Poland’s Chief of the General Staff, General Wiesław Kukuła, has warned that a recent wave of cyberattacks and suspected sabotage marks a “pre-war” phase in which an adversary is preparing the conditions for possible future aggression.
Speaking to Polish Radio, Kukuła argued that the pattern of activity targeting Poland’s infrastructure is part of a broader effort to destabilise the country and weaken deterrence. He said the incidents represent “a certain environment” being built to shape the strategic landscape to an attacker’s advantage.
The interview, published by Rzeczpospolita and available here, comes amid rising concern in Warsaw following explosions and track damage on a major railway route linking Warsaw and Lublin, one of the key lines used to move aid to Ukraine. Prime Minister Donald Tusk has described the events as an “unprecedented act of sabotage” and warned that the consequences could have been far more severe.
Kukuła’s comments followed remarks by US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, who recently urged a shift toward wartime-level procurement reforms and warned of “mounting urgency” in the international security environment. Kukuła said the comparison to 1939 or 1981 was apt, and that the outcome depends on whether Poland and its allies invest sufficiently in deterrence.
Pressed on whether Poland now finds itself closer to a pre-war moment or the height of the Cold War, Kukuła said that states are “always in the pre-war period” and that stability depends on managing this phase effectively. He argued that credible resistance, significant defence investment and a clear signal of collective resolve by NATO members are essential to dissuade Russia from further escalation.
On the railway incident itself, Kukuła described it as consistent with hybrid warfare tactics, though he urged caution until the Interior Ministry issues its formal assessment. He said the pattern of recent incidents should be understood as part of a broader threat environment rather than isolated criminal acts.
Time to roll out the Red Carpet again, maybe an Air Display, exchange some gifts ?
The Polish general fella, should go back to telecommunications, which is where he excelled. Russia is NOT looking to go to war with NATO, as he/Russia would lose within 3 months.
Personally speaking, if he were to make that mistake, the Russian ‘issue’ would be fixed/eradicated once and for all.
Grey zone tactics, short of declared war. See how far you can push before anyone pushes back hard enough to dissuade you.
Yes, Putin will try to use grey zone tactics to undermine western belief in liberal democracy. His strategy is to create a level of paranoia, frustration and economic cost that ‘Prevent’ measures start to erode our freedoms. He wants to force us to confront the prospect of an authoritarian society, like Russia – to choose between communism and fascism; because that’s his view of the world. That’s the drama that is playing out now in the US. Authoritarian Russian society remains stable because by and large the population is homogeneous, strongly Orthodox and patriotic – they are loyal to ‘Mother Russia’. Putin believes that western societies cannot rely on their values with the same will power, the same faith in themselves. He will be proved wrong, but it will take a while.
Im inclined to agree,
Offcourse I’m sure NATO is preparing to go to war with Russia and Russia is preparing to go to war with NATO.
Preparing to go to war is what militaries do.
I’m just very confident that NATO’s preparations far exceed Russias.
The only chance Russia had against NATO was cutting off the Baltics. They day Finland joined NATO was the day Russia lost even that slim chance of being able to threaten NATO.
In the event of war now Murmansk would be captured in a few hours and St Petersburg if a few days.
People in Moscow would be hanging Mad Vlad from a lamp post with in the week.
No one in Russia wants this war.
Hmmm…dunno, NATO (including American and British) General Staff may wish to exercise some humility in critiquing Polish general’s strategic and/or tactical assessments. Consider the case of Field Marshal Montgomery and Operation Market Garden. If the Polish general’s counsel had been accepted, the disaster at Arnhem might have been averted, wherein British and Polish paratroopers landed on not one, but TWO, SS Panzer divisions! Personally, if in a command position, would be listening very intently to whatever advice the professional military of the Ukrainians, Poles, Finns and even the Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians, were providing. It is one matter when you believe you are hunting the bear; a markedly different scenario when you realize the bear is probably hunting you.
Arnhem failed before they even took off. NOT because of what a Polish General had said, but because recon photos of tanks at Arnhem were ignored, because the Market Garden plan was deemed ‘too advanced’ to stop.
The Market Garden plan was sound (apart from the use of a single highway) It’s failure was due to poor intelligence, weather, and defective equipment. It could have, and nearly did succeed.
Gentlemen,
Merely stating the obvious, that insular planning methodology can easily yield an unsatisfactory result. Group think can be dangerous IRL scenarios. As Lt.Gen. F. Browning is reputed to have stated in the after action analysis, Market Garden included “a bridge too far.” Incidentally, UK not the only fallible planning organization; US at least equally culpable of faulty analysis and planning in the debacle known as the Battle of the Hurtgen Forest. Hindsight is always 20/20, much more useful to receive relevant critiques prior to operational commitment. Dangerous to assume that the Eastern European professional, senior military staff do not discern the capabilities, tactics and strategy of their probable existential foe.
You would expect any General worth his/her salt to be holding their politicians’ feet to the fire on military spending and war readiness. And so they should. We must be ready in case.
But I just can’t see why Putin would want war with NATO. He’s not mad or suicidal. It would be tougher for NATO than many think, but they would prevail.
Putin will not undertake a full kinetic war with NATO unless it was set against a stage of a sino US war in the pacific… if he had chinas full backing and the US was completely distracted and half of European NATOs naval forces had bugged of to fight an indo pacific war then he may just take a shot.. I think this may be a possible long term risk ( out to around 2035ish and beyond )
Baring that catastrophic event I suspect he will actually focus on political and grey warfare… he knows the best way to get a Baltic state is via destabilising it. If he can mobilise the minority Russian ethnic populations and create a civil war then NATO could struggle to act as there is no NATO mandate for getting involved in a civil war and some may baulk at that. It’s why the JEF is so useful as it sidesteps that issue and allows the northern nations to undertake a swift response to grey zone conflicts and issue from political warfare.
The final route to conflict is the mistake.. Russia simply goes over a red line without realising it has done so.., this may actually be the most likely short term risk because Putin is brazen and thinks Europe is morally weak.
War with NATO using what exactly ? Terrorism and sabotage may viable for Russia a conventional attack on a NATO member seems unimaginable to me (a civilian and non-expert).
Good day Gentlemen! I would suggest Great Britain should rearm as soon as possible before its to late! Putin has learnt from his mistakes in Ukraine.
Why is her HMG not rebuilding and strengthing our forces before its to late?
Best regards Nick
I would say it is mainly political sabotage by Reform, possibly on Russian orders.
After nine years of neglect by the Tories the new Labour Government has identified the right spending priorities.
One, modernise and harden our obsolete infrastructure. Process started. Tick.
Two, start rebuilding our defenses. First year saw a 5% real increase. Keep that up and we reach 3.5% in 2034 which is probably the highest rate we can sustain while rebuilding defense manufacturing. Tick.
To fund this while reducing debt (As high a priority as direct defense spending. Wars cost) they started a program of cuts to our benefit spending. This has stalled mainly because of opposition from Reform. Yes the hard left also opposes it but a, they do not matter electorally and b, their opposition was predictably and had probably been planned for. If you look at the six Labour MPs suspended for opposing the cuts last summer they were all new MPs from the right of the party facing a threat from Reform.
Reform is currently promising more money for defense, with tax cuts, while treating the benefit system as untouchable. The figures do not add up but thanks to the double standards of our media Farage is not facing the grilling Corbyn got in the same position. Most of the talk of left wing bias in the media is from the far right trying to cover up how much power they have over the media in reality.
Russia has a significant demographic problem. Putin has, consequently, revived the ‘Union State’ idea. Belarus and Eastern Ukraine are both now part of that ‘Union State’. Moldova and the Baltic States are next. There are strong pro Russian factions within Serbia, Slovakia and Hungary.
Russia has no designs, geographically, on Western Europe but every satellite state of the USSR is fair game. With such an expansion, Russian political domination of Western Europe would become very real.
The answer lies in a credible conventional deterrent on Continental Europe
The problem is that we no longer possess a credible conventional deterrent.