Follow us on social

google cta
The Poland-Belarus border is becoming a tinderbox

The Poland-Belarus border is becoming a tinderbox

That neither side has an interest making the first move may be the saving grace. But tensions are growing absurdly nonetheless.

Analysis | Europe
google cta
google cta

Aside from the horrendous loss of life, limb and land, the greatest danger of the war in Ukraine has been the threat of nuclear weapons and the risk that NATO could get drawn into a third world war. President Joe Biden has promised — repeatedly — that won’t happen.

But while NATO has so far avoided being drawn into a war with Russia and World War III on the Russian-Ukrainian border, things are threatening to go sideways on the Poland-Belarus border right now.

On the Belarusian side, the military has started drills along its border with NATO members Poland and Lithuania. In addition, there were reportedly upwards of 10,000 Russian Wagner Group forces headed to Belarus in July (according to a Wagner commander) and their mercenaries are training Belarusian special forces just a few miles from the boundary. On the Polish side, troops are are massing in response, and officials in Warsaw have accused Belarus of hosting “redeployed” Wagner forces “to NATO’s eastern flank to destabilize it.”

Meanwhile the Poles accused Belarus military helicopters of violating Polish airspace last week. Belarus denied this, and charged Poland with fabricating the incident to justify the build up of Polish troops on the border. “We call on the Polish side not to escalate the situation and not use it to militarize the border area,” Belarusian ministry spokesman Anatoly Glaz said at the time.

Tensions are rising high enough to see how one match might set the tinderbox aflame.

“Our response to the provocation is to increase the size of the Polish Army on the eastern border of the country by redeploying troops from the west,” Poland’s defense minister Mariusz Blaszczak said last Thursday. “In accordance with the applicable law, soldiers in a specific situation can use weapons. They are not defenseless.”

Poland is now considering closing its border with Belarus partly out of concern that Wagner fighters could cross into Poland disguised as immigrants or use refugees to stage provocations. Russia, for its part, is warning against Polish attacks on the pretext of a Belarusian provocation. Russian President Putin has said “launching an aggression against Belarus would mean launching an aggression against the Russian Federation. We will respond to that with all the resources available to us.”

That kind of Russian response could conceivably trigger the alliance’s Article 5 obligations.

Experts don’t think either side wants to make the first move, however. Alexander Hill, professor of military history at the University of Calgary, told RS that, based on the limited information available, “it seems highly unlikely that Wagner will be involved in any sort of incursions . . . into Polish territory from (Belarus).”

It wasn't long ago that Anders Rasmussen, former NATO chief and now current adviser to Ukrainian President Zelensky, suggested a "coalition of the willing" to fight on behalf of Ukraine.

"If NATO cannot agree on a clear path forward for Ukraine, there is a clear possibility that some countries individually might take action," he said before the July Vilnius summit. "We know that Poland is very engaged in providing concrete assistance to Ukraine. And I wouldn’t exclude the possibility that Poland would engage even stronger in this context on a national basis and be followed by the Baltic states, maybe including the possibility of troops on the ground."

But Anatol Lieven, director of the Eurasian Program at the Quincy Institute, said Poland would not likely “make the first move, as this would be deeply unpopular with most other NATO countries.”

Geoffrey Roberts, professor emeritus of history at University College Cork, told RS that it is hard to see “Poland doing anything without the full support and go-ahead of the U.S. A Polish move against Belarus would mean war with Russia, and that won’t be Warsaw’s call.”

Given the disincentives for either side to strike first, there is the possibility that the troop movements, military drilling and public statements are intended to be deterrents. We can only hope that a miscommunication, an accident or some other spark doesn’t trigger action among these two armed contingents now aiming guns at one another over miles of border.


google cta
Analysis | Europe
Why SCOTUS won’t deter Trump’s desire to weaponize trade
Top image credit: U.S. President Donald Trump talks to Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Roberts on the day of his speech to a joint session of Congress, in the House Chamber of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., March 4, 2025. (REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque)

Why SCOTUS won’t deter Trump’s desire to weaponize trade

QiOSK

In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court today ruled against the White House on a key economic initiative of the Trump administration, concluding that the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA) does not give the president the right to impose tariffs.

The ruling was not really a surprise; the tone of the questioning by several justices in early November was overwhelmingly skeptical of the administration’s argument, as prediction markets rightly concluded. Given the likelihood of this result, it should also come as no surprise that the Trump administration has already been plotting ways to work around the decision.

keep readingShow less
Trump Iran
Top image credit: Lucas Parker and FotoField via shutterstock.com

No, even a 'small attack' on Iran will lead to war

QiOSK

The Wall Street Journal reports that President Donald Trump is considering a small attack to force Iran to agree to his nuclear deal, and if Tehran refuses, escalate the attacks until Iran either agrees or the regime falls.

Here’s why this won’t work.

keep readingShow less
As Iran strikes loom, US and UK fight over Indian Ocean base
TOP IMAGE CREDIT: An aerial view of Diego Garcia, the Chagossian Island home to one of the U.S. military's 750 worldwide bases. The UK handed sovereignty of the islands back to Mauritius, with the stipulation that the U.S. must be allowed to continue its base's operation on Diego Garcia for the next 99 years. (Kev1ar82 / Shutterstock.com).

As Iran strikes loom, US and UK fight over Indian Ocean base

QiOSK

As the U.S. surges troops to the Middle East, a battle is brewing over a strategically significant American base in the middle of the Indian Ocean.

President Donald Trump announced Wednesday that he would oppose any effort to return the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, arguing that a U.S. base on the island of Diego Garcia may be necessary to “eradicate a potential attack by a highly unstable and dangerous [Iranian] Regime.” The comment came just a day after the State Department reiterated its support for the U.K.’s decision to give up sovereignty over the islands while maintaining a 99-year lease for the base.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.