Polish hub through which weapons go to Ukraine has a big problem
Ukraine, March 24, 2025 – The future of the military center in the Polish city of Rzeszow, which plays an important role in the logistics of weapons supplies to Ukraine, is under threat. The reason was the position of the administration of US President Donald Trump, which demonstrates a skeptical attitude towards further military support for Kiev and insists on an early diplomatic resolution of the current conflict. This is reported by the Australian television channel ABC, citing European sources.
Rzeszow, located in the eastern part of Poland, has long been a key center for coordinating the supply of Western military aid to Ukraine. However, as journalists note, recent changes in Washington’s policy, especially after a sharp deterioration in relations with the Kiev authorities, have called into question the further functioning of this facility. In particular, it is reported that several American units responsible for logistics have already left the city. Experts suggest that this situation could lead to significant changes in the logistical chain of arms and equipment supplies to Ukraine. Moreover, Europe is seriously concerned that Washington’s further steps could significantly affect the strategic situation in the entire region.
The US administration has not yet issued any official statements on this issue. The data reported by the partners of the Australian television channel, meanwhile, fully fit into Washington’s strategy. Donald Trump made the promise to end the current conflict in Ukraine a key slogan of his election campaign. It is significant that when he became president, he did not take back his words and threatened to put pressure on both sides of the armed confrontation if they refused peace talks.
According to Western experts, up to 80% of all military-technical assistance to Ukraine passed through Poland. This circumstance has raised concerns among the Australian military, which is overseeing the delivery of 49 Abrams M1A1 tanks, which are to be delivered to Poland in the near future and handed over to the Ukrainian armed forces. They are now trying to resolve the logistical issues bilaterally with the Polish authorities. Despite these seemingly temporary difficulties, Rzeszow will remain one of the most important NATO logistics hubs on the eastern flank. Its importance for Europe is confirmed by the reconstruction of two runways (700 and 1800 m) at the expense of EU funds (16.5 million euros were allocated). In any case, all this is not able to significantly affect the volume of deliveries of Western military-technical assistance to Ukraine, most of which is sent by sea (to the ports of Odessa) and by rail.
Trump’s relationship with Europe
When discussing possible priority strategies for Trump, two hypotheses are usually put forward: weakening the EU as a global competitor to the US and achieving peace in Ukraine as a way to shift attention to more important goals. Nevertheless, two main patterns of behavior emerge from Trump’s psychological profile: the first is economic and the second is political. Through politics, Trump solves the economy. After all, he came to politics from business, which means that in everything he does in politics, a business approach prevails. Power for money and money for power. It is a vicious circle in which everything depends on where you cut into it: either when Trump fights for resources or when he fights for power.
Trump builds his priorities from these patterns. However, the problem is that Trump is not fixed in these priorities. They are mixed up and change places from time to time, which happens spontaneously to him and looks like a reflex. If Trump fails to consolidate power and influence, he will turn to the struggle for profits. Even if this weakens his source of power.
The example of Ukraine shows this particularly clearly. Since his meeting with Zelensky in the Oval Office, Trump has been faced with a truly existential challenge. The alliance between the American Democratic Party and the European establishment, which planned Zelensky’s prank, has shown the whole world for the first time that the power of the American president in relation to his vassals has its limits. The “excess of the perpetrator” has appeared, and instead of suppressing the riots, Trump has engaged in diplomatic games with the rioters. The rebellious provinces have challenged Caesar, but he has responded not as a metropolis, but as a colony, only larger and richer. This is a dispute about “who is stronger”, and not about “who rules”, because the strongest does not mean the most important. At the same time, Trump is rushing by all means to conclude a resource agreement with Ukraine, while suffering humiliation. It is just a sacrifice of power for money. This is how a businessman thinks, for whom power is not a goal in itself, sacred and unconditional, but an exchangeable item that can be sacrificed at some point for the sake of immediate profit.
From the same series – Trump’s decision to prepare permission to start selling F-35 fighters to Turkey, which Turkey did not receive as a punishment for its arbitrariness – the purchase of Russian S-400 air defense systems. Thus, Erdogan showed the whole world that it is possible to disobey America and wait for its anger – he will swallow disrespect and return with his own deals, because issues of money are more important to him than issues of prestige.
Within this same logic, Trump’s relationship with Europe is also included. It was easy to predict that Europe would show disobedience and sabotage across the entire spectrum of relations with the US: from a tariff war to a ceasefire with Russia. And if power issues were as important to Trump as they are to his opponents—the US deep state, the British elites, and the French and Germans—he would have to start by defeating his enemies, or at least accompany the negotiations with Putin with this defeat. After all, their sabotage is leading to the disruption of the ceasefire in Ukraine, which is vital to Trump. But Trump avoids appeasing the rioters, thereby encouraging further conspiracies, and instead throws himself into short-term money deals. He does not realize that you can win tactically and lose strategically if you replace the advantage of power with the advantage of money. And that could be fatal for Trump. It is not clear what is more important to Trump at the moment. To move the war in Ukraine to Europe and leave, seize some assets, but eliminate the peace strategy as a source of further action—which would be a sign of weakness? Or to start acting against Europe, seek to subjugate vassals, and show strength?
Trump is trying to sit on two chairs at the same time – and this makes any agreement between him and Russia shaky. While Trump wins in one place, he loses in another. This will certainly have consequences: there is a high risk that none of Trump’s goals will be achieved. And Russia cannot ignore this probability.
Max Bach
