If Poland received an extra $30 billion for defence, should it buy nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers?
Short answerNo; Poland's geography points first toward conventional submarines, land combat forces, and transport infrastructure, with destroyers a more useful naval option than carriers.
NotesPoland's proximity to Russia makes artillery, tanks, armoured personnel carriers, and movement infrastructure more urgent than aircraft carriers. Additional conventional submarines are more plausible than a small nuclear force in this assessment. High-end general-purpose destroyers could still provide Baltic fire support and reinforce allied carrier groups, but they would be a secondary choice. A carrier attack from Russia's east would not reliably relieve pressure on Poland because the country's vast and fragile east-west transport links already limit reinforcement. Geography drives the force-structure argument, which still leaves useful roles for naval forces.