U.S. Military Presence in Poland

U.S. Military Presence in Poland

Updated August 4, 2020
U.S. Military Presence in Poland
Introduction
The U.S.-led NATO Enhanced Forward Presence Battle
Poland has been a major focus of U.S. and NATO efforts to
Group stationed in Orzysz, Poland, includes an 857-soldier
deter potential Russian aggression in Europe. This is due in
Armored Cavalry Squadron from the Vilseck, Germany-
part to its geographic location on NATO’s eastern flank,
based U.S. Army 2nd Cavalry Regiment. On July 29, 2020,
providing land access to the Baltic States. Although
the Department of Defense announced that the 2nd Cavalry
Ukraine is not a NATO ally, the Russian occupation of
Regiment would be returning to the United States from
Ukraine’s Crimea region in 2014 and subsequent initiation
Germany at an unspecified future date.
of a separatist war in eastern Ukraine underscored to many
observers that NATO allies, particularly those in Eastern
U.S.-Poland Joint Declaration
Europe, could once again be threatened by Moscow. In
On June 12, 2019, the United States and Poland signed a
response, the United States and its NATO allies have
Joint Declaration on Defense Cooperation Regarding
undertaken a number of initiatives to emphasize NATO’s
United States Force Posture in the Republic of Poland. The
collective defense agreements, thereby assuring allies of
declaration proposed adding an additional 1,000 U.S.
their own security while simultaneously deterring Russian
rotational military personnel and establishing the following:
aggression. Poland is a critical partner in these efforts.
 an Army Division Headquarters (Forward). This could
The United States has bolstered security in Central and
build on the existing Mission Command Element by
Eastern Europe with an increased rotational military
adding staff and command, control, communications,
presence, additional exercises and training with allies and
and intelligence, and planning capabilities;
partners, improved infrastructure to allow greater
 a joint U.S./Polish Combat Training Center (CTC) in
responsiveness, enhanced prepositioning of U.S.
Drawsko Pomorskie and other locations in Poland;
equipment, and intensified efforts to build partner capacity
for newer NATO members and non-NATO countries. The
 a U.S. Air Force MQ-9 Intelligence, Surveillance, and
European Deterrence Initiative (EDI), launched in 2014
Reconnaissance Squadron to share information, as
(originally called the European Reassurance Initiative), an
appropriate, with Poland;
Overseas Contingency Operations account in the U.S.

defense budget, is the key fiscal mechanism by which it
an Aerial Port of Debarkation (APOD) to support the
does so. U.S. military operational activities of EDI are
movement of forces for training or contingency
executed as part of Operation Atlantic Resolve (OAR).
operations;
Approximately 6,000 U.S. military personnel are involved
 an Army Area Support Group (ASG) to provide
in OAR at any given time, with units typically operating in
maintenance and supply support to current and future
the region under a rotational nine-month deployment.
U.S. forces in Poland;
Current U.S. Rotational Forces in Poland  a U.S. special operations forces capability in Poland to
The United States has a rotational military presence in
support air, ground, and maritime operations. It is
Poland of approximately 4,500 personnel, including those
unclear if this capability is intended to be for command
involved in OAR and NATO Missile Defense efforts, and
and control and planning purposes only, an actual
forces assigned to one of four NATO Enhanced Forward
operational capability, or a combination of both; and
Presence Battle Groups. U.S. forces in Poland include
 infrastructure to support the presence of an Army
 an Army division-level Mission Command Element
ABCT, an Army Combat Aviation Brigade (CAB), and
(MCE) in Poznan, Poland;
an Army Combat Sustainment Support Battalion.
 elements of a rotational Army Armored Brigade Combat Implementing this initiative is contingent upon the signing
Team (ABCT) and support units;
of a formal bilateral Defense Cooperation Agreement; the
 an Army Aviation Task Force;
two sides reportedly finalized the text at the end of July
2020 and are expected to officially sign the agreement on
 an approximately 750-person Army Logistics Task
August 15, 2020. As part of the agreement, Poland has
Force based in Poland but with logistics hubs also in
reportedly pledged to fund the construction of infrastructure
Lithuania and Romania;
and other logistical support for U.S. troops in the country.
 a U.S. Air Force Detachment at Lask, Poland; and
July 2020 U.S. European Command
 a U.S. Navy Detachment in Redzikowo, Poland working (USEUCOM) Force Posture
on the Aegis Ashore missile defense site as part of
Announcement
NATO Missile Defense efforts.
On July 29, 2020, U.S. Secretary of Defense Mark Esper
announced a series of USEUCOM force posture changes
https://crsreports.congress.gov

U.S. Military Presence in Poland
largely focused on the withdrawal of certain U.S. troops
collapse of the Soviet Union, due to concerns in some
from Germany. With regard to Poland, the announcement
member states that this would violate the terms of the 1997
stated that, in addition to the forces agreed upon in the 2019
NATO-Russia Founding Act, which states,
Joint U.S.–Poland Declaration, the United States also plans
NATO reiterates that in the current and foreseeable
on rotating the forward lead element (about 200 soldiers) of
the Army’s
security environment, the Alliance will carry out its
newly established V Corps headquarters to
collective defence and other missions by ensuring the
Poland. Secretary Esper noted that there might be other
necessary interoperability, integration, and capability for
opportunities to move additional U.S. forces into Poland as
reinforcement rather than by additional permanent
well.
stationing of substantial combat forces.
Permanent Basing vs. Rotational Forces? Accordingly, the enhanced NATO presence has been
The bilateral Defense Cooperation Agreement reportedly
referred to as “continuous” but rotational. Proponents of
defines the nature of the U.S. presence in Poland as
extended permanent basing assert that the “current security
“enduring” rather than “rotating.” Several observers have
environment” has changed considerably since 1997, largely
asserted that it might be more politically reassuring and
due to Russian activities, and that NATO should therefore
financially efficient to permanently station these “heel-to-
no longer be constrained by the NATO-Russia Founding
toe” rotational forces in Poland. Those in favor of
Act.
permanent basing also note that understanding the region’s
human and geographic terrain may require forces that are
Figure 1. Poland and Its Environs
present for longer than nine months.
Others contend that these rotations force military units in
the continental United States to routinely test their ability to
deploy to other theaters and exercise critical logistics and
mobility capabilities. According to this view, after nearly
20 years of expeditionary operations in the Middle East
region, the skills and capabilities necessary to mass U.S.
forces onto the European continent and transit them to the
front lines have not been sufficiently trained and exercised.
Heel-to-toe rotations also could allow U.S. forces to
develop those skills while simultaneously identifying and
developing solutions to logistical issues in Eastern Europe
that might slow down a U.S./NATO response to a crisis.

From a military standpoint, most observers contend that
Source: CRS. Data from U.S. Department of State.
regardless of whether forces are permanent or rotational,
Burden (Cost) Sharing?
exercising these capabilities is critical. In the event of war
on the European continent, the United States may choose to
Some observers, including President Trump, contend that
flow significant additional forces across the Atlantic, an
European allies have not invested sufficient resources in
undertaking that would be complex under optimal
their militaries and that, as a result, the United States has
circumstances, and exponentially more so under conditions
shouldered too much of the financial burden associated with
of war, when an adversary might seek to actively prevent
Europe’s defense. Such observers often note that most of
the arrival of U.S. service members and equipment (“Anti-
NATO’s allies in Europe have yet to meet a pledge made in
Access/Area Denial”). Some officials also have expressed
2014 to increase their defense budgets to 2% of GDP by
that the United States’ ability to move equipment in a
2024. According to NATO, Poland’s defense expenditures
timely fashion, in particular heavy tanks and fighting
were 2% of GDP in 2019. The Polish government plans to
vehicles, from U.S. bases to the ports from which the
increase defense spending to 2.5% of GDP by 2030.
equipment is shipped, is an area in need of improvement.
Congressional Response
Concerns Regarding Russian Reactions?
Congress has broadly supported the stationing of U.S forces
Recent developments regarding U.S. forces in Poland have
in Poland as part of a long-term strategy to deter Russian
raised questions about how Russia might interpret, or
aggression in Europe. Section 1248 of the John S. McCain
respond, to those forces. The situation is complicated by
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019
Kaliningrad, a 5,800-square-mile Russian exclave wedged
(P.L. 115-232) expressed the sense of Congress in support
between Poland and Lithuania. Kaliningrad is a key
of “enhanced defense cooperation with Poland, including
strategic territory for Russia, allowing the country to project
continued presence of United States forces in Poland and
military power into NATO’s northern flank. The territory
increased training, exercises, and other activities focused on
has a heavy Russian military presence, including the Baltic
improving effective joint response in a crisis.”
Fleet and two airbases. Russia has deployed Iskander short-
range nuclear-capable missiles in Kaliningrad.
Andrew Feickert, Specialist in Military Ground Forces
Kathleen J. McInnis, Specialist in International Security
Some analysts express concern that additional U.S. forces
in Poland could escalate tensions in and around
Derek E. Mix, Specialist in European Affairs
Kaliningrad. NATO continues to resist calls to deploy
IF11280
troops permanently in countries that joined after the
https://crsreports.congress.gov

U.S. Military Presence in Poland

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF11280 · VERSION 4 · UPDATED