The risk of incidents involving explosive materials in Poland

In recent weeks, the media have reported incidents that at first glance may appear isolated— a suspicious parcel reported by an employee, an artillery round brought to a police station, or the evacuation of a building following a bomb threat. Such situations, however, are not merely media curiosities. They form part of the real risk environment in which public institutions and businesses in Central and Eastern Europe operate today.

Poland remains one of the countries most heavily affected by the remnants of World War II and by the long-term presence of the Soviet Army’s Northern Group of Forces. The legacy of former bases, ammunition depots, and training grounds is still reflected in the number of explosive and hazardous items being discovered. Each year, military EOD teams recover and neutralize tens of thousands of unexploded ordnance and duds. These are found not only in forests and fields, but also during the construction of roads, residential developments, production facilities, and logistics centers. Increasingly, such items also enter scrap collection points and, from there, industrial facilities along with raw material deliveries.

In recent years, there have been multiple instances in which the discovery of unexploded ordnance brought entire cities to a standstill. In 2023, the discovery of an aerial bomb in Głogów forced the evacuation of thousands of residents. The neutralization operation of the “Tallboy” bomb in Świnoujście demonstrated the scale of logistical and technical challenges associated with securing such objects. Similar evacuations have taken place in Lublin, Wrocław, Kraków, and other urban centers. Each such incident entails operational shutdowns, employee evacuations, transport disruptions, and tangible financial costs. Above all, however, it represents a real threat to human health and life.

The regional security environment is also evolving. The ongoing war in Ukraine has resulted in an increased presence of weapons and ammunition within international circulation. Experience from other conflicts shows that as wars persist, the risk of illicit arms trafficking and smuggling attempts rises. States in the region must therefore account for the possibility of an increase in incidents involving the illegal possession of ammunition, grenades, or other military ordnance.

At the same time, Europe will face the challenge of reintegrating individuals returning from conflict zones. The vast majority of these individuals primarily require systemic and psychological support. From a security management perspective, however, this also means operating within a more complex and less predictable risk environment, in which access to weapons may be easier than in previous years. This is not a matter of sensational forecasts, but of a responsible assessment of security trends.

The most serious issue is not the mere existence of explosive items. Unexploded ordnance will continue to be discovered for decades, and incidents related to illicit arms trafficking may periodically increase. What is decisive is the level of organizational preparedness.

In practice, a crisis rarely begins at the moment of an explosion. It starts earlier— with a decision made under conditions of uncertainty. With an attempt to move a discovered object. With handling a suspicious item. With a disregarded parcel. With the absence of a clear and unambiguous procedure.

Public institutions and enterprises are also increasingly confronted with bomb threats. Some of these are hoaxes; nevertheless, each one triggers procedures, evacuations, and emergency service responses. Every such incident tests an organization’s actual resilience— whether personnel know how to react, whether decisions are made quickly and according to clear frameworks, or whether improvisation and chaos prevail.

Effective risk management in the area of explosive and hazardous items requires a systemic approach: recognition of explosive and dangerous items (PWiN), identification of threats within the supply chain, appropriate responses to suspicious parcels and bomb threats, and regular drills of evacuation procedures. In an environment of growing geopolitical uncertainty, these measures become a component of responsible organizational management rather than merely an additional safeguard.

For sixteen years, Global Protection Group has specialized in training and projects aimed at reducing risks associated with explosive and hazardous items (PWiN) and bomb threats, supporting organizations in building genuine preparedness for crisis situations. Experience clearly shows one thing: the level of preparedness directly affects decision-making in the first minutes of an incident— and it is those minutes that most often determine the scale of the consequences.

We have no influence over where or when the next unexploded ordnance will be discovered, nor over how the security environment will evolve in the coming years. We do, however, have influence over whether an organization responds in an orderly manner, grounded in knowledge and rehearsed procedures.

In the domain of explosive threats, the difference between an incident and a tragedy very often comes down to a single factor: preparedness. And preparedness always begins long before a threat emerges.