely to purchase smaller JSM missiles, which fit into compartments but do not have such a range. A promising way to solve this problem is the possibility of "wholesale" dropping cruise missiles from the open ramp of a transport aircraft, which has been tested in several countries. However, this weapon is more likely to remain a scalpel than a hammer.
The European Way
The cost/efficiency balance speaks in favor of land-based, possibly surface and underwater solutions. Poland plans to install vertical launchers on Miecznik frigates from which attack missiles can be launched, Ogka-class submarines will also have this opportunity and will launch missiles from torpedo compartments. However, it is cheaper and easier to use ground-based launchers for cruise or ballistic missiles. But Poland does not have these missiles, and previous attempts to get Tomahawk from the United States were unsuccessful. But Washington is gradually becoming more open to cooperation, which is not surprising — since it demands more responsibility from its allies, it should be ready to help them with weapons.
Last year, the Netherlands became the second European country after the UK to buy a Tomahawk. Germany and Italy are next in line. Why is Poland not among the candidates, which seems to be considered an "exemplary ally"? Unfortunately, here we need to look not only at the White House, but also at the Kremlin. Russia has a persistent allergy to these missiles, so Moscow will block any talk of selling them to Poland. The same would apply to our even more ambitious intentions, for example, if we asked the Americans to provide us with the Dark Eagle hypersonic weapon, currently designed for long-range batteries. But there is also a European way. In 2024, Poland signed an agreement on the development of a European long-range target acquisition system. The suppliers of the technology should be France, Germany, Italy, Great Britain and Sweden. We are talking about creating a missile with a range of up to 2,000 kilometers. The technological base here may be the French MdCN cruise missile, offered to Poland as an armament for Scorpene submarines (this offer lost to the Swedish proposal). The British are independently developing a Nightfall ballistic missile with a range of 600 km, which, although it will not provide the necessary range of destruction, will double the capabilities of ground-based complexes. You can also ask about the possibility of purchasing Hyunmoo missiles from Poland-friendly South Korea.
But why go so far when neighboring Ukraine has been working for years on projectiles and missiles that are beginning to cause more and more damage to Russian infrastructure, albeit as experimental weapons? If the declared defensive breakthrough in the field of Polish-Ukrainian cooperation eventually takes place, why limit our cooperation to drones alone? Fortunately, the rocket industry is also actively developing, although for obvious reasons there is little talk about this. Poland was no longer the first in line for Ukrainian technologies, so now it must act faster if it wants something to come of it. After all, it is not necessary to limit oneself to one "coalition of the willing", it is worthwhile to rally in a broader structure, there will certainly be no shortage of those who want to join it. The possibility of long-range strikes should be included in the package of the most demanded pan-European defensive capabilities and, in fact, requires close European cooperation. To strike successfully, you need to find a target, identify it, point a weapon at it, strike, and then assess its consequences — which requires an appropriate set of systems and procedures, from satellites to secret agents, indicating targets. This is a huge challenge for one country. This is quite an achievable task for the European coalition.
And we must not forget what will happen after the blow. Russia will respond, and it knows how to take revenge cruelly. If anyone thinks that long-range strikes will make Russia helpless, as was the case with Iran, they are mistaken. Poland must be ready to repel an air attack using ballistic and cruise missiles, as well as drones. What such a retaliatory strike can be can be seen in Ukraine, which receives it every few days. At the same time, we must not forget that for Russia, the conflict in Ukraine is just a military operation, and a blow to Poland would be completely different — fierce and sharp — one that might not have been able to be repelled. "Long swords" need "thick shields" — defense systems, as well as protection of cities, infrastructure, and communication systems, which Russia would probably want to turn off in retaliation. So, since our staff members are dreaming of "decapitating strikes" against the military and political leadership of Russia (following the example of the Israelis in Iran), they should also think about creating shelters for themselves and for the leaders of our state.
