Poland Signals Exit from Landmine Ban Treaty
Poland is signaling a major shift in its defense posture by initiating steps toward withdrawing from the international treaty banning antipersonnel landmines. The move reflects growing anxiety across Eastern Europe as the war in Ukraine reshapes security calculations and intensifies concerns over potential Russian aggression.
The decision marks one of the most consequential European responses to the deteriorating regional security environment since the invasion of Ukraine. If finalized, Poland’s withdrawal from the Ottawa Convention would represent a pivotal shift in European defense norms, potentially influencing other frontline states along NATO’s eastern flank.
Why Poland Is Reconsidering the Ottawa Convention
The Ottawa Convention, formally known as the Mine Ban Treaty, prohibits the use, stockpiling, production, and transfer of antipersonnel mines. Poland joined the agreement in 2012, committing to dismantle its stockpiles and forgo future deployment.
However, Warsaw now argues that the geopolitical environment has fundamentally changed.
Security Landscape After Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine
Since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Poland has transformed into a strategic hub for military logistics, humanitarian aid, and NATO troop deployments. Sharing borders with both Ukraine and Belarus, Poland occupies a critical position on NATO’s eastern frontier.
Polish officials contend that:
- Russia’s aggressive military posture presents a direct and long-term threat.
- Belarus’ alignment with Moscow adds instability along Poland’s northeastern border.
- The extensive use of landmines in Ukraine demonstrates their continued relevance in modern warfare.
The Polish government argues that maintaining all available defensive options is essential for deterrence.
The Strategic Argument: Deterrence Over Doctrine
Poland’s leadership frames the withdrawal as a pragmatic security decision rather than a rejection of humanitarian principles.
Landmines in Modern Conflict
The war in Ukraine has demonstrated that antipersonnel mines remain widely used despite international bans. Large swathes of Ukrainian territory are contaminated, underscoring both the military utility and humanitarian cost of such weapons.
From a strategic standpoint, Poland’s military planners view landmines as:
- A cost-effective force multiplier
- A tool to slow or channel advancing enemy troops
- A mechanism to protect fortified border zones
- A deterrent against rapid mechanized incursions
Officials argue that in the event of a large-scale conventional attack, especially from heavily mechanized Russian forces, landmines could significantly complicate enemy movements.
NATO Context: Will Others Follow?
Poland is not alone in reassessing its defense doctrine. Several NATO member states bordering Russia have intensified military preparations since 2022. The Baltic states—Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania—have openly debated similar measures.
However, withdrawing from the Ottawa Convention would be a bold move within NATO, where many Western European members remain firmly committed to the treaty.
Eastern vs. Western Security Perspectives
The divergence in views highlights a growing East-West divide within Europe:
- Western European states emphasize humanitarian norms and arms control frameworks.
- Eastern frontline states prioritize deterrence and territorial defense.
For countries closest to Russia, the perceived immediacy of the threat outweighs longstanding disarmament commitments.
Poland’s position underscores a broader trend: security realism is increasingly shaping defense policy across Central and Eastern Europe.
Legal and Political Implications of Withdrawal
Exiting the Ottawa Convention is a formal legal process requiring notification and a waiting period before withdrawal becomes effective. The decision must also pass through domestic political channels.
Domestic Political Support
In Poland, defense policy enjoys broad bipartisan backing amid heightened security concerns. While some opposition voices caution against undermining humanitarian norms, the prevailing political consensus favors strengthening national defense capabilities.
Public opinion has also shifted significantly since 2022, with increased support for:
- Higher defense spending
- Expanded military recruitment
- Enhanced border fortifications
- Closer cooperation with NATO forces
Poland already allocates more than 4% of its GDP to defense—one of the highest proportions in NATO.
Humanitarian Concerns and Global Reaction
The Ottawa Convention was established to address the devastating civilian impact of landmines, which often remain active decades after conflicts end. Humanitarian organizations argue that renewed use would:
- Increase civilian casualties
- Complicate post-war reconstruction
- Hinder agricultural and economic recovery
- Create long-term environmental hazards
Poland insists that any potential use would comply with international humanitarian law and focus strictly on defensive military needs.
Still, the move may attract criticism from human rights groups and certain European partners committed to arms control regimes.
The Russia Factor: Strategic Calculations
Poland’s calculus is inseparable from its assessment of Russia’s long-term intentions.
Military Buildup Along NATO’s Border
Russia’s military presence in Kaliningrad and Belarus has heightened Polish concerns. Kaliningrad, a heavily militarized Russian exclave bordering Poland and Lithuania, hosts advanced missile systems and substantial troop deployments.
Poland views the possibility of hybrid or conventional operations targeting NATO territory as a credible risk.
Key concerns include:
- Rapid armored advances across flat terrain
- Hybrid tactics involving border destabilization
- Escalation scenarios extending beyond Ukraine
In this context, landmines are seen not as offensive tools but as part of a layered defensive strategy.
European Security Architecture Under Strain
Poland’s announcement reflects a broader transformation in European defense thinking.
For decades, European security policy emphasized:
- Arms control
- Confidence-building measures
- Disarmament treaties
- Cooperative security frameworks
The invasion of Ukraine shattered many assumptions underpinning that model. Now, military readiness and deterrence dominate policy discussions.
A Shift Toward Hard Power
Across Europe:
- Defense budgets are rising.
- Ammunition production is increasing.
- Conscription debates are resurfacing.
- Border defenses are expanding.
Poland’s reconsideration of the Ottawa Convention symbolizes this pivot from idealistic post-Cold War frameworks to hard-power realism.
Military Modernization and Defense Expansion
Poland has embarked on one of the most ambitious military modernization programs in Europe.
Recent initiatives include:
- Acquisition of advanced air defense systems
- Procurement of modern main battle tanks
- Expansion of artillery and rocket capabilities
- Growth of active-duty personnel
The potential reintroduction of antipersonnel mines would complement these efforts, particularly in territorial defense planning.
Poland’s doctrine increasingly focuses on denying adversaries rapid breakthroughs, buying time for NATO reinforcements to arrive.
Risks of Escalation and Diplomatic Fallout
Despite the strategic rationale, risks remain.
Potential Diplomatic Consequences
- Strained relations with treaty-supporting allies
- Increased criticism from humanitarian organizations
- Possible reputational costs in global arms-control forums
Poland must balance its security imperatives against its commitment to international norms.
There is also the risk that such a move could encourage similar withdrawals elsewhere, potentially weakening global non-proliferation and disarmament efforts.
The Broader Debate: Security vs. Humanitarian Norms
The controversy highlights a fundamental tension in international security policy:
- Should states prioritize absolute adherence to arms-control treaties?
- Or should evolving threats justify revisiting past commitments?
Poland’s position suggests that treaties negotiated under different geopolitical conditions may no longer align with current security realities.
Critics argue that undermining established norms could erode decades of humanitarian progress. Supporters counter that deterrence failure would have far greater human costs.
What Happens Next?
The withdrawal process, if formally initiated, would take several months to complete. During that time:
- Parliamentary approval would likely be required.
- NATO consultations could intensify.
- Diplomatic negotiations might attempt compromise solutions.
Poland may also explore technological alternatives, such as smart defensive systems, to mitigate humanitarian concerns while enhancing deterrence.
A Defining Moment for European Defense Policy
Poland’s consideration of leaving the Ottawa Convention is more than a legal maneuver—it is a signal of Europe’s evolving security doctrine.
The war in Ukraine has fundamentally reshaped threat perceptions. For frontline states, the calculus now centers on deterrence, preparedness, and resilience.
Whether or not Poland ultimately exits the treaty, the debate itself reflects a broader transformation in European defense thinking—one that prioritizes survival and sovereignty in an increasingly volatile geopolitical environment.
As tensions with Russia persist and NATO reinforces its eastern flank, Poland’s decision may become a defining moment in the next chapter of European security policy.
