POLISH NON-PAPER ON BALTIC CONTINGENCY PLANNING

S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 02 USNATO 000011 NOFORN SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/11/2020 TAGS: PREL MCAP MARR NATO PL EN LH LG GM SUBJECT: POLISH NON-PAPER ON BALTIC CONTINGENCY PLANNING Classified By: Ambassador Ivo Daalder. Reasons: 1.4 (b) and (d). ¶1. (U) This is a request for guidance. See para 8. ¶2. (S) SUMMARY: On January 11, Polish Permanent Representative Winid delivered a non-paper reflecting Warsaw's views on the U.S./German proposal to revise the NATO contingency plan for the defense/reinforcement of Poland to also include the defense of the Baltic states. He said that Warsaw had agreed to the proposal, but wanted U.S. support for Polish ideas on how to implement the proposal in order to avoid unnecessary delays in the Poland-specific portions of the plan. Ambassador Daalder promised to raise the Polish ideas with SACEUR and with Washington. The Polish deputy assured us after the meeting that Poland would approve expansion of the plan at the January 20th meeting of the NATO Military Committee. END SUMMARY. ¶3. (S) On January 11, Polish Permanent Representative Winid delivered a non-paper (see para 9 below) to Ambassador Daalder reflecting Warsaw's views on the U.S./German proposal to revise the NATO contingency plan for the defense/reinforcement of Poland (EAGLE GUARDIAN) to also include defense of the Baltic states. He said that the non-paper was only being distributed to Daalder and to German PermRep Brandenburg, although the missions of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania would also be briefed on its contents. ¶4. (S) Winid said that Poland--with his encouragement--had agreed to the proposal to revise EAGLE GUARDIAN, but that it had some views and questions about the technical implementation of the revision. Winid explained that Warsaw saw three "layers" of approval for the plan (initial endorsement by SACEUR, formal approval by the NATO Military Committee, and then promulgation by SACEUR) and wanted to creatively use these layers to avoid any perception that the Poland-specific part of the plan was being delayed. He said that Poland was seeking U.S. support to have SACEUR "endorse" the Polish portion of the plan as soon as it was ready, but stressed that after this endorsement the plan could be put on the shelf until the Baltic portion of the plan had been concluded, at which point the entire document could go to the Military Committee for formal approval. ¶5. (S) Similarly, Winid said that Poland was seeking U.S. support for having SACEUR ask JFC Brunssum to informally begin preparing the necessary supporting plan for the Poland-specific portion of EAGLE Guardian. ¶6. (S) Ambassador Daalder promised to discuss the Polish requests with SACEUR, as well as with Washington. ¶7. (S/NF) COMMENT: Winid was obviously taking great pains to be as positive about the revision of EAGLE GUARDIAN as possible. After raising the two issues noted above, he cut off his own DCM when the DCM tried to interject to raise additional points. At the same time, Warsaw clearly wants to mitigate the extent to which "its" plan will be delayed by the revision. While we intend to double-check the technical feasibility of the Polish requests, the requests appear reasonable and constructive. END COMMENT ¶8. (S/NF) RFG: Unless otherwise directed we intend to inform Winid that we will support the Polish requests, assuming our checks determine that they are technically feasible. ¶9. (S/REL POLAND) The full text of the Polish non-paper is reproduced below: BEGIN TEXT CLOSE HOLD Art. 5: Contingency Planning ) Poland's position Contingency planning for a reinforcement of relevant parts of NATO territory during crisis remains (sic) indispensable element of the Alliance's art. 5 preparedness. Poland believes that contingency plans should reflect the changed USNATO 00000011 002 OF 002 geographic scope of the Washington Treaty area, should be regularly updated, appropriately exercised and underpinned by other measures, including adequate capability packages. Poland has constantly supported the development of contingency planning for the defence of the Baltic States. Such planning would provide them with necessary strategic reassurance, showing full Alliance solidarity for any possible art. 5 situation emerging in this region. We acknowledge arguments in favour of the assumption that extending existing contingency plans to the Baltic States would strengthen the Contingency Plan for the reinforcement of Poland during crisis. Poland believes that current update of Contingency Plan EAGLE GUARDIAN provides an opportunity to address the defence requirements of the Baltic States. However, a possible expansion of EAGLE GUARDIAN has to be conducted in a careful manner in order to avoid derailing the whole process or causing unnecessary delays. Consequently, Poland wishes to propose the following course of action: - Current update of EAGLE GUARDIAN should be completed according to envisaged time-frame. The plan will be endorsed by SACEUR in February and passed to the Military Committee. - After endorsement by SACEUR, JFC Brunssum should start working on development of the supporting plan, CONSTANT GUARDIAN, without any further delay. Simultaneously, SHAPE will begin planning for exercising EAGLE GUARDIAN with the aim of preparing first command post exercise as soon as possible. - In the Military Committee a consensus will be forged to expand EAGLE GUARDIAN to include the Baltic States. This might be done in a form of an additional branch plan or extended option of EAGLE GUARDIAN. In any case, expanded EAGLE GUARDIAN should include two distinct elements: the current option (that does not need to be reopened) and the extended option. - Additional planning for the Baltic States will be developed by SHAPE as a matter of priority allowing prompt formal approval of expanded EAGLE GUARDIAN. Poland stands ready to actively support this process. Poland believes that proposed steps do not require any political debate. Consensus on them can be achieved through informal consultations. We hope that the United States would take a leading role in engaging NATO Military Authorities and Allies to ensure support for expansion of EAGLE Guardian. Contingency planning has to remain internal, strictly classified NATO process and should not be a part of public statements. END TEXT DAALDER