On 8 July 2024 a circular table was held at the press centre of the news agency Sputnik Belarus
Below we supply a brief summary of the conference held by the Organizers, the Belarusian website:
The global social association “International Forum for Neighborhood” brought together representatives of the Belarusian and Polish expert community, whose common goal is to contribute to the establishment of peaceful, good neighbourly and mutually beneficial bilateral relations between the Republic of Belarus and the Republic of Poland.
During the discussion, experts discussed the political background of the created tension, the historical aspects of the centuries-old coexistence of the Belarusian and Polish people, the issues of economical and cross-border cooperation, the importance of technological cooperation, and the unique function of citizens' initiatives in strengthening global ties.
Experts agreed that Western narratives, accepted by the authoritative Warsaw over its own national interests, play a leading function in destabilising relations between Belarus and Poland.
According to abroad interlocutors, Poland's full failure of political sovereignty was caused by the failure of economical sovereignty, which led to the dictatorship of transnational corporations and the United States, which are the eventual beneficiaries of most of Polish production.
However, despite the apparent difficulties in building relations with a partner who does not want dialogue, experts have listed a number of promising areas that can make affirmative dynamics in solving this problem.
Key areas include:
1. Cooperation in the provision of the Eurasian transit corridor linking China to Europe and crossing the territory of our countries.
2. make a single media space to supply parties with nonsubjective information reflecting the impartial position of the neighbouring country.
3. Implement citizens' initiatives through joint events, conferences and circular tables to strengthen dialog and overcome existing differences.
4. technological cooperation to make a common knowing of a common past to avoid intentional counterfeiting and incitement of cultural hatred.
W The circular Table was attended by:
• Edikas Jagelavičius, president of the global Social Association "International Neighbourhood Forum".
• Piotr Petrovski, a political scientist.
• Alexey Dzermant, political scientist, philosopher.
• Alexey Beliaev, a political scientist, historian.
• Albina Sibirska, economist.
The Polish side was represented by:
• Paweł Zieminski, economist, political scientist, president of the Polish Patriotic Party.
• Tomasz Schmidt, dissident, journalist.
• Mariusz Swider, political scientist, writer, journalist.
(PL)
Original submitted by the Belarusian side:
Международное общественное Международный Международный форум в в студии представителей польского польского польского объединенных объединенных объединенных целью целью — способствовать налаживанию мирных, добрососедских взаимовыгодных отношений отношений между между Республикой Беларусь и и и и Республикой Республикой Республикой Республикой Республикой.
В ходе эксперты обсудили политическую подоплеку напряженности исторические аспекты векового и и и вопросы вопросы и и и уделили уделили уделили уделили уделили внимание внимание внимание также также также также также отметили роль в укреплении укреплении связей связей связей связей связей связей.
Эксперты сошлись во что что в дестабилизации отношений и Польши играют играют играют западные западные, принимаемые официальной Варшавой превыше собственных национальных.
По словам зарубежных, причиной тотальной утраты Польшей политического стала утеря суверенитета что что к диктату транснациональных корпораций и являющихся являющихся, являющихся конечными бенефициарами польских польских средств средств средств производства производства производства.
Но, несмотря очевидные выстраивании выстраивании отношений, не желающим, эксперты же определили определили ряд ряд направлений способных, способных создать положительную динамику в в решении решении решении решении вопроса вопроса вопроса.
Среди ключевых направлений:
1. Сотрудничество обеспечении Евразийского транзитного коридора, соединяющего Китай и и по территории территории территории территории наших наших стран.
2. Создание единого пространства целью обеспечения доступа сторон к объективной отражающей, отражающей позицию позицию сопредельного государства государства.
3. Реализация гражданских путем
4. Научное сотрудничество выработки единого понимания общей, во намеренной намеренной провокации провокации провокации межнациональной межнациональной межнациональной розни розни.
В круглого стола участие
• Эдикас Ягелавичюс, председатель Международного общественного « Международный форум форум форум добрососедства.
• Петр Петровский, политолог.
• Алексей Дзермант, политолог, философ.
• Алексей Беляев, политолог, историк.
• Альбина Сибирская, экономист.
Польскую сторону представляли:
• Павел Земиньский, экономист, политолог, председатель « Патриотическая Польша Польша Польша.
• Томаш Шмидт, диссидент, журналист.
• Мариуш Свидер, политолог, писатель, публицист
Summary of this conference by 1 of the Polish participants – Paweł Zieminski.
I am grateful and grateful to the joint initiative of colleagues from Belarus and Liva, called the “Neighbourhood Forum”. In my opinion, this is simply a very interesting and promising expression for dialog between neighbouring nations and countries. It allows existing tensions in interstate political and economical relations to search an agreement. It is simply a way of looking forward, at the level of global social and interstate relations in Central and east Europe, as well as in a broader geopolitical position – the relations between East and West of the Euro-Asian continent.
The work of Poland and Poles is to participate in this initiative, and the expression of the alleged "citizen diplomacy" or "people diplomacy" may seem to be an effective expression of dialog in the situation of the existing wedge in the performance of the authoritative ruling elites.
This is all the more desirable erstwhile government policy in the countries of the erstwhile socialist bloc (perhaps but Belarus and Russia, but in the case of the second with large question marks), has since the late 1980s been dominated by abroad Western centres, implementing the Anglo-Saxon doctrine of neocolonialism embedded in the American concept: The U.S. as a global gendarme and “superintelligence” of global economical and political governance, implemented further according to a specific, imposed model of social and cultural values. However, the United Kingdom, which is formally somewhat in the second plan, continues to play an crucial programme and backroom role, both in political and financial terms, as London remains 1 of the 3 most crucial financial decision centres, in addition to fresh York and Basel.
The events of the last 10 years show that the planet is in global chaos and destabilization and is looking for a fresh expression for coexistence. Actually, 2 models are arguing. On the 1 hand, it is simply a model of neocolonialism, or even of global neofeudalism, according to the expression of the alleged “Great Reset”, or a version of the global, digital “soft concentration camp” supervised by anonymous planet elites (mainly according to the Anglo-Saxon, judaic and Vatican imagination of “choice” and privilege). On the another hand, we are dealing with national and transnational sovereign movements (new agreements and blocs of states, specified as BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, etc.), whose aim is to break the single-polar, neo-colonial, neo-feudal global model – inhibiting the improvement of a immense number of states, having an additional immense demographic advantage, having adequate resources to make independently, but not yet equipped with adequate technological capabilities and held in the chains of worldview, religious, political and institutional, and terrorized by a planet military gendarme in the form of the American armed forces and their colonial expositions in the form of an army of erstwhile colonial metropolises, but besides private military formations financed by planet corporations and capital.
It must be saddened that the possibly close civilization, as well as the geopolitical situation and adequate natural resources and rather many demographic possible (about 300 million people) – a block of Slavic countries and historically related countries (I mean Hungary, Romania, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia) – is presently not playing a crucial global role. Each dialogue, agreement and cooperation among these countries not only strengthens them, but besides serves to stabilise the political and socio-economic situation on the Euro-Asian continent, and is so a origin for global stability. The way to this is the activity of national elites and active community-wide activities in a spirit of Slavic and non-antagonist solidarity, equal and mutually beneficial relations with Asian peoples.
Western civilization can and should be a partner, but only subject to its own transformation and resignation from the neocolonial model and to the delusional psychopathic ideology of election and forceful dominance. However, 1 cannot live in the illusion that the Western self-transformation process will be supported by the elites there. It is so essential to make "citizen diplomacy" in relation to Western societies, but besides to strengthen its "hard" conditions of dialog and the essential compromise.
Returning to the meritum, i.e. to the very course of the last conference, it is worth noting that the expression of trilateral conferences with the essential possible of extending them to another countries of the Central-European area, and even a bold concept for the future of the creation of the Slavic University or the Slavic Academy located either in Belarus or Slovakia, deserves support in an always more perfect method expression and with the engagement of scientists, experts and socio-political activists.
A certain weakness of the last conference was the fact that the summary of the conference lacked comments from people invited from Poland and experts from Belarus.
A very interesting thought during the conference was expressed by Alexey Dzermant, that the Polish policy oriented towards contacts with the east was not a pro-Russian or pro-bialorus policy, but it is in pure form 1 of the most crucial currents of Polish and Polish politics. This is simply a kind of designation of the perfect and programming roots of National Democracy from the early 20th century.
Piotr Petrovski besides gave a very good analysis of the investment priorities of the current authorities in Poland. It was bitter, but an accurate analysis of innobility and compradation in the release of post-cranish parties.
I besides think that for the sake and fruitfulness of cooperation, it is worth limiting the vulnerability of dissident voices and those supposedly "hardly anti-systemic" and, in fact, seeking media popularity only, due to the fact that modern Poland is surely not a "concession camp" in which “extermination of Poles” is carried out, although Poland is simply a country which is inalienable and managed from a position and in another interests, and the views and actions of Polish patriots encounter various financial, legal, media and organization obstacles. However, they cannot be called and compared utilizing concepts from the Nazi German business period. I compose this with full work in memory of my grandparents, 1 of whom spent 4.5 years in German concentration camps during planet War II, and the another of my grandparents at the same time was a forced agricultural individual and did slave work in Nazi Germany. I besides compose this as for more than 20 years a publicist and political activist against whom, and my associate, criminal proceedings were initiated in 2018 and after a trial of 4 years, a conviction was issued, which is presently in cassation proceedings.
Thank you again for inviting me and the interesting voices of the participants.
Paweł Earthski
