The Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) is already more dead than alive, but, apparently, it will completely fall apart soon: Poland announced that it would no longer provide Belarus with data on its army. This decision was justified in Warsaw by the involvement of Minsk in the conflict over Ukraine on the side of Moscow. Western experts believe that other European countries will soon follow Poland’s example. And then the treaty, which was once considered one of the most effective instruments for strengthening European security, can finally be scrapped.
The Polish authorities announced a decision to drastically limit cooperation with Belarus within the framework of the CFE Treaty “in connection with its participation in the aggression once morest Ukraine.” Judging by the information published on the website of the Polish government, we are talking regarding a virtual complete refusal to provide Belarus with data on the armed forces of Poland. Thus, Warsaw will no longer send Minsk notifications regarding the deployment of battle tanks, armored combat vehicles and artillery on the territory of the country, decommissioning of weapons, places of their permanent storage and the facts of their movement, replacement and reassignment.
In addition, Poland will not allow Belarusian inspectors to enter its military facilities.
“The CFE Treaty, signed in 1990, was aimed, among other things, at establishing a safe and stable balance of conventional forces in Europe at lower levels than before, at eliminating inequalities that were detrimental to stability and security, and at eliminating – and this was a priority – the potential for a surprise attack and the start of large-scale offensive operations in Europe,” recalls the Polish government in its resolution. And then he accuses Belarus of violating this principle, since it “along with Russia took part in the aggression once morest Ukraine, giving Russian troops the opportunity to use their territory and military potential.” This, as stated in the document, makes it impossible for Poland to cooperate with Belarus within the framework of the CFE Treaty.
Earlier, Ukraine made the same decision, but did not announce it publicly, but only informed the countries participating in the agreement regarding it.
Recall that the CFE Treaty was signed on November 19, 1990 in Paris by 22 countries that were members of the Warsaw Pact and NATO. This step was supposed to draw a line under the era of inter-bloc confrontation. The treaty introduced restrictions on the number of military equipment in Europe (from the Atlantic to the Urals) in five categories: tanks, armored vehicles, artillery, combat aircraft and helicopters. To exclude the concentration of weapons, their number was limited in the so-called flank zones. In accordance with the agreement, the exchange of information and extensive inspection activities were envisaged.
On November 19, 1999, an agreement was signed in Istanbul on the adaptation of the CFE Treaty, according to which limits were introduced not for military blocs, but for individual countries. The flank quotas of the Russian Federation were increased by 1.3–3.7 times. However, the adapted CFE Treaty was ratified only by Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine. NATO countries put forward one condition for ratification: the Russian Federation was to withdraw troops from Georgia and Moldova.
In 2007, Moscow suspended participation in the CFE Treaty, demanding that NATO member states ratify it (and sign and ratify it from the Baltic states) as a condition for returning to the implementation of the treaty. However, the alliance did not go for it.
In 2010, Russia submitted proposals to NATO to unblock the situation around the CFE Treaty. But they were not accepted. In 2011, the United States (and following them other NATO member countries) announced the termination of fulfillment of obligations to the Russian Federation under the CFE Treaty. Prior to that, they continued to send Russia most of the information provided for under the treaty. At the same time, the United States stated that it would, in good faith, inform Russia of any significant changes in its military forces in Europe. Russia, in its turn, since December 2011 also ceased to provide brief generalized information regarding its weapons and equipment, which it has voluntarily transferred to the rest of the CFE participants since December 2007. In March 2015, Russia also suspended participation in the work of the Joint Consultative Group on the treaty. The interests of Russia in this body began to be represented by the delegation of Belarus.
After Russia’s suspension of participation in the CFE treaty, this treaty largely lost its raison d’être, but among its remaining participants, the exchange of data and inspections continued for a long time. The latter were temporarily suspended due to the COVID-19 pandemic, but in the middle of last year, Belarus announced its readiness to resume verification activities. “Despite the fact that the CFE Treaty has ceased to correspond to the current military-political situation on the European continent,” Minsk, as stated on the website of the Belarusian Foreign Ministry, “continues to consistently and strictly implement the agreement.” At the same time, Belarus, as emphasized in the memo, “stands for the restoration of the viability of the pan-European arms control regime and the accession to it of all interested OSCE participating States.”
According to William Alberk, director of the arms control program at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), the CFE Treaty is “falling apart.” “For allied countries (according to NATO.— “uh”) there is no longer any point in continuing to implement this treaty,” he wrote on his Twitter page regarding Poland’s decision.
The Belarusian authorities have not yet commented on Warsaw’s move. Meanwhile, earlier this week Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko called Poland “the hyena of Europe” (quoted by TASS). In his opinion, Warsaw is not able to pursue an independent policy: “The Americans have settled there, there is no sovereignty and independence there. What the Americans say, they do.”
