U.S. President Donald Trump warned late Saturday that the United States will “obliterate” energy plants in Iran if the government doesn’t fully open the Strait of Hormuz, giving the country a 48-hour deadline to comply. “If Iran doesn’t fully open, without threat, the Strait of Hormuz, within 48 hours from this exact point in time, the United States of America will hit and obliterate their various power plants, starting with the biggest one first,” Trump said in a post on Trust Social. Iran warned in reply that any strike on its energy facilities would prompt attacks on U.S. and Israeli energy and infrastructure facilities — specifically information technology and desalination operations — in the region, the Associated Press reported, citing a statement by an Iranian military spokesperson carried by state media and semiofficial outlets. The warnings of escalation in the Mideast conflict come after the British government on Saturday confirmed that Tehran launched an unsuccessful attack on Diego Garcia, a joint U.S.-U.K. military base in the Indian Ocean. Media reports said Iran fired two ballistic missiles at the base but missed. Meanwhile, Israel claimed that Iran has missiles with a range of about 4,000 kilometers, capable of hitting London, Paris and Berlin. “The Iranian terrorist regime poses a global threat. Now, with missiles that can reach London, Paris or Berlin,” the Israel Defense Forces said in a post on X. Iran’s targeting of the base on Diego Garcia occurred before Britain on Friday confirmed that U.S. use of its bases includes defensive operations against “missile sites and capabilities being used to attack ships in the Strait of Hormuz,” a permission that includes the Indian Ocean island.

Switzerland said it won’t allow weapons exports to the U.S. as long as Washington is involved in its ongoing military campaign against Iran. The Swiss government said on Friday that it will not sign off on any new licenses for the export of war materiel to countries involved in the conflict, citing Switzerland’s commitment to neutrality. Switzerland said that it has not issued new export licenses to send weapons to the U.S. since the U.S. and Israel launched strikes on Tehran on Feb. 28. Existing licenses to export weapons to the U.S. can continue as they are not relevant “to the war at present,” but they will be kept under review in case they conflict with Swiss neutrality laws, it said. Exports of other dual-use and military goods, and other goods affected by sanctions against Iran, will also be kept under review, it added. Switzerland has not granted weapons export licenses for Israel or Iran for a “number of years,” the government said.

Moscow proposed a quid pro quo to the U.S. under which the Kremlin would stop sharing intelligence information with Iran, such as the precise coordinates of U.S. military assets in the Middle East, if Washington ceased supplying Ukraine with intel about Russia. Two people familiar with the U.S.-Russia negotiations said that such a proposal was made by Russian envoy Kirill Dmitriev to Trump administration envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner during their meeting last week in Miami. The U.S. rejected the proposal, the people added. They, like all other officials cited in this article, were granted anonymity due to the sensitivity of the discussions. Nevertheless, the sheer existence of such a proposal has sparked concern among European diplomats, who worry Moscow is trying to drive a wedge between Europe and the U.S. at a critical moment for transatlantic relations. U.S. President Donald Trump has voiced anger over the refusal of allies to send warships in the Strait of Hormuz. On Friday, he lambasted his NATO allies as “COWARDS“ and said: “we will REMEMBER!” The White House declined to comment. The Russian Embassy in Washington did not respond to a request for comment. One EU diplomat called the Russian proposal “outrageous.” The suggested deal is likely to fuel growing suspicions in Europe that the Witkoff-Dmitriev meetings are not delivering concrete progress toward a peace agreement in Ukraine, but are instead seen by Moscow as a chance to lure Washington into a deal between the two powers that leaves Europe on the sidelines. On Thursday, the Kremlin said that the U.S.-mediated Ukraine peace talks were “on hold.” Russia has made various proposals about Iran to the U.S., which has rejected them all, another person familiar with the discussions said. This person said the U.S. also rejected a proposal to move Iran’s enriched uranium to Russia, which was first reported by Axios. Russia has expanded ‌intelligence-sharing and military cooperation with Iran since the war started, a person briefed on the intelligence said. The Wall Street Journal first reported the increase and wrote that Moscow is providing satellite ⁠imagery and drone technology to help Tehran target U.S. forces in the region. The Kremlin called that report  “fake news.” Trump hinted at a link between the intelligence-sharing with Iran and Ukraine during a recent interview with Fox News, saying that Russian President Vladimir Putin “might be helping them [Iran] a little bit, yeah, I guess, and he probably thinks we’re helping Ukraine, right?” The U.S. continues to share intelligence with Ukraine, even as it has reduced other support. Washington briefly paused the exchanges last year after a disastrous Oval Office meeting between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. That abrupt halt to U.S. intelligence sharing triggered a chaotic scramble among allies and exposed deep tensions in the partnership with Kyiv. One European diplomat sought to downplay the risk of the Russian proposal, noting that French President Emmanuel Macron had said in January that “two-thirds” of military intelligence for Ukraine is now provided by France. Still, intelligence-sharing remains a last crucial pillar of American support for Ukraine after the Trump administration stopped most of its financial and military aid for Kyiv last year. Washington is still delivering weapons to Ukraine but under a NATO-led program where allies pay the U.S. for arms. Deliveries of critical air defense munitions, however, are under strain amid the U.S.-Israel war with Iran.  Most recently, the Trump administration decided to ease sanctions on Russian oil to alleviate pressure on oil markets, causing strong concern and criticism from  European leaders like German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. Hans von der Burchard reported from Berlin, Felicia Schwartz and Diana Nerozzi from Washington and Jacopo Barigazzi from Brussels.

WARSAW — Poland’s MAGA-aligned President Karol Nawrocki is in a war for control of the country with pro-EU Prime Minister Donald Tusk. The sharp end of the conflict concerns the European Union’s €150 billion Security Action For Europe program — an EU effort (in part negotiated by the Polish government) to provide cheap loans to finance arms purchases by member countries. Nawrocki last week vetoed a law enabling the allocation of a €44 billion loan to Poland, although the government insists it will still be able to get the cash. But SAFE is just one front in a wide-ranging tussle. Tusk and Nawrocki are sparring over everything from the EU’s social media law to the government’s efforts to restore rule of law, ambassadorial nominations, whether to swear in judges and even the EU’s Emissions Trading System. Both sides are painting the struggle in existential terms as they gear up for next year’s crucial parliamentary election. For Nawrocki and his allies in the nationalist Law and Justice (PiS) party, the EU loan is a misguided effort that would make an independent Poland subservient to Brussels, and especially Berlin, while fraying ties with the U.S. “NO TO THE LOSS OF SOVEREIGNTY,” Jacek Saryusz-Wolski, a member of the European Parliament and one of Nawrocki’s top foreign policy advisers, wrote on X. Tusk is warning that the effort to derail the SAFE loan will inexorably lead to a Polexit — a U.K.-style Polish withdrawal from the EU. Polish MEP Jacek Saryusz-Wolski attends a session of the European Parliament on November 27, 2019 in Strasbourg, France. | Thierry Monasse/Getty Images “I think there is a clearly anti-European narrative promoted by the president’s camp and PiS. It’s potentially very dangerous, because we see in this rhetoric an attempt to cast the European Union as an enemy and to blame it for the challenges Poland faces,” Finance Minister Andrzej Domański told POLITICO, calling the president’s approach “extremely irresponsible and contrary to Poland’s national interest.” SUSPICIOUS LOANS SAFE is a flashpoint because Poland’s political divisions are as deep as in Donald Trump’s America. Both sides have their own media ecosystems and are engaged in a winner-takes-all conflict, with social contacts between ordinary people fraying over political differences. In the rest of the EU, SAFE was not controversial. So far 19 EU countries have signed up, and even conservative leaders like Italy’s Giorgia Meloni and Hungary’s Viktor Orbán are on board. While some countries have managed to rub along with power-sharing between presidents and prime ministers from different political groupings, it’s proving very difficult in Poland. A protester holds a trash bin saying “Safe.” Polish opposition groups protest outside the Presidential Palace in Warsaw, Poland, on February 21, 2026. | Marek Antoni Iwaczuk/NurPhoto via Getty Images The core promise Tusk made when he led his coalition to victory in the 2023 parliamentary election was to roll back many of the changes made during the previous eight years under PiS governments. Those governments had clashed with the EU over efforts to bring the judicial system under tighter political control and saw relations with key partners like Germany and France go sour, while top officials were accused by Tusk of misusing public funds. But Tusk’s program set him up for immediate clashes with pro-PiS President Andrzej Duda. The standoff grew even worse after Duda was replaced by the far tougher Nawrocki last year. Now Nawrocki is trying to expand the limited powers of the presidency, while Tusk is trying to hem him in. The prize is next year’s parliamentary election. POLITICO’s Poll of Polls shows Tusk’s Civic Coalition is comfortably ahead with the support of 34 percent of voters, while PiS trails at 26 percent. However, the smaller parties that make up Tusk’s coalition aren’t doing well and he’d be unlikely to form the next government. Just behind PiS are two far-right parties, the libertarian Confederation at 13 percent and the antisemitic Confederation of the Polish Crown with 8 percent. However, those parties are in deep conflict with PiS, and it’s unclear if they’d be able to form a stable coalition. That’s forcing PiS to scramble to appeal to conservative voters, making Nawrocki’s SAFE veto a key political move. A survey out this week by the Ibris organization found that 56.9 percent of those polled were opposed to Nawrocki’s SAFE veto while 33.8 percent supported it. While many voters are leery of the effort to block SAFE, the right-wing Republika television denounced the loan program with comments like: “HERR DONALD FÜR DEUTSCHLAND,” and, “A gang of traitors and Volksdeutsches is trying to saddle Poles with billions of euros in debt to Germany” — playing to anti-German stereotypes common among the Polish right. Berlin isn’t taking a SAFE loan as it can borrow more cheaply on its own. Poland’s new President Karol Nawrocki (right) and his predecessor Andrzej Duda wave as Nawrocki takes over the Presidential Palace on August 6, 2025 in Warsaw. | Sergei Gapon/AFP via Getty Images “I understand that blocking the law on realizing SAFE investments is an internal battle among the extreme right,” said Deputy Defense Minister Paweł Zalewski, adding that PiS had supported SAFE until it saw the rising danger from rival far-right parties. “It’s a battle for the anti-EU electorate. The danger is real.” PLAYING THE POLEXIT CARD Tusk is hoping to capitalize on the situation by warning of the danger of a Polexit. EU membership is still overwhelmingly popular in Poland — which has for years been one of the bloc’s best-performing economies. However, support is slowly eroding. A CBOS poll last month found that 82 percent of Poles support being in the EU, down from 92 percent in 2002; among conservative voters, only two-thirds back the bloc. Nawrocki and PiS insist they aren’t in favor of quitting the EU, just reshaping the bloc to make it more of a loose grouping of sovereign nation states. That aligns with the thinking of the U.S. administration, which strongly supports Nawrocki. “Tusk’s Polexit claim is utter nonsense and yet another attempt to scare voters for electoral gain — a campaign tactic, plain and simple,” Saryusz-Wolski told POLITICO. “PiS and the president support Poland’s membership of the EU, but with a sovereign role and on the basis of the EU Treaties — without competence creep or the usurpation of powers not granted to the EU, aimed at building a centralized European superstate in place of nation states,” Saryusz-Wolski said. But years of skepticism about the value of the EU can also build momentum to quit — as happened in the U.K. “It may be that they introduce this topic into public circulation somewhat cynically, that is, looking at it exclusively from the point of view of their own political interests, rather than because they genuinely want Polexit,” said Anna Mierzyńska, a disinformation expert. “But the consequences of doing so may be such that they will not be able to control it, and that Polexit might start defining things more broadly so that the 2027 campaign is all about whether you are for the EU or against it,” Mierzyńska added. Bartosz Brzeziński contributed to this report.

LONDON — U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has stressed since the start of the U.S. and Israeli-led war in Iran that Britain will only contribute to defensive operations, including limiting the U.S. use of British airbases, saying: “We have learned the lessons of Iraq.” The problem as the war continues into its third week is that Starmer is now getting low marks from key allies in the Gulf for how he’s applied those lessons, according to senior military figures and diplomats who spoke to POLITICO. That has left London scrambling to deploy sufficient resources and show that it can provide adequate defensive support in the region as well as protect British assets, including its sovereign bases in Cyprus.  Three people familiar with operational and planning strategies, granted anonymity to speak frankly about sensitive matters, said the U.K. had bungled defensive decision-making and failed to send the necessary resources to the area at the time of the first U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran.   Chief of the Defense Staff Richard Knighton has taken flak over delays in deploying HMS Dragon, a guided missile destroyer, to the Mediterranean for more than a week after the war started. But one former military commander familiar with conversations in government about the U.K. response said the greater fault lay in a risk-averse stance from Starmer as well as his National Security Adviser Jonathan Powell and Defense Secretary John Healey, whose fears over a domestic backlash to being embroiled in a conflict in the Middle East hobbled the U.K.’s thinking about how to support allies in the Gulf. “No. 10 was determined to downplay any risk or perception of us getting involved and now the government is playing catch-up,” the former commander said. “And that means we are showing up late.” Others POLITICO spoke with said the failure to deploy maritime assets — especially in minesweeper expertise and air defense — has shaken states ranging from Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates with longstanding close defense ties to the U.K. This perceived lapse has left Britain on the back foot both in its deployment of assets and in diplomatic relations with partners, visible in the U.K.’s concerted effort last week to demonstrate support for Gulf countries facing retaliatory strikes from Iran, as Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper travelled to Saudi Arabia. The prime minister and defense secretary have highlighted extra resources deployed to the region since widespread unrest erupted in Iran at the start of the year, including fighter jets, air defense missiles and radar systems.  The prime minister and defense secretary have highlighted extra resources deployed to the region since widespread unrest erupted in Iran at the start of the year, including fighter jets, air defense missiles and radar systems. And there are mounting signs that Starmer and Healey have understood the extent of sore feelings among allies and are seeking to assuage any tensions with Gulf allies as well as with the U.S.  In a social post on Sunday, the Ministry of Defense highlighted U.K. Typhoon and F-35 jets flying over Bahrain for the first time in “defense of British interests” and Britain’s role in air protection over the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Cyprus. Christian Turner, Britain’s ambassador to Washington, also issued a video over the weekend noting that British pilots have spent “over 300 hours in the skies above the Middle East shooting down Iranian drones and missiles” as well as drawing attention to the U.S. use of U.K. bases and sharing of intelligence.  “We acted early to protect British people and British interests and to support our allies across the region,” a Ministry of Defense spokesperson said, specifically noting defense patrols with extra Typhoons in Qatar to support that country as well as Bahrain and the UAE. “Those preparations made a real difference, enabling our troops to conduct defensive operations from Day One.” “We acted early to protect British people and British interests and to support our allies across the region,” a Ministry of Defense spokesperson said, specifically noting defense patrols with extra Typhoons in Qatar to support that country as well as Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates. “Those preparations made a real difference, enabling our troops to conduct defensive operations from Day One.” A Downing Street spokesperson declined to comment further, referring inquiries to the Ministry of Defense.  But a government official, granted anonymity as they were not authorized to speak on the record, insisted Starmer and Healey had “followed all military recommendations presented to them throughout the build-up” and hit out at “armchair generals who aren’t seeing the intelligence and information that our military see every day.” Yet a person with knowledge of deployment decisions said that close allies of the U.K. were “deeply disappointed” by the lack of preparation. “There had been knowledge of the preparations for U.S. action on Iran on a large scale from around Christmas and the U.K. had visibility on that,” this person said. “But the response was wholly inadequate.” If a full array of options had been considered, according to this person, a submarine presence from the Royal Navy might have been sent to the region as a deterrent under the terms of Operation Kipion, a long-standing umbrella for British security, intelligence gathering and deterrence to the Gulf. One area of concern has been the decommissioning of ships, some of which were moved for servicing and routine upgrades in recent weeks.  HMS Middleton, which was based in Bahrain, arrived back in Britain on March 1 — the day after the U.S. and Israel opened their attack — for maintenance and a technological upgrade. The vessel, ⁠which is more than 40 years old, was no longer certified to sail, according to the MOD. The U.K.’s only mine-hunting ship was brought back to Britain to save money just as strikes began, according to The Times.  Healey told reporters this week he was still considering “additional options” for protecting the Strait of Hormuz.  The former commander was frustrated by a gap between the prime minister and Healey’s robust language about Britain’s need for war-readiness and the reality of its actions.  “We have the prime minister and defense secretary talking about ‘preparing the nation for war’ on a running basis, which is ironic, as we and our allies ended up not deploying deterrent force and taking a week to deploy a major warship to defend Cyprus in good time to show our strong  defensive intentions,” this person said. A senior Gulf diplomat said the U.K.’s early response to the conflict fell short of what Gulf partners expected given Britain’s longstanding military ties in the region. There were “a lot of phone calls,” the diplomat said, but not much in the way of “serious support.” John Foreman, a former deputy head of the Combined Maritime Forces in Bahrain, said Starmer’s cautious approach was bound to cause continued problems as the conflict continues, particularly amid rising focus on protecting the Strait of Hormuz. “Wiser, less cautious heads would have got ahead of the game,” Foreman said. “It comes from Starmer ultimately and the tone of his government. It’s too late for Powell to be asking for options on the eve of war — and for Healey to still be pondering options now.”

U.S. President Donald Trump said late Friday that the U.S. launched punishing air strikes on Iran’s Kharg Island while sparing vital oil infrastructure as he pressed the country not to interfere with shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. Trump, in a statement, called the attack one of the “most powerful bombing raids in the History of the Middle East,” and said only military assets were targeted on the island, a 5-mile strip of land that is home to Iran’s most important oil facility. “I have chosen NOT to wipe out the Oil Infrastructure on the Island,” Trump said on social media. “However, should Iran, or anyone else, do anything to interfere with the Free and Safe Passage of Ships through the Strait of Hormuz, I will immediately reconsider this decision.” The oil processing facilities at Kharg Island are a foundational component of Iran’s economy. Roughly 90 percent of Iran’s crude is processed at Kharg Island, and any disruption to its oil processing could cripple the country’s economy. The strategic purpose of the strikes on the island were not clear, but the threat of future strikes on oil infrastructure marks a significant escalation of the U.S. effort to secure the Strait of Hormuz. Trump has indicated he would send the Navy to escort ships through the critical waterway after Iran’s ships effectively closed it in response to the war.

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Zwischen Kyjiw und Budapest droht der endgültige Bruch. Während Viktor Orbán im Europäischen Rat womöglich kommende Woche die Freigabe von 90 Milliarden Euro an EU-Hilfen blockiert, bezeichnet Wolodymyr Selenskyj ihn ⁠im Exklusiv-Interview mit POLITICO⁠ als „Verbündeten Russlands“. Gordon Repinski berichtet von der aufgeladenen Stimmung im Präsidentenpalast und analysiert gemeinsam mit Rixa Fürsen, wie Selenskyjs „Plan B“ aussieht, um das ungarische Veto zu umgehen. Kanzler Friedrich Merz ist derweil am nördlichen Polarkreis. Begleitet von Verteidigungsminister Boris Pistorius geht es in Norwegen um weit mehr als nur diplomatische Höflichkeit. Zwischen NATO-Übungen und dem Besuch eines Weltraumbahnhofs stehen ein U-Boot-Deal mit Kanada sowie die europäische Unabhängigkeit in der Satellitentechnik auf der Agenda. Hans von der Burchard begleitet den Kanzler auf dieser Reise und ordnet ein, ob Norwegen als wichtigster Energielieferant gerade jetzt eine Lebensversicherung für die deutsche Wirtschaftswende sein könnte. Deutschland gibt Teile der strategischen Ölreserve frei und führt eine tägliche Preis-Obergrenze an den Tankstellen ein. Im 200-Sekunden-Interview erklärt Justiz- und Verbraucherschutzministerin Stefanie Hubig (SPD), was die Preisobergrenze bringen soll und ob deutschen Autofahrern bei anhaltender Krise im Nahen Osten bald doch mit einer echten Preisbremse geholfen wird. Das Berlin Playbook als Podcast gibt es jeden Morgen ab 5 Uhr. Gordon Repinski und das POLITICO-Team liefern Politik zum Hören – kompakt, international, hintergründig. Für alle Hauptstadt-Profis: Der Berlin Playbook-Newsletter bietet jeden Morgen die wichtigsten Themen und Einordnungen. ⁠Jetzt kostenlos abonnieren.⁠ Mehr von Host und POLITICO Executive Editor Gordon Repinski: Instagram: ⁠@gordon.repinski⁠ | X: ⁠@GordonRepinski⁠. POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0 ⁠information@axelspringer.de⁠ Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390 Geschäftsführer: Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna **(Anzeige) Eine Nachricht von Amazon: Unabhängige Verkaufspartner stehen heute für über 60 % aller bei Amazon verkauften Produkte. Ein Beispiel ist Alphatrail aus Regensburg: Michael und sein Team haben ihre Leidenschaft in ein erfolgreich wachsendes Unternehmen verwandelt. Über Amazon bietet Alphatrail Radsport-Fans in ganz Europa erstklassige Ausrüstung und Zubehör. Sie sind eines von rund 47.000 deutschen kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen bei Amazon. Erfahren Sie mehr darüber auf AboutAmazon.de.**

U.S. President Donald Trump told Keir Starmer that Washington doesn’t need U.K. aircraft carriers in its strikes against Iran, accusing the British prime minister of seeking to “join wars after we’ve already won.” Trump’s comments late Saturday came as the U.S. and Israel continued to launch airstrikes on Iran. His criticism also came as the HMS Prince of Wales aircraft carrier is being prepared to sail to the Persian Gulf, according to U.K. media reports. The British government “is finally giving serious thought to sending two aircraft carriers to the Middle East.” Trump said in a post on social media. “That’s OK, Prime Minister Starmer, we don’t need them any longer — But we will remember,” he said. “We don’t need people that join Wars after we’ve already won!” Trump added.

The war in Iran will lead to delays in U.S. weapons deliveries to Europe, Polish Defense Minister Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz said Friday. “The U.S. industry will focus on replenishing the stockpiles used in the Middle East,” he told reporters in Warsaw. “We expect some delays in deliveries,” especially if the conflict drags on, he said, adding that makes it even more urgent for Europeans to increase their own production capabilities. He was echoed by European Defense Commissioner Andrius Kubilius: “Americans will not be able to provide enough for Gulf countries, Ukraine needs, and the U.S. army itself.” The U.S. and Gulf countries are now fighting against Iranian missiles and drones mainly with Patriot PAC-2 and PAC-3 interceptor missiles. U.S. officials have warned that could strain American stockpiles. It’s also having an immediate knock-on effect on deliveries. According to the Swiss press, deliveries of Patriot air defense systems to Switzerland will be delayed even further because of the war in the Middle East. Kubilius is on a so-called a missile tour in Europe, which started in Poland. He also said he was “very surprised” about the Polish dispute over the EU’s loans-for-weapons SAFE scheme. Polish President Karol Nawrocki hasn’t signed off the SAFE bill and proposed instead financing with the help of the National Bank of Poland. “Who will lose if Poland doesn’t approve SAFE? Saying no to SAFE is saying no to jobs for Polish people,” Kubilius stressed. “If Poland decided to use taxpayers’ money to buy weapons from somewhere else, that will mean Polish taxpayers money will create jobs elsewhere.”

WARSAW — Polish President Karol Nawrocki proposed Wednesday that the country’s military build-up be financed with the help of the National Bank of Poland instead of tapping the EU’s €150 billion Security Action for Europe loans-for-weapons program. The move comes amid a standoff with Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s pro-EU government over nearly €44 billion in SAFE loans earmarked for modernizing Poland’s armed forces, repayable by 2070.  “We have a concrete, Polish, safe and sovereign alternative to the SAFE program that will not involve any financial interest,” Nawrocki said, speaking alongside NBP President Adam Glapiński. The idea would be to work with the central bank to secure 185 billion złoty — equivalent to the amount Poland plans to borrow under SAFE. The president, and the opposition nationalist Law and Justice party which backs him, have both criticized SAFE, arguing it saddles Poland with decades of debt, creates an exchange rate risk because the loan is denominated in euros and not Polish złoty, and could see Brussels imposing political conditions. They also warn that contracts funded by SAFE could disproportionately benefit Western European defense firms rather than domestic producers — something the government rejects, insisting 80 percent of the cash will stay in Poland. There is also concern over angering the United States, Poland’s main ally and arms supplier, which has expressed displeasure at SAFE’s provisions limiting participation of non-EU countries. “The war in Iran and recent U.S. operations also show … above all, the effectiveness of American equipment,” Nawrocki said. Nawrocki’s announcement follows parliamentary approval of a law detailing how SAFE funds would be spent. If president vetoes the legislation, Tusk’s coalition doesn’t have enough votes in parliament to override him. However, the government insists that even with a Nawrocki veto, it would still be able to access the EU cash. But Nawrocki stressed that the SAFE money comes with strings attached. His idea, he says would mean “a concrete and secure alternative for SAFE that will not involve any interest … without credit, without changing Poland’s situation in the EU, and with the flexibility our armed forces need in selecting equipment.” Glapiński hinted that the central bank would step in with its annual profit for the purpose. Any central bank profits are channeled to state coffers, although that hasn’t happened in recent years. The NBP has also amassed 550 tons of gold, with plans to boost that to 700 tons. However, Polish law limits the ability of the central bank to finance budget expenditures. Adam Glapiński hinted that the central bank would step in with its annual profit for the purpose. | Mateusz Wlodarczyk/NurPhoto via Getty Images “We cannot use any part of the reserves in the sense that a portion would be transferred, because that would be against the law,” Glapiński said. Nawrocki said he would present further details, which would include new legislation for the parliament to work on, to Tusk and Defense Minister Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz as soon as Wednesday. Kosiniak-Kamysz pushed back, saying on X: “The SAFE program provides the fastest and most concrete funding for modernizing the Polish army, which is why the military, the defense industry, and all those committed to strengthening our armed forces are calling for the president to sign the [SAFE] law.” “If additional financing instruments for the army appear, the Polish Armed Forces will only benefit — not as an alternative to SAFE, but as extra resources enhancing security,” Kosiniak-Kamysz added.