“We’re interested in becoming a concrete part of the arrangement,” said the Polish foreign ministry spokesman, Boguslaw Majewski, after it was revealed that Poland has been in secret talks with the United States of America for the past eight months on locating elements of the US ballistic missile defence system, including interceptor missiles, on its territory. Then it came out that the US has also been talking to the Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria about it, but Poland is definitely the leading candidate.

Poland’s main problem has always been its geography. Sandwiched between Germany and Russia, it was regularly conquered by them or partitioned between them. Poland lost 20 per cent of its population in World War II, mainly in Nazi death camps, and then spent the next 45 years under a communist dictatorship imposed by its Russian liberators. You can see why it wants close links with a great power that isn’t in Europe, and is giving the US military bases that Washington sees as important.

The Poles don’t care whether the missiles work or not, and most of them don’t even believe the story that the Pentagon wants a site in eastern Europe to intercept nuclear missiles fired at the US by Iran or Syria. They suspect that Washington really wants to intercept Russian missiles just after they launch, but that’s okay with them, too. The Poles mistrust the Russians almost as much as they do the Germans.

Hard sell

All the Poles want is an important American base on their territory, so that Washington doesn’t forget about them in a crisis. They will make do with radar stations if they have to, but, as the former defence minister, Janusz Onyszkeiwicz, put it, “an interceptor site would be more attractive”. It’s a very understandable Polish reflex, given the history — but it could greatly complicate Poland’s foreign relations closer home.

Germany and France are not pleased to see the US seeking missile bases in eastern European countries that have become a part of the European Union. They see it as part and parcel of Washington’s strategy of splitting these ex-communist countries, which the defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, described last year with typical sensitivity as “new Europe” (good and pro-American) to be distinguished from France, Germany and other parts of “old Europe” which are anti-American.

It’s working, too. Most of the states have sent token contingents to Iraq to curry favour with the US, and they would be happy to have American bases on their soil. And it’s practically a cost-free strategy. The Germans and French haven’t been nasty to them, and the Russians have been positively saintly about it. But it could get ugly further down the line.

Tough road

If the US remains on a unilateralist course after this November’s election, failing to consult with allies, ignoring the United Nations whenever it gets in the way, and frequently violating international law, all the other great powers will start to respond by trying to create counter-balancing power centres. They are on hold for the moment, because none of them really wants to go down that road, but it’s clear what they will do if it becomes necessary.

They will start building up their arms, and in the case of China, that is probably all they will do. In Europe, the great powers will also start to come together in what won’t be called an alliance, but will gradually become exactly that. And its chief members will be France, Germany and Russia. That’s the only combination big enough to say “no” to overwhelming American power.

If it comes to that, five years down the road, life will get very hard for east European countries that have become too closely bound with the US — especially if they have American missile interceptor sites on their territories. And if you think that this scenario hasn’t already occurred to the chief American negotiator on the potential deal with Poland, John Bolton, then you are seriously underestimating the man.

The real question is whether it has occurred to the Poles.