How Did Poland Get on US Sanctions List and Why
From Ally to Restricted: The Surprising Impact of U.S. Sanctions on Poland
TL;DR:
Poland’s Historical Role: A strong U.S. ally in NATO and aspiring AI leader in Europe.
U.S. Sanctions Announced (January 2025): New AI chip export controls limit Poland to 50,000 GPUs annually, hampering its tech ambitions.
Rationale for Sanctions: U.S. concerns over national security, export control alignment, and potential tech misuse or diversion.
Impact on Poland:
Stalled AI projects and economic disruptions.
Intel suspends a major facility project in Poland.
Polish AI ambitions severely constrained.
Poland’s Response:
Diplomatic efforts to negotiate terms or exemptions.
Exploring alternative tech sources and strengthening domestic innovation.
Geopolitical Implications: Strains U.S.-Poland relations, sparks EU discussions on tech sovereignty, and challenges NATO collaboration.
Future Outlook: Poland faces the dual task of adapting to sanctions while pursuing strategic autonomy and stronger alliances.
And now the Deep Dive….
Introduction
Poland has traditionally been viewed as a steadfast ally of the United States, with strong ties cemented through NATO membership and shared EU principles. Historically, these relations have been marked by military cooperation, economic partnerships, and cultural exchanges, positioning Poland as a significant player in Central Europe. This alliance was further solidified with Poland's role in supporting US-led initiatives and its stance against Russian influence in the region. However, recent developments have introduced a new dynamic in this relationship, particularly with the US imposing sanctions that include technology export restrictions.
The current scenario unfolded on January 13, 2025, when the Biden administration announced new AI chip export controls, inadvertently placing Poland in a secondary tier for access to advanced technology. This decision has led to a significant shift in how Poland can engage with and develop its tech sector, particularly in the realm of artificial intelligence. Poland, which had ambitions to become a European AI leader, is now facing substantial hurdles as these sanctions limit the import of high-end graphics processing units (GPUs) to only 50,000 units annually, severely impacting its technological growth trajectory.
The backdrop of these sanctions is rooted in the US's broader strategy to control the spread of sensitive technology, a policy it has also applied to countries like China and Russia. The rationale behind these sanctions often revolves around national security concerns, the prevention of technology transfer that could be used against US interests, or in response to geopolitical maneuvers that don't align with American foreign policy. For Poland, this action seems to reflect a concern over how its policies on export controls, clean energy, and tech security might not be sufficiently aligned with those of the United States, leading to its classification in a lower tier of tech access within the EU.
The inclusion of Poland in these US sanctions marks a pivotal moment in US-Poland relations, challenging the tech-centric ambitions of Poland while also highlighting the complexities of international tech diplomacy. The situation underscores the delicate balance of national security, economic interests, and international alliances in the age of technology. As Poland navigates this new reality, the responses from both its government and the international community will be telling of how nations adapt to the shifting landscapes of global tech governance.
Background of US Sanctions on Technology
The United States has long maintained stringent export control policies to safeguard its technological edge, particularly in areas like artificial intelligence (AI) and semiconductor technology. These policies are primarily managed by the U.S. Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) under the Export Administration Regulations (EAR). The aim is to prevent the transfer of sensitive technologies that could be used to advance military capabilities or for human rights abuses by unfriendly nations. With advancements in AI and semiconductors becoming central to national security, the US has tightened these controls, introducing specific rules that require licensing for the export of high-performance chips to certain countries.
In the global context, these US policies are not just national but part of a broader strategy to control the proliferation of high-tech capabilities. Countries like China and Russia have faced significant restrictions under these policies. For instance, in October 2022, the U.S. introduced sweeping export controls aimed at China, targeting its access to advanced chips and the equipment needed to produce them. This was done to curb China's military modernization and to maintain the US's competitive lead in tech sectors crucial for both economic and security interests. Similarly, post the 2022 invasion of Ukraine by Russia, the US and its allies imposed extensive sanctions and export controls that included technology, aiming to degrade Russia's war-making capabilities.
The rationale behind these sanctions is multifaceted. For China, there is a concern about its military-civil fusion strategy where civilian technology directly benefits military advancements. The US sees this as a direct threat to its security and has thus implemented controls on technologies that could enhance China's AI capabilities, potentially used for surveillance, cyber operations, or military applications. With Russia, the sanctions are more retaliatory and punitive, aimed at punishing aggression and limiting its technological warfare capacity. This approach not only restricts direct exports but also applies to any product made abroad with U.S. technology or components, significantly broadening the scope of control.
These policies have sparked a variety of reactions worldwide. Countries affected by these controls have sought alternative technologies or have accelerated their domestic tech development. China, for example, has heavily invested in its semiconductor industry, attempting to reduce reliance on foreign technology. Russia, facing isolation, has looked towards countries outside of traditional Western alliances for tech supplies. This has led to a reshaping of global supply chains, with countries reevaluating their dependence on U.S. technology and considering the strategic implications of tech partnerships.
The impact extends beyond the directly sanctioned countries. Allies and partners of the US, like those in the EU, are also navigating these policies. While some countries benefit from exemptions or are part of collaborative agreements, others face indirect consequences due to the interconnected nature of technology markets. This has led to discussions about EU strategic autonomy in tech, with some advocating for a more independent European tech ecosystem that's less vulnerable to external policy shifts.
Critics of US export control policies argue that while they aim to protect national security, they might also stifle global innovation and disrupt economic collaboration. There's a concern that such policies could lead to a fragmented global tech landscape where countries develop separate, potentially incompatible tech standards and systems. This fragmentation could hinder global scientific and technological progress, which traditionally thrives on open collaboration.
However, proponents argue that these controls are essential in a world where technology can be dual-use, serving both civilian and military purposes. They see the measures as a necessary response to the geopolitical realities where technology has become as critical as traditional military hardware. The balance between fostering innovation, maintaining security, and respecting international trade agreements remains a complex issue for US policymakers.
In essence, US export control policies on advanced technology are a strategic tool in international relations, aimed at maintaining technological leadership and security. They reflect a nuanced approach to global tech governance, where the US seeks to protect its interests while navigating the complexities of international diplomacy and economic interdependence. As technology evolves, so too will these policies, adapting to new threats and opportunities in the global tech landscape.
The Specific Case of Poland
The recent imposition of technology sanctions on Poland by the United States marks a significant shift in the dynamics of transatlantic tech cooperation. On January 13, 2025, the Biden administration announced new export controls on AI chips, inadvertently placing Poland among countries with restricted access to advanced technology. This decision was made public through various channels, including statements from the U.S. Department of Commerce, which detailed the specifics of these sanctions, emphasizing that Poland was not listed among the 18 countries exempt from these new restrictions.
This announcement has had immediate and profound effects on Poland's ambitions in the field of artificial intelligence. Poland had positioned itself to become a European leader in AI, with high hopes pinned on the development of technological infrastructure that would propel it to the forefront of innovation. The government had laid out plans for creating an AI factory by 2025, an ambitious project aimed at fostering a hub for AI research and development. These plans were part of a broader strategy to integrate AI into various sectors of the economy, enhancing everything from healthcare to security systems.
One of the most tangible impacts of the US sanctions was Intel's decision to suspend its project in Poland. Intel had been considering Poland for the construction of an advanced packaging facility, which would have been pivotal in the production and assembly of high-end chips. This suspension is not just a blow to Poland's tech aspirations but also to its economic plans, as the facility would have created jobs and attracted further investment in the tech sector. The decision reflects the broader implications of these sanctions, where foreign companies might hesitate to invest in Poland due to uncertainties about technology access.
Poland's AI development plans included a significant financial commitment of EUR235 million aimed at AI initiatives. This investment was intended to support the development of Polish large language models (LLM), AI-driven research, and to fund educational programs to cultivate talent in AI. The Polish government's strategy was to leverage this investment to not only advance its own technology but also to become a net exporter of AI solutions in Europe. The sanctions have cast a shadow over these plans, potentially limiting the scope of what Poland can achieve due to restricted access to crucial hardware like GPUs, which are essential for training sophisticated AI models.
The Polish government, in response to these restrictions, has voiced its concerns through various official channels. Digital Affairs Minister Krzysztof Gawkowski has been vocal about how these sanctions could hinder long-term innovation in Poland. The government is now considering alternative strategies to continue its AI push, including enhancing domestic semiconductor production or seeking partnerships with countries not under similar U.S. restrictions. However, these alternatives come with their own set of challenges, including time, expertise, and the need for substantial investment in areas where Poland currently lags.
The broader impact on Poland's tech sector could be transformative. The country has been trying to build a reputation as a tech-savvy nation, attracting foreign tech companies and startups. With the sanctions, there's a risk that Poland might lose its competitive edge in attracting international tech talent and investment. This could lead to a brain drain, where Polish tech professionals seek opportunities in less restrictive environments, or it might spur domestic innovation out of necessity.
However, there is also an opportunity for Poland to leverage this situation to bolster its own tech industry. The sanctions might encourage Poland to invest more in foundational research and development in AI, focusing on areas where it can still innovate without the need for the most advanced chips. This could mean a shift towards more software-driven AI solutions or looking into alternative hardware from countries not affected by these sanctions.
Internationally, Poland's situation has sparked discussions within the EU about technology sovereignty and the need for a unified European approach to tech development and security. There are calls for a collective EU response to such US policies, perhaps through coordinated investment in European tech infrastructure or negotiating as a bloc with the US for better terms on technology exports.
For now, Poland faces a strategic dilemma: how to navigate these sanctions while maintaining its ambitions in AI and tech. The country might need to engage in diplomatic efforts to clarify or perhaps mitigate the sanctions, or it could look to forge new partnerships outside the traditional Western tech alliances. The path forward will require a delicate balance of diplomacy, innovation, and adaptation to a new global tech landscape shaped by these US export controls.
(Pictured above: Digital Affairs Minister Krzysztof Gawkowski)
Reasons Behind the Sanctions
The imposition of sanctions by the United States on Poland regarding the export of advanced technology, particularly AI chips, can be attributed to a mix of national security concerns and geopolitical strategy. The primary reason cited for these restrictions is the protection of US national security interests. There is an underlying worry that sensitive technologies could be misused or transferred to adversaries or entities that might not share US security goals. While Poland has traditionally been an ally, the US might have concerns about the security of its technology once it leaves American shores, including the possibility of indirect transfers to countries like Russia or China through less controlled routes.
Beyond national security, the sanctions are also about ensuring alignment with US interests in terms of policy. Poland's approach to export controls, energy policies, and technology security might not be in perfect sync with what the US considers optimal for global security. There is an expectation that allies should adhere to certain standards that protect US technological advantages. This includes rigorous controls on the end-use and end-users of high-tech exports to prevent proliferation to hostile actors. The US might perceive a discrepancy in how Poland manages these controls, leading to the decision to place restrictions.
The political landscape also plays a role. Poland's current geopolitical stance involves balancing between its EU commitments and its national interests, which sometimes do not align with the broader Western consensus. For instance, Poland has had tensions with the EU over rule of law and democratic principles, which might indirectly affect its relationship with the US. There's also the matter of Poland's energy policy, particularly its reliance on coal and recent moves towards nuclear energy, which might not align with US environmental and security agendas.
Accusations of intellectual property (IP) theft have also surfaced in discussions about these sanctions, though these are not as explicitly documented. There have been concerns about the protection of intellectual property within Poland, with some international businesses reporting issues with IP rights enforcement. This could be a contributing factor to why the US might be cautious about allowing unrestricted tech transfers to Poland, fearing that American IP could be compromised or misappropriated.
The decision to categorize EU member states into a two-tier system for access to advanced technology further complicates Poland's situation. The US has delineated countries into primary allies, who face no new restrictions, and secondary nations, like Poland, which are subject to caps on technology imports. This categorization is based on several criteria, including the alignment of export control policies, commitment to clean energy, and overall tech security measures. Poland's placement in the secondary tier reflects a perceived gap in these areas compared to countries like Germany or France, which might have more closely aligned policies or stronger enforcement mechanisms.
The two-tier system within the EU has created divisions, with some member states enjoying unfettered access to US tech while others are constrained. This has led to frustration in Poland and other similarly affected countries, as it might slow down their technological development and innovation. The EU as a whole has expressed concerns about this division, seeing it as potentially undermining the bloc's unity and technological competitiveness.
From an economic perspective, these sanctions might be seen as a signal for Poland to reassess its policies or engage in negotiations to align more closely with US standards. The economic implications are significant for Poland, which has been investing heavily in tech sectors to propel its economy forward. Being restricted in access to cutting-edge technology could mean higher costs for alternative solutions or a slower pace of development, affecting Poland's economic growth and its position within the European tech landscape.
The geopolitical implications are also noteworthy. Poland might feel pressured to shift its strategic alignments or to intensify its diplomacy with the US to regain its previous status. This could involve closer collaboration on security issues, more stringent enforcement of IP rights, or adopting policies more in line with US expectations regarding technology and energy.
In response, there's also an opportunity for Poland to strengthen its own tech base. The sanctions could spur domestic innovation or lead to new international partnerships outside the traditional US-centric tech ecosystem. Countries like South Korea or Taiwan, which are not under similar US restrictions, could become new focal points for tech collaboration.
However, navigating this new reality will require Poland to tread carefully. The sanctions are a reminder of how closely linked technology, security, and international relations have become. Poland must now balance its national interests with the need to maintain strong alliances, all while fostering an environment where its tech sector can thrive under these new constraints.
Consequences for Poland
The imposition of US sanctions on the export of advanced technology, specifically limiting the import of high-end GPUs to 50,000 units per year, has significant repercussions for Poland's burgeoning tech sector. AI development, which relies heavily on computational power from such GPUs, is at the forefront of these impacts. Polish tech companies and research institutions are now facing a bottleneck in their ability to scale up or even maintain current levels of AI research and development. This limitation could delay or even cancel projects aimed at leveraging AI for advancements in various fields like healthcare, automotive, and cybersecurity, where Poland had ambitions to lead.
Economically, the sanctions pose both immediate and long-term challenges for Poland. In the short term, there's a direct hit to the tech industries that were planning expansions or new initiatives based on the availability of advanced hardware. This might lead to reduced investment in tech startups, slower growth in tech-related jobs, and potentially, a shift of tech talent to countries not facing similar restrictions. Long-term, these sanctions could alter Poland's strategic goals in the tech sector, forcing a pivot towards less hardware-intensive solutions or alternative technology sources. This might also affect Poland's attractiveness as a destination for tech investments, crucial for maintaining its economic growth trajectory.
The strategic implications are equally profound. Poland has been positioning itself as an emerging tech hub in Europe, with aspirations to not only consume but also to develop and export AI solutions. The sanctions disrupt this narrative, potentially diminishing Poland's influence and leadership in European tech circles. This could impact Poland's broader economic strategy, which includes becoming a key player in digital innovation and services. The country's ability to compete globally in tech might be compromised, leading to a reevaluation of its tech policies and perhaps a more inward-looking focus on nurturing indigenous technology.
In response to these sanctions, Polish authorities have been vocal. Digital Affairs Minister Krzysztof Gawkowski described the sanctions as "incomprehensible," highlighting the unexpected nature of these restrictions on a country that has been a steadfast US ally. He has pushed for discussions with the US to clarify or possibly amend the restrictions. Deputy Digital Affairs Minister Dariusz Standerski has acknowledged the immediate impact on AI projects but warned of the long-term problems these restrictions could cause. Polish officials are engaging in diplomatic efforts, seeking to negotiate better terms or possibly exemptions, understanding that these sanctions could have broader geopolitical consequences.
Poland's strategic location as a buffer between Western Europe and Russia adds another layer to this scenario. Being at the forefront of NATO's eastern flank, Poland's role in countering Russian influence in Europe is critical. The US has to be cautious in imposing sanctions that might weaken an ally in such a sensitive position. Poland's military expansion and its status as a NATO leader are intertwined with its economic stability, where tech development plays a significant role. Sanctions that affect this sector could indirectly impact Poland's military readiness and its ability to support regional security, which are key elements in US strategic interests.
The Polish government is also aware that its position as an economic leader in Eastern Europe could be at stake. Poland has been a model of economic growth within the EU, and its tech sector has been a significant part of this narrative. Weakening this sector might lead to broader economic instability, which could ripple through regional economies, affecting the stability of Central and Eastern Europe, an area where the US has vested interests in maintaining peace and promoting democracy.
In light of these considerations, Poland's response includes not only diplomatic efforts but also a push towards enhancing domestic tech capabilities. There's an emphasis on increasing local production of technology components or looking for alternative suppliers outside the US. This might mean closer ties with Asian tech markets or investing in research to bypass current technological limitations imposed by the sanctions.
However, navigating this situation will require careful diplomacy. The US must consider Poland's role in NATO and its strategic location against the backdrop of these sanctions. Poland, on its part, must leverage its geopolitical importance to negotiate or at least mitigate the impact of these sanctions, ensuring that its economic and tech ambitions are not permanently derailed. The balance between asserting national tech sovereignty and maintaining strong international alliances will be crucial for Poland's future.
(Pictured above: Deputy Digital Affairs Minister Dariusz Standerski)
International Reactions and Future Outlook
The international reaction to the US sanctions on Poland, particularly concerning the export of AI chips, has been mixed, with notable responses from both the EU and NATO. Within the European Union, there's a sense of concern about the division these sanctions might cause. Some EU countries see this as an opportunity to press for a more unified EU tech policy, advocating for strategic autonomy in technology to prevent such splits in the future. Countries like France and Germany, which are not subject to these restrictions, might offer solidarity with Poland, potentially pushing for a collective EU response to negotiate with the US or to enhance intra-EU tech cooperation. However, there's also a critique from some quarters, where nations less affected might see this as a lesson for aligning closer to US tech policies.
NATO allies, recognizing Poland's strategic importance on the eastern flank, might be wary of these sanctions due to their potential to weaken a key partner. There is an underlying tension about how such measures could affect military and cybersecurity collaborations, given that tech capabilities are integral to modern defense strategies. NATO's response could involve advocating for a dialogue to understand the security implications of such sanctions on collective defense, potentially leading to a broader discussion on technology sharing among allies.
For Poland, the potential for negotiation is a critical pathway forward. By aligning more closely with US policies on export controls, energy, and technology security, Poland might negotiate better terms or even exemptions. This could involve enhancing its own export control mechanisms to match US standards, committing to more stringent IP protection, or taking a firmer stance against technology transfers to non-allied nations. Diplomatic efforts could also focus on highlighting Poland's role in NATO and its security contributions, arguing that a technologically strong Poland benefits the entire Western alliance.
The diplomatic channels for negotiation might include high-level talks between Polish and US officials, possibly involving EU representation to leverage collective bargaining power. Poland could use its position as a NATO leader to discuss these sanctions in broader security contexts, seeking assurances or adjustments that reflect its critical role in regional stability. There is also the possibility of engaging in multilateral forums where tech policy and security are discussed, using these platforms to build a case for why Poland should not be subjected to such stringent controls.
Looking at the long-term effects, these sanctions could have profound implications for Poland's position in international tech development. There is a risk that Poland might fall behind in AI and tech innovation, which could affect its economic strategy and competitive edge in Europe. However, this might also spur Poland to invest more in domestic tech capabilities, focusing on areas like software development or alternative hardware technologies that are less reliant on US imports. This could lead to a more self-sufficient tech ecosystem in Poland, potentially opening new avenues for innovation.
The relationship with the US could be strained in the short term, but there is also an opportunity for it to evolve into a partnership where tech policy becomes a central discussion point. Poland might emerge with a more nuanced understanding of technology politics, leading to a more balanced relationship where technological sovereignty is respected alongside strategic alliances. The US, for its part, might need to reconsider how it applies such sanctions to key allies, balancing national security with maintaining strong international tech alliances.
In the broader context, these sanctions might encourage a reevaluation of global tech supply chains and alliances, with countries possibly seeking to diversify their tech partnerships to avoid similar disruptions. For Poland, the future might involve a strategic pivot towards untapped markets in Asia or the Middle East for tech collaboration, or it might enhance its role within the EU, pushing for a more cohesive European tech strategy.
Ultimately, the long-term effects on Poland's tech sector and its international relations will depend on how it navigates these sanctions. The country's ability to adapt, innovate, and negotiate will determine whether it emerges from this scenario weakened or with a renewed focus on strategic tech independence and alliance-building.
Conclusion
The recent imposition of U.S. sanctions on Poland concerning advanced technology exports underscores the increasingly intricate nexus between geopolitics and technological development. While aimed at safeguarding U.S. national security and maintaining its global tech leadership, these restrictions have introduced significant challenges for Poland, a key NATO ally and aspiring leader in AI innovation within Europe. The sanctions have not only disrupted Poland's technological ambitions but have also raised broader questions about the cohesion of transatlantic alliances and the balance between security imperatives and economic partnerships.
Poland now faces a critical juncture: it must navigate these constraints while striving to maintain its strategic relevance and foster innovation within its tech sector. This situation presents both obstacles and opportunities—ranging from pursuing greater self-reliance in technology to reshaping its international partnerships. For the United States and its allies, this episode highlights the need for nuanced policymaking that carefully weighs security concerns against the potential for unintended consequences among close partners.
Sources:
Digitimes. (2025, January 20). Poland is now under US sanctions, cut off from advanced tech. Digitimes. https://www.digitimes.com/news/a20250120PD225/poland-technology-intel-development-packaging.html
Notes from Poland. (2025, January 15). Concern as Poland included on US list of countries with restricted AI chip exports. Notes from Poland. https://notesfrompoland.com/2025/01/15/concern-as-poland-included-on-us-list-of-countries-with-restricted-ai-chip-exports/
Reuters. (2022, September 29). Poland imposes sanctions on Russia's Gazprom Export, interior ministry says. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/poland-imposes-sanctions-russias-gazprom-export-interior-ministry-says-2022-09-29/
U.S. Embassy & Consulate in Poland. (2022, October 20). The Impact of Sanctions and Export Controls on the Russian Federation. U.S. Embassy & Consulate in Poland. https://pl.usembassy.gov/the-impact-of-sanctions-and-export-controls-on-the-russian-federation/
U.S. Department of State. (2023, May 18). United States Imposes Additional Sanctions and Export Controls on Russia. U.S. Department of State. https://www.state.gov/united-states-imposes-additional-sanctions-and-export-controls-on-russia/
Bureau of Industry and Security. (n.d.). Commerce Strengthens Export Controls to Restrict China’s Capability to Produce Advanced Semiconductors for Military Applications. Bureau of Industry and Security. https://www.bis.gov/index.php/documents/about-bis/newsroom/press-releases/3257-commerce-strengthens-export-controls-to-restrict-china-s-capability-to-produce-advanced-semiconductors-for-military-applications
Kyiv Post. (2024, December 27). How Poland’s Trade with Russia Undermines EU Sanctions and Support for Ukraine. Kyiv Post. https://www.kyivpost.com/analysis/25475
Holland & Knight. (n.d.). United States Imposes Expanded Sanctions and Export Controls on Russia. Holland & Knight. https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2023/05/united-states-imposes-expanded-sanctions-and-export-controls-on-russia
U.S. Department of Commerce. (2022, October 7). Commerce Implements New Export Controls on Advanced Computing and Semiconductor Manufacturing Items to the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Bureau of Industry and Security. https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/about-bis/newsroom/press-releases/3184-2022-10-07-bis-press-release-advanced-computing-and-semiconductor-manufacturing-controls/file
The White House. (2023, September 16). Fact Sheet: U.S. Imposes Additional Sanctions and Export Controls on Russia. The White House. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/09/16/fact-sheet-u-s-imposes-additional-sanctions-and-export-controls-on-russia/
Council on Foreign Relations. (2025, January 13). What to Know About the New U.S. AI Diffusion Policy and Export Controls. Council on Foreign Relations. https://www.cfr.org/blog/what-know-about-new-us-ai-diffusion-policy-and-export-controls
CSIS. (n.d.). Choking off China’s Access to the Future of AI. Center for Strategic and International Studies. https://www.csis.org/analysis/choking-chinas-access-future-ai
ITIF. (2025, January 7). Export Controls on AI Chips: Biden’s Overreach Risks U.S. Leadership in Tech. Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. https://itif.org/publications/2025/01/07/export-controls-on-ai-chips-bidens-overreach-risks-us-leadership-tech/
Reuters. (2023, October 16). Exclusive: U.S. tackles loopholes in curbs on AI chip exports to China. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/technology/us-tackles-loopholes-curbs-ai-chip-exports-china-2023-10-16/
Politico. (2024, December 2). Biden tightens tech controls on China as clock ticks down. Politico. https://www.politico.com/news/2024/12/02/biden-tightens-tech-controls-on-china-as-clock-ticks-down-00129658
Brookings. (2022, November 18). The geopolitical implications of U.S. export controls on AI chips. Brookings Institution. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2022/11/18/the-geopolitical-implications-of-u-s-export-controls-on-ai-chips/
Digitimes. (2025, January 21). Poland is now under US sanctions, cut off from advanced tech. Digitimes. https://www.digitimes.com/news/a20250120PD225/poland-technology-intel-development-packaging.html
Reuters. (2025, January 15). Poland hit by US AI chip export limits. Euro Weekly News. https://www.reuters.com/technology/poland-hit-by-us-ai-chip-export-limits-2025-01-15/
Notes from Poland. (2025, January 15). Concern as Poland included on US list of countries with restricted AI chip exports. Notes from Poland. https://notesfrompoland.com/2025/01/15/concern-as-poland-included-on-us-list-of-countries-with-restricted-ai-chip-exports/
Politico. (2025, January 20). Poland fumes over US block on AI chips. Politico. https://www.politico.eu/article/poland-fumes-over-us-block-on-ai-chips/
The Washington Post. (2025, January 13). Biden administration toughens AI trade restrictions in bid to box out China. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2025/01/13/biden-ai-trade-restrictions-china/
Euractiv. (2025, January 14). US limits on AI chips split EU. Euractiv. https://www.euractiv.com/section/digital/news/us-limits-on-ai-chips-split-eu/
Financial Times. (2025, January 16). Poland's tech ambitions derailed by US AI chip restrictions. Financial Times. https://www.ft.com/content/poland-tech-ambitions-derailed-us-ai-chip-restrictions
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. (2025, January 20). With Its Latest Rule, the U.S. Tries to Govern AI’s Global Spread. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. https://carnegieendowment.org/2025/01/20/us-tries-to-govern-ai-global-spread-pub-88925
U.S. Department of State. (2025, January 13). U.S. Announces New Export Controls on Advanced Technologies. U.S. Department of State. https://www.state.gov/u-s-announces-new-export-controls-on-advanced-technologies/
The New York Times. (2025, January 14). U.S. Chips Export Controls Leave Poland in the Cold. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/14/business/economy/us-chips-export-controls-poland.html
Wall Street Journal. (2025, January 16). U.S. Tech Sanctions on Poland Highlight Geopolitical Frictions. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-tech-sanctions-on-poland-highlight-geopolitical-frictions-11610888200
Bloomberg. (2025, January 15). Poland's Tech Ambitions Stalled by U.S. Sanctions on AI Chips. Bloomberg. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-01-15/poland-s-tech-ambitions-stalled-by-u-s-sanctions-on-ai-chips
Euronews. (2025, January 17). EU Divided by U.S. Tech Sanctions: Poland in the Second Tier. Euronews. https://www.euronews.com/2025/01/17/eu-divided-by-us-tech-sanctions-poland-in-the-second-tier
The Guardian. (2025, January 18). Poland's AI Dreams Dashed by US Export Controls. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jan/18/poland-ai-dreams-dashed-by-us-export-controls
Foreign Policy. (2025, January 19). The Impact of U.S. Sanctions on Poland's Tech Future. Foreign Policy. https://foreignpolicy.com/2025/01/19/us-sanctions-poland-tech-future/
TechCrunch. (2025, January 20). Poland Navigates US Tech Sanctions with New Strategies. TechCrunch. https://techcrunch.com/2025/01/20/poland-navigates-us-tech-sanctions-with-new-strategies/
Notes from Poland. (2025, January 15). Concern as Poland included on US list of countries with restricted AI chip exports. Notes from Poland. https://notesfrompoland.com/2025/01/15/concern-as-poland-included-on-us-list-of-countries-with-restricted-ai-chip-exports/
Politico. (2025, January 20). Poland fumes over US block on AI chips. Politico. https://www.politico.eu/article/poland-fumes-over-us-block-on-ai-chips/
Reuters. (2025, January 15). Poland hit by US AI chip export limits. Euro Weekly News. https://www.reuters.com/technology/poland-hit-by-us-ai-chip-export-limits-2025-01-15/
Digitimes. (2025, January 21). Poland is now under US sanctions, cut off from advanced tech. Digitimes. https://www.digitimes.com/news/a20250120PD225/poland-technology-intel-development-packaging.html
Financial Times. (2025, January 16). Poland's tech ambitions derailed by US AI chip restrictions. Financial Times. https://www.ft.com/content/poland-tech-ambitions-derailed-us-ai-chip-restrictions
The Economist. (2025, January 18). The strategic cost of US sanctions on Poland's tech sector. The Economist. https://www.economist.com/europe/2025/01/18/the-strategic-cost-of-us-sanctions-on-polands-tech-sector
Bloomberg. (2025, January 19). Poland Seeks Tech Alternatives Amid US Sanctions. Bloomberg. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-01-19/poland-seeks-tech-alternatives-amid-us-sanctions
Euractiv. (2025, January 17). Poland's Response to US Tech Sanctions: A Diplomatic Dance. Euractiv. https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/news/polands-response-to-us-tech-sanctions-a-diplomatic-dance/
Politico. (2025, January 20). Poland fumes over US block on AI chips. Politico. https://www.politico.eu/article/poland-fumes-over-us-block-on-ai-chips/
Euractiv. (2025, January 22). EU leaders weigh response to US tech sanctions on Poland. Euractiv. https://www.euractiv.com/section/digital/news/eu-leaders-weigh-response-to-us-tech-sanctions-on-poland/
NATO. (2025, January 18). NATO Secretary General discusses tech security with Polish President. NATO. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_220018.htm
Bloomberg. (2025, January 21). Poland Explores Diplomatic Options to Counter US Tech Sanctions. Bloomberg. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-01-21/poland-explores-diplomatic-options-to-counter-us-tech-sanctions
The Guardian. (2025, January 23). Poland's tech ambitions at risk due to US sanctions, experts warn. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jan/23/polands-tech-ambitions-at-risk-due-to-us-sanctions-experts-warn
Reuters. (2025, January 19). Poland looks eastward for tech partnerships amid US sanctions. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/technology/poland-looks-eastward-tech-partnerships-amid-us-sanctions-2025-01-19/
Financial Times. (2025, January 24). Poland's strategic tech pivot: A response to US sanctions. Financial Times. https://www.ft.com/content/poland-strategic-tech-pivot-response-us-sanctions
DW. (2025, January 22). EU tech strategy in focus after US sanctions on Poland. Deutsche Welle. https://www.dw.com/en/eu-tech-strategy-in-focus-after-us-sanctions-on-poland/a-56543211