"We went Korean…and the reason was that only the Korean defense industry was able to deliver on such a short notice what we needed," Lt. Gen. Piotr Błazeusz, Poland’s military representative to NATO, told a Washington audience on Wednesday.
Lt. Gen. Piotr Błazeusz on U.S. delivery timelines
Błazeusz framed the problem bluntly: European capitals are being urged to spend more on defense, yet when those governments seek to buy American systems they are told delivery dates that are far off and uncertain. "When they come to the US and say, ‘We would like to buy the system’ …they are told, ‘Okay, but [it will be delivered in ] 2029-2030 and you know, it still could be delayed,’" he said at a Center for the Study of the Presidency & Congress lunch. That combination of pressure to invest and long waits for equipment, he argued, produces a "Catch-22" for European militaries.
From "gold-plated" to "good enough": choice driven by timing and MRO
Błazeusz described a shift in procurement preferences that is practical rather than ideological. European buyers, he said, "are no longer looking for the gold-plated solutions that American firms specialize in, but instead looking at 'good enough' solutions that are more affordable and arrive more quickly." He added that the U.S. equipment Poland trusts is also "easy to integrate," but long delivery timelines and "limited ability to locally maintain, repair, and overhaul (MRO) equipment" pushed Warsaw to seek alternatives and suppliers who can provide local MRO capacity.
Poland’s $16 billion run of deals with South Korean firms (2022–2025)
The most visible consequence of that calculus has been Warsaw’s deepening relationship with Seoul. "Between the start of 2022 and 2025, Poland announced arms agreements worth $16 billion with South Korean firms," the general said. Those deals covered hundreds of tanks, artillery pieces and light-attack aircraft. In August 2025 Poland signed a $6.5 billion agreement with Hyundai Rotem Company for 180 K2 tanks to be delivered between 2026 and 2030 — a second order following an initial 2022 order for 180 tanks. The 2025 package also included support vehicles based on the K2 chassis: 31 armored recovery vehicles, 25 engineering vehicles, and 25 assault bridge systems.
U.S. FMS and FMF changes, and the effect on allies' delivery expectations
Błazeusz’s comments come as the Trump administration is "overhauling its Foreign Military Sales (FMS) and Foreign Military Financing (FMF) processes," and, according to the reporting, quietly notifying partners that their U.S. weapons orders are being delayed because of operations against Iran and political strains with NATO allies. In recent weeks, "a number of allies and partners have been told their expected US weapons deliveries are being slowed down as the US prioritizes its own coffers," the reporting states. At the same time, several analysts told Breaking Defense that they do not yet see a wholesale shift away from American systems, even if the practice of "kicking allies down the queue" amplifies longer-term pressure to look elsewhere.
What this means for procurement leaders, policymakers, and South Korean firms
- Procurement leaders in NATO capitals: They will weigh delivery certainty and local MRO capabilities as heavily as platform performance, a calculation that already produced Poland’s large South Korean purchases.
- Policymakers in allied governments: They face a policy paradox — buy more and buy American is the stated objective, but when American timelines are long, political and operational pressures favor nearer-term alternatives.
- South Korean defense firms: The ability to meet rapid delivery schedules and to establish MRO hubs inside Europe positions them as attractive partners for countries that require faster fielding and local support.
Analysts quoted by Breaking Defense captured the tension plainly. "What we’re going to see is the inevitable tension between the administration’s stated desire to have our allies buy American and buy more … and likewise the need to put ourselves first to replenish stockpiles," Tom Karako, a missile defense expert with the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), told the outlet.
Poland’s pivot to South Korea is not offered as a repudiation of U.S. equipment — "we strongly believe in the US equipment, it’s easy to integrate," Błazeusz said — but as a practical response to timelines and sustainment constraints. Whether the U.S. overhaul of FMS and FMF procedures will shorten delivery horizons or further accelerate partner diversification remains the central unanswered question implied by this episode: allies are being asked to spend more, but some will only do so if what they buy can actually arrive and be sustained when they need it.
