No Polish politician or expert in global realities has been and is yet able to explain to the public, but the loud rhetoric of “curriculation” and “holy” dogmas, which is the real intent of the Polish policy towards Ukraine.
Resisting on Russia's denial, imposing further sanctions on Russia, while defending Ukraine and pumping money into it to sustain government Volodymyr ZelenskiTurned out to be the way to nowhere. The fact that Russia “must lose” cannot be a goal is, at most, a stubborn postulate, a “desire wish”, a naive expectation, not respecting reality, its own inability and its own interests. Rather, it shows any possession of psychosis that does not undergo rational analysis.
Against the background of a sobering society, 1 can be tempted to task that the presidential election in 2025 will win in Poland this candidate who will halt speaking nonsense about “our war”, that Ukrainians are fighting for “our freedom” and that “self-appointed advocate” to integrate Ukrainian “Wild Fields” into Europe, with a kleptocrat government and oligarchical property, is any peculiar mission of subsequent Polish governments. Candidates incapable to answer questions about how to halt Ukrainian disassembling in different cities of Poland (the Main marketplace Square has become a symbol), regardless of the wings of COPIS they come from, will endure a terrible defeat. For people are tired of this "living hospitality" and the distress of undesirable visitors.
For more than 2 years, the conceptual confusion about "our war" shows how easy public opinion could be manipulated to gain support for a powerful engagement on the side of Ukrainian oligarchy through a comparatively simple rhetorical procedure. In fact, Poles together with the Ukrainian people became victims of the cynical game of the West. utilizing tacky slogans that we are “ministers of the Ukrainian people” was proof of political infantilism, but besides of the zeal of the neophytes, who were assigned to the function of “avanguard” in fueling this conflict. It is time to clearly revise this harmful policy.
In the alleged political establishment and survey circles, everyone as 1 husband proclaims that it is about defending the territorial integrity of Ukraine and its sovereignty. However, these qualities have been lost to Ukraine since the alleged Orange Revolution 2004. Polish diplomacy was not indifferent in these processes, supporting the alleged westernization of the neighbour. The annexation of Crimea by Russia and the outbreak of separatists in the east were the consequence of another ‘unique revolution’, which was called the ‘revolution of dignity’, though with the real dignity of the Ukrainian people neither at the time nor at present had anything to do with it. Rather, it was humiliating the Ukrainians through colonial plunder of their natural materials, wizards and freedom. These trials were attended by local, Soviet, but besides global oligarchy, large corporations and governments, but it is simply a taboo subject. An embargo was imposed on the word "oligarch" itself, although it is known that they will decide on Ukraine's systemic form for decades to come. It's property that decides freedom, not the another way around. In Poland, this subject practically does not be in any form in political discourse.
The biggest problem of the Polish east Policy (if it is inactive justified to usage this term) is that in period III of the Polish Republic no coherent doctrine has been developed, which would contain its own, in accordance with the national interest methodological assumptions for the conduct of subsequent teams in Kiev. Announced during Government Hanna Suchocka The "strategic partnership" was a nonchalant and propaganda tromtadration, without preparation and reflection. First of all, a political explanation of the deep conditions of common relations, from geopolitics to geohistory and geoculture, to geoeconomics and misperception, was needed. These concepts sound abstract to many, but it was primarily about the knowing of how the 2 countries, the burden of past on their shoulders, including the pretensions, prejudices and feelings of harm, are divided in terms of cultural habits, customs and confession, and yet what possible the states gotta think in terms of regional interests.
To this day, no authoritative politician on the Polish side (what can be heard on the Ukrainian side) is able to admit that Ukraine may not only grow up as a competitor in the east Europe region but as a regional rival of Poland in integration processes in Europe. The erstwhile allies of Poland in the West, including Germany in particular, will make all effort to rise Ukraine to the leader of the region, which is due to their imagination of Mitteleuropa and their erstwhile commitment. However, the Polish authorities themselves under the COPIS insist on the fast adoption of Ukraine into the integration structures of the West – the European Union and NATO – to make their situation clearly worse if 1 looks at the competitiveness of the agricultural market, the processing manufacture or transport service.
Is any of the Polish politicians able to imagine that the stronger Ukraine will be, the greater its tendency to retaliate historical harm and pay Poland with territorial claims and flag nationalism?
The Ukrainian authorities are presently benefiting from the peculiar immunity and legitimacy resulting from the emergency situation of war and the unconditional support of external forces. president Zelenski and the head of the cabinet Andrij Jermak have unlimited power, which, however, hangs in the balance of Western powers. It is up to them to find the quality of the relation with Poland, whose authorities are disappointed by the deficiency of gratitude for the assistance given in the war with Russia. However, Ukrainians do not show good will to “disarm” the most hard historical bomb, in the form of an exhumation licence for victims of the Volyn massacre. It is now known that specified acts are dangerous primarily for the Ukrainian regime, as they would uncover the size of the crimes committed by “heroes” from the signs of the CNS and UPA.
On the part of the Polish political elite, this is an apparent disaster, announcing harmful effects on their own interests. In addition, no 1 takes seriously the option that, in the event of the reversal of Ukrainian policy vectors and their return to the east, or even towards China, Poland will stay alone and even blamed for Ukrainian failures in the conflict with Russia.
With respect to the aftermath of the U.S. presidential election, we are dealing with a comic denial of earlier support for the erstwhile Democratic squad in the US administration. Although no of the Polish politicians call it that, there has been a turn in American society from alleged missionary internationalism and globalism towards distance, protectionism and defending their own interests. This is simply a crucial signal that liberal elites in Europe, as well as in Poland, must number for a revival of anti-EU and even anti-Western tendencies. Russia, despite sanctions and attempts to isolate it in the global system, is now becoming 1 of the leaders of the fresh BRICS+ group, associated with the Global South. For this reason, we should anticipate deep decomposition in America's relations with the alleged remainder of the world.
It seemed that after the end of the “cold war” between the Communist East and the capitalist West, ideological confrontation between countries on specified a scale as after planet War II would never be repeated. Meanwhile, the place of the old divisions in the 21st century was replaced by global cracks on the background of poorness and wealth, revisions of the existing power systems and preservation of the position quo, economical globalisation and cultural universalization against nationalisms and particularisms, left-liberal axiology and conservative-traditionalism.
Russia has a position in these dichotomies of opposition to everything associated with the West. For these reasons, after rising from the collapse of the 1990s, he definitely defends not only his state of possession, but besides aspires, thanks to the raw-nuclear assets, to take an crucial voice on reconstruction of global order. It stabilizes and even strengthens its position, which on the western side meets frontal attacks.
After the “cold war”, the West has inherited hostility towards Russia as a “carrier” and “intervention force”, giving meaning to NATO's collective action, as well as the European Union. Despite the various declarations of the 1990s, these bodies evolved not to accomplish common, desirable goals with Russia (indivisible security, complementary economy, disarmament, the fight against terrorism and climate warming), but against its aspirations to return to normality and to enter the global community with its differentness. It turned out fast enough, due to the fact that already during the President's first word Vladimir Putinthat for specified a “separate” Russia, reasoning in terms of power, there is no place in this community, commanded by the West.
Hostility is simply a gradual category, and at different times we are dealing with its relativisation alternatively than absolutisation. Only states determined to destruct each another in the way of war are guided by a "hateful hostility", rather total. Hostility is expressed in collective action against another State ( States) and its (their) leaders. It is measured by the strength of attributing negative qualities to them, the emotional perception of the dangers from them, the willingness to harm and the self-sacrifice of sacrifices in defence of their rations.
In modern global relations, no 1 declares specified hostility, the intent of which is to completely annihilate a nation or state. Civilization progress, expressed in the normative defence of the interests of existential states (especially the right to their existence and duration) and technological safeguards, in the form of weapons of mass demolition and the ability to strike back against possible attackers, caused that full war can only be born in the minds of sick individuals. This does not mean that the top powers do not have ready scenarios of atomic destruction. It is worth reaching out to a fresh book Annie Jacobsen " atomic War. Possible scenario" (Kraków 2024).
With respect to Russia, there is no shortage of fantasies in which its breakdown, dismemberment or full elimination is called a "political necessity", dictated by its "immanent evil". specified an enemy deserves the word “objective”, as the Jews were described in Nazi doctrine and practice. The "objective" enemy has inalienable features, i.e. it is not subject to any change, reform, repair or conversion due to natural, even metaphysical characteristics. They are the ones that origin absolute enmity, which assumes utmost measures.
Hostility to Russia is to be unconditional and uncompromising. Speaking of words, Witold Modzelewski, she is “absurd and even stupid” due to the fact that she closes the way to any concessions. This is like the ancient times erstwhile conflicts ended in humiliating the defeated. This is not what Russia is looking for today. It gained an advantage in the war on destruction, which, on the 1 hand, provokes European elites to proceed helping Ukraine, but on the another hand, it manifests itself in an increasingly serious communicative of the necessity to frost the conflict as rapidly as possible.
As you can imagine, all of this reasoning is based on political thought. Carla Schmitt (see Carl Schmitt, “Political Theology and another Writings”, Warsaw 2012) whose reception among the ruling elites in Poland is alternatively rachitic. Nevertheless, they usage their reasoning and acting in a dilemma of constant choice between an enemy and an ally. The notion of hostility in absolute and almost metaphysical terms leads to mad dependence on all protector, even if it threatens to be demeaned, dignified, or given up on subject treatment. Moreover, the hostility of Poles and Poland towards Russia and Russians is primary, rudimentary, profoundly embedded in many idiosyncrasies, while alliances are secondary, variable and most frequently instrumental. The second mostly neglect during the trial, which Poland experienced even in 1939 in the face of Nazi German attacks.
This sounds offensive, but the current Polish-American alliance is mostly a hoax, covering one-sided dependence, especially in the area of purchases of costly weapons and military equipment. American bases in Poland are besides the basis of false glory, as they service primarily the global hegemony of America, and only in the process of improving the well-being of Polish politicians. Poland – despite propaganda declarations – has no treaty safety or privileged position in relations with the US. The colonial complex of all groups on the Polish political scene towards Washington's elites, as well as the inability to emotionally distance themselves towards the heroes of American interior polarization do not build an optimistic perspective.
There is no warrant that in the event of an effort to attack 1 of the 32 NATO associate States, all others will supply effective assistance to the affected state. First of all, Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, which describes the mechanics casus foederis, there is no automatic aid, and in addition, operatingly, only the possible of the strongest countries – the USA, the UK, France or Germany – that will consider defending their own interests before they begin providing allied aid.
The pathological request to be taken care of by a selfish power or not full proven in terms of the effectiveness of multilateral alliances is the consequence of the peculiar enslavement of the minds of Polish decision-makers. They accepted for their credo based on the united strength of the West, while rejecting individual diplomacy. They do not image themselves as assertive interlocutors, persuasion negotiators or competent players in global plurilogue. They depend on 1 hegemonic and Atlantic option, not knowing that in 3 decades of systemic transformation, the global protectorate of the United States has changed, and the integration processes of Europe are going in a direction contrary to the behaviour of an independent national substance.
It turns out that courageous pluralism of external vectorism is possible even in countries smaller than Poland, specified as Hungary, and besides in the Euro-Atlantic possible of Turkey, which are able to prosecute their profits and benefits on many azimuts. Nor do they lose their reputation, as is the case with Poland, which despite the "self-praising" rhetoric of native politicians and compliments of the American ambassador, or alternatively the "governor" or "lord of protector", Marek Brzezińskiis not recognized or respected in the global environment. individual Sympathy Donald Tusk In the ellipse of EU friends, they do not replace what we call the position of a "serious" state, with appreciation for its achievements and global roles.
Hostility towards Russia blinds not only decision-makers, but besides a full lot of acolytes of power – media, experts, or non-reflective “kibs”. It slows down from thought effort, justifies primitive atavism, and besides makes their conviction of their own patriotism credible. Focusing on combating independent views and analyses, Poland has led to intellectual paralysis funded by the state and by abroad analytical centres, which unreflexively, or enthusiastically, supported an endless and meaningless war in Ukraine without paying attention to its human and material costs. The threat of an out-of-control conflict towards the usage of atomic weapons is not only widely disregarded in Poland, but surrounded by crazy arguments that Russia cannot afford to usage it due to the fact that it has against itself the full NATO atomic arsenal. Objectively, the atomic war will destruct everyone. However, there are subjective limits to endurance and patience that must not be underestimated.
The questioning of the rationality of Vladimir Putin's behaviour demonstrates the absolute ignorance of the authorities, which shock with their dilemma in reading the intentions of the powers and their competitive logic. Polish politicians do not realize what the interests of vital powers are, what Realpolitik is about, balancing forces, the regulation of hierarchical subordination and the right of winners to dictate the rules of the fresh order. There is simply quite a few media yelling about the threat of “new Potsdam”. fewer think that all fresh order was dictated by victorious camps. There are many indications that Russia will besides be in the position of the winner this time. However, the paradox will be that on the peace table there will be the same proposals that the Russians had already made in December 2021.
Poland's pro-war argument contains no evidence that the consequence of the strategical clash with Russia will prove beneficial. In triumph calculations, it is based not on hard data on Russian capabilities and resources, but on suppositions and ideas of its extraordinary possibilities. On purpose, it is not known by whom the calculated threat is that Russia intends to attack NATO states in the coming years (2026-2030). Nobody in public asks where this cognition comes from. Who is this Pyta or Cassandra who knows better than Russia itself, what will happen to her safety policy? Perhaps, however, it is about creating specified a belief that even if Russia itself did not want to commit aggression, it will should be provoked, as it did in 2022. Self-fulfilling prophecies are for all instigators of war.
Prof. Stanisław Bielen
Think Poland, No. 49-50 (1-8.12.2024)
