Poland offers Washington financial incentives as talks advance on a permanent U.S. military base

Poland is offering to pay $15,000 a year for each U.S. soldier stationed on its territory and cover infrastructure costs, as Warsaw and Washington move closer to an agreement on creating a permanent U.S. military base, a senior Polish defense official told Radio Free Europe (RFE).

Polish Deputy Defense Minister Paweł Zalewski said in an interview with Radio Free Europe on September 25 that negotiations with the Pentagon are now focused on how to implement the plan, including troops, capabilities and potential locations. “We are discussing with the Pentagon various variants of implementing the decision,” Zalewski said.

While declining to say which U.S. units could be deployed or where, Zalewski revealed new details of Poland’s offer to Washington. “We are offering very special conditions for U.S. troops,” he said. “We will cover infrastructure costs. We are also covering the cost of each U.S. soldier stationed in Poland at $15,000 a year.” Asked who would pay, Zalewski answered: “Paid by Polish taxpayers.”

The offer highlights Warsaw’s determination to secure a permanent U.S. military presence, as the Pentagon reviews the deployment of American forces across Europe. U.S. President Donald Trump said on September 17 that progress was being made toward creating a U.S. Army base in Poland and that its location could be announced soon. The United States already has thousands of troops in Poland, mostly deployed on rotation, and the country has become an important hub for NATO operations along the alliance’s eastern flank.

Zalewski said details of any permanent deployment are being negotiated within Washington’s broader review of its military posture in Europe. “We are discussing various variants, different types of troops, capabilities and locations,” he said, adding Warsaw expects more clarity once the review process is complete. The Pentagon did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

For Warsaw, the importance of a permanent base goes beyond the number of troops stationed there. “Permanent bases create permanent commitment,” Zalewski said, adding such a deployment would be less dependent on changes in the political or military environment, while simultaneously sending a direct signal to Moscow. An attack on Poland, he said, would risk putting Russian forces in direct conflict with U.S. troops. “This is a very important and urgent message to President [Vladimir] Putin that the U.S. has strategic interests in Poland and that an attack on Poland would be an attack on U.S. armed forces in Poland,” Zalewski said.

He also argued the permanent U.S. presence should not be seen simply as a favor Washington is doing Warsaw. “This permanent base is not the result of some kind of altruism,” he said, but rather reflects “American interests”. Poland has rapidly expanded its military and invested heavily in U.S. weapons systems. The two countries have also deepened energy ties, including cooperation with U.S. companies on Poland’s first nuclear power plant.

Security experts said a permanent base would strengthen Washington’s commitment to NATO’s eastern flank, but warned its significance would partly depend on what happens to U.S. forces in other European countries. “A permanent U.S. base in Poland would be an important signal of American commitment to NATO’s eastern flank, especially as Washington reviews its broader military posture in Europe,” David Cattler, former NATO assistant secretary general for intelligence and security, told Radio Free Europe. But Cattler, now a senior fellow at the Center for European Policy and Analysis, said allies would watch the broader outcome of the U.S. review. “Allies will judge the whole picture: which forces and capabilities will remain, how quickly they can reinforce Poland and the Baltic states and whether they can operate together effectively,” he said. “A base would strengthen deterrence if it adds real capabilities to the eastern flank. It would do much less to reassure allies if accompanied by significant reductions of the U.S. presence elsewhere in Europe.”

Matthew Boyse, senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and former U.S. deputy assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, said the negotiations reflect Poland’s growing role in NATO. “These base talks show Poland’s continued value as a great NATO ally,” Boyse told Radio Free Europe. Poland has significantly increased defense spending in recent years and become one of NATO’s top military spenders relative to the size of its economy. “Instead of complaining about ‘reliability’, Poland is doing everything it can,” Boyse said. “The administration sees and appreciates this.”

Charles Kupchan, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, said the prospect of a permanent base would be welcomed in countries closest to Russia, but warned uncertainty remains about Washington’s broader approach to Europe. “The prospect of a permanent U.S. base in Poland is good news for Poles and others along NATO’s eastern flank, especially amid growing concerns about the threat Russia poses,” Kupchan told Radio Free Europe. “However, this is still a period of uncertainty for NATO,” he said, referring to the sometimes-tense relationship between Trump and allies and the Pentagon review, which could reduce the U.S. presence in other European countries.

Warsaw’s push for a permanent U.S. presence comes as Russia appears increasingly willing to take risks against NATO members. “Russia’s willingness to accept greater risk is evident and Russia is ready to escalate the situation,” Zalewski said. He referred to recent incidents Poland has linked to Russia, including airspace violations and suspected acts of sabotage, saying they illustrate the pressure facing countries on NATO’s eastern flank. Poland, he said, is responding both through its alliance with the U.S. and through NATO. For Warsaw, a permanent U.S. base would add another layer to this deterrence, making clear that any military confrontation involving Poland could immediately involve U.S. forces as well. “Permanent bases create permanent commitment,” Zalewski said.