Instead of building a leading position in Central and Eastern Europe, trying to prevent the expansion of Russia, balancing German influences and strengthening relationships with the U.S., Poland began to “swim” within the main stream, that is to orient itself towards the strongest countries in Europe, endorsing their policies, obediently listening to their voices, and giving up activities that would meet with their disapproval.
The total change in policy towards Russia in recent years, suggested to us by France, Germany and other EU countries, means renouncing the promotion of the values which once were identified with “Solidarity”. Rather than supporting the Russian opposition and the democrats in Russia’s neighbouring countries, Polish politicians are hugging Putin. This policy has led to the Smolensk tragedy and the aftermath disaster, which demonstrates the total helplessness of the Polish Republic, and the complete cynicism and nihilism of the Polish authorities.
The Civic Platform’s rule causes the disintegration of political will of Poles both in terms of external and internal policy – although the tragedy of 10 April, 2010 caused a reflex of opposition and social mobilisation. In domestic and foreign policy, Donald Tusk’s government followed the line of least resistance. National populism was translated into the foreign policy of deference to Russia, France and Germany, the resignation from independent politics and celebration of the apparent success – visits and rituals.
There were attempts to advance Polish politicians to high ranking international positions, mostly completely nonsensical, hopeless or even fake, as took place recently in the case of Leszek Balcerowicz – the one-day Polish candidate to head the IMF, which gave an excuse for short-term useful media noise.
Instead of building a leading position in Central and Eastern Europe, trying to prevent the expansion of Russia, balancing German influences and strengthening relationships with the U.S., Poland began to “swim” within the main stream, that is to orient itself towards the strongest countries in Europe, endorsing their policies, obediently listening to their voices, and giving up activities that would meet with their disapproval.
Przemyslaw Zurawski vel Grajewski rightly wrote in “Common Things”: “When the policy of Law and Justice Government supported by President Lech Kaczynski forced the other participants in the international arena to action, the current government and presidential policy allows for” servicing” of Polish foreign policy towards other countries with meaningless gestures. Before 10 April 2010, the presidential centre was opposed to such politics. The Smolensk disaster finally ended this era. Since then, the Polish voice abroad is uniform and consistent. It reads: “Take us for granted.”
Poland in the role of an obedient pony
The resignation from more ambitious action is even more dangerous because the international situation has changed to our disadvantage.
After the departure of George W. Bush there was a major change in U.S. policy. At the time of the intervention in Iraq, much has been written about the differences between the U.S. and Europe, and the divisions of the West. At that time Poland played an important role in American politics. United States needed Polish support – not so much military as political and moral. Poland, on the other hand, was right to seek an active U.S. presence in Europe and sought to develop transatlantic relations, which strengthened its position in relation to France and Germany. As a result, there were accusations that Poland was a “Trojan Horse” in Europe for the United States. Today, nobody in the U.S. is talking about a “new Europe”, which can eclipse the importance of “old Europe”. The “Trojan Horse” of America has turned into an obedient pony. The United States largely withdrew from an active role in Europe. This is due to the policy of Obama, who does not understand and is not interested in European affairs and who depends primarily on improving relations with Russia. Unfortunately, despite his fondness for Islam and his interest in Asia, Obama’s perceptions about the world and Europe correspond to the average American leftist liberal. These are not the views in which Poland can occupy an important place or induce warm feelings.
The position of the U.S. was also weakened by the financial and economic crisis and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Until recently, many books used to appear on imperialism and the empire, suggesting that the U.S. has become a global empire, guarding the world order. Now there is a return to the ideology of the decline of America, and the growing strength of China, India and Brazil. It denied the thesis that the world will increasingly be managed globally by international organisations.
Some people think that there will be return to the nineteenth century, and the most significant division will occur between the West opting for international cooperation and the new powers that will cultivate a policy of zones of influence. However – argues the author of an article in the May issue of “Foreign Affairs” – this is not a geographical division: isolationists, protectionists and anti-internationalists are also present in the West, and advocates of renewal and expansion of ruling multilateral institutions are not lacking in Asia. (G. John Ikenberry, “The Future of the Liberal Internationalism After World Order, America,” Foreign Affairs, May / June 2011).
In the grip of the Franco-German “directorate”
The withdrawal of the Americans, the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty and the economic crisis in Greece, Ireland and Portugal have contributed to the situation that the European Union is no longer a union of equal states with equal rights. The EU is de facto ruled by the Franco-German “directorate”. Of course, they do not govern in the absolutist manner and the large countries need to consult with smaller about their decisions, and also with the EU institutions. There is no doubt, however, that in recent years the power of these two countries in Europe has increased immensely. Greece has become in fact an EU protectorate. Many smaller countries have already lost their independent foreign policy. The same is happening with Poland. The evidence can be seen in the closure of several diplomatic missions and cultural institutions, in the withdrawal from many regions in which Poland was present, as well as in the disappearance of international politics in the Polish media. Poland is pursuing its policy as a member of the Union only in accordance with the line laid out by the “directorate.”
When crime becomes an asset
In the “directorate” not everything proceeds smoothly, as the Germans aim to become the sole leader. French policy is still guided by two traditional rules: the inclusion of Germany in Europe to constrain them from acting too independently, and the maintenance of balance between France and Germany in Europe, including economic balance. But it becomes increasingly difficult. Germany emerges from the crisis strengthened economically and politically. Headlines appear in the press, such as in the latest edition of the”Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung” (June 12): “The fullness of power throughout Europe. Many European countries are not doing well. Germany is in excellent shape. The government in Berlin does not hide it.” At the same time, both economic and political activities in Germany provoke strong resistance in the smaller European countries, particularly on the southern periphery of the Union.
Germany becomes more ambitious and increasingly less “European”. These trends, existing for a long time, are now noticed by those who until recently remained uncritical of Germany’s European policy. Jürgen Habermas wrote in “Süddeutsche Zeitung” (7 April, 2011): “National unification in Germany began a change of mentality, which (as shown by studies in political science) also affected the self-understanding and orientation of German foreign policy and turned it inwards, towards a greater focus on itself. From the 90s on, the self-awareness of the “middle power” (Mittelmacht – which can also be translated as central power), increases gradually, backed by military force, acting as a player on the world stage.” Today, the term “middle power” (Mittelmacht) replaces the former “civilian power” (Zivilmacht). Habermas points to the “priority of national interests” and the judgement of the German Constitutional Court, which turns out to be the “guardian of the nation-state identity.” Articles about the need to strengthen the nation-state appear in the German press and more and more Germans become critical of the EU. In 2002, 40 per cent of polls showed no or little confidence in the Union with 49 per cent declaring confidence or great confidence; today 67 per cent of those polled lack confidence or have little confidence and 25 per cent declare confidence or great confidence. Only 41 per cent would agree with the statement that “Europe is our Future”, 34 per cent reject it (FAZ, 26 January, 2010).
Germany has achieved a seemingly impossible thing – turning their terrible past into an asset. Today they are the guardians of remembrance of the Holocaust. The mechanical transfer of the German model, “overcoming the past” is being shifted to other countries as applicable. It is no longer a reminder of the horrific crimes and an act to compensate victims. The memory of the Holocaust has additional political functions. Once it was used to convince of the importance of the European integration, today it is used to suppress the national aspirations and ambitions of countries of Central and Eastern Europe. A recent example is Hungary, where the dangerous memory of the traumatic experience of the Treaty of Trianon (1920 – ed.) is replaced by the democratising memory of the Holocaust. Recently, the Polish-German dispute about history ended with the quiet capitulation when power was transferred to the Civic Platform. The issue was not just historical truth, but also dominance in the sphere of symbols and ideas about “Deutungshochheit” (sovereignty of interpretation), without which it would be difficult for Germany to become a superpower.
Victims of Smolensk are not the end
The strengthening of Polish sovereignty does not seem worth the effort to the ruling camp in Poland, because – as stated by Bronislaw Komorowski in the address during his swearing-in message – “We’re free and we live in a free world, in a free country. Nobody is stalking our Polish freedom, nobody is stalking us”. It appears that he thinks – and his political camp led by Donald Tusk – that there are no fundamental conflicts of interest between Poland and other countries and that this freedom does not require consolidation and defence.
So we can sleep peacefully. And if necessary, we can simply join the stronger and the wiser. We were eager to join the Euro Plus pact, which – if it enters into force – will mean the subordination of large areas of our economic policy, such as taxation, to the Union, that is to the most powerful European states. Let us recall how once Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder aroused great indignation by his proposal to harmonise taxes across Europe. What is more, following the example of Germany, we have agreed not to take part in operations in Libya, undermining the cohesion of NATO, which certainly is not in our interest. Today it is also obvious that the German minister for foreign affairs is involved in the diplomatic talks regarding the Kaliningrad District – although the case allegedly concerns an integral part of the Russian Federation and Poland and, at most, the EU as a whole. The total change in policy towards Russia in recent years, suggested to us by France, Germany and other EU countries, means renouncing the promotion of the values which once were identified with “Solidarity”. Rather than supporting the Russian opposition and the democrats in Russia’s neighbouring countries, Polish politicians are hugging Putin. This policy has led to the Smolensk tragedy and the aftermath disaster, which demonstrates the total helplessness of the Polish Republic, and the complete cynicism and nihilism of the Polish authorities. Nothing better illustrates the effects of policies offered to us by Donald Tusk and his party. And only the incurable optimist would believe that it will end with 96 victims and one wrecked plane.
Źródło: Freepl.info/Gazeta Polska 15 June 2011 No 24