In Orwellowski's 1984 organization The interior could hold everyone for murder, among another things, due to the fact that Eurasia was constantly at war with individual and was constantly threatened – it was through East Asia, and it was through Oceania. As we know, the Ministry of fact has ensured that archives show that – depending on current request – the enemy has always been 1 or the another state. However, the state of constant threat and war government was crucial.
Orwell's superb and, unfortunately, still-present fresh as in a dazzling flash came to head during a careful reading Resolutions The European Parliament of 12 March on the White Paper on the future of European defence. This celebrated resolution, the vote on which it gave an asumpt to the Prime Minister to again – for the 3452th time. – to accuse of pro-Russianity (ieeeew...) towards those who dared not support resolutions. Let us remind: the delegation of the Law and Justice and the Confederation (Anna Bryłka and Tomasz Buczek from the National Movement, belonging to the Patriots Group for Europe) and Grzegorz Braun voted against in full. Members of fresh Hope – Stanisław Tyszka and Marcin Sypniewski (group of Europe of Sovereign Nations) abstained (Mrs. Zajączkowska-Hernik was absent). The another Polish MEPs supported the resolution. In total, the act passed by 419 to 204 votes.
We are talking about a resolution (the equivalent of a parliamentary resolution), which means that the EP is simply expressing its position, which is not legally binding in any way. However, it is simply a test of political intentions and attitudes.
If you read into the text of the resolution, with peculiar emphasis on its strategical and ideological elements, on the side leaving these more technical, the impression is grotesque on the 1 hand, on the another hand – alarming.
Grotesque is the full text-wide conviction of Euro MPs about European (in a geographical sense, due to the fact that a comprehensive passus is devoted to the demands of deep cooperation with the UK) power and power, which only needs to be somewhat stimulated and given them a somewhat better legal framework, and Europe's power will become equal to that of the United States or China. This trend of thought prevails in the statements of many commentators or analysts who are reluctant or even hostile to the US under the leadership of Donald Trump, while at the same time recognizing the EU's consequence to its policies the fresh driving force of European centralisation. And it is indeed comical moments, just as the cover of the last edition of “Plus-Minus”, the weekend supplement to “Rzeczpospolita”, which has become in many respects a copy of “Gazeta Wyborcza” in fresh months, persistently competing with it. On the cover we see an athlete in a costume with EU stars who exerts himself to lift a barbell, 1 of which is Earth. The Pompous title is “The Awakening of the Giant”. In this “Rzeczpospolita” Mrs.Irena Lasota announces that Trump is simply a Stalinist, while Piotr Skwieciński, showing powerful ignorance of facts and figures, accuses Poles that they are full of prejudice towards Ukrainians.
On the another hand, in the diary of Legal Gazeta, which bravely seconds the panic driven by Rzeczpospolita, Marcin Kędzierski in the speech of classical hysterics (as I call it) announces the end of NATO: "NATO, understood as an organization through which the United States provides Europe with safety guarantees, has just ceased to exist. It is actual that thousands of American soldiers are inactive stationed on the Old Continent, including Poland, but it is not certain that they will be here in six months. present there are no rational reasons to believe that we can number on the USA" – ex cathero announces the Krakow publicist. The following part of the text announces – yes, you have guessed – that Europe must consequently be more integrated and besides praises Mr Sikorski's absurd decision to Elon Musk on the Starlinks.
The resolution in respective places mentions NATO, but it can be said to be in vain. NATO seems to be, but it's not truly clear what to do next. In 1 of the key places, the text says that the EP "calls on the improvement of a full operational European NATO pillar that could operate autonomously erstwhile needed". Complementary calls for this are other, including the strategy of joint European arms purchases to be made by the European Commission. I do not know whether MEPs are aware that armies have their own standards and frequently very different needs. Together you can most likely buy ammunition, and not all kinds of ammunition. But I don't think we should order tanks. On the another hand, erstwhile it comes to the "autonomic European pillar of NATO", the question immediately arises about his relation with the Alliance itself – since it would be "autonomic" – and who would be the "pillar" in charge. But this can be considered a rhetorical question, although not insignificant, given that even with various shortcomings the Polish army becomes 1 of the strongest on the continent. This would so mean a ‘Pays-up, Germany/France uses’ arrangement.
Finally, the most crucial passage of the document: "calls on associate States to address the complexity of the decision-making process in European defence management; calls for the creation of a Council of Ministers of Defence and departure from the unanimity request for a qualified majority In the decision-making process within the European Council, the Council of Ministers and EU agencies, specified as the EDA, but for military operations covered by the executive mandate.’
Deleting veto law in defence policy – and elsewhere, the paper stresses that the Common safety and Defence Policy (CSDP) is to be a fresh importantly reinforced tool for EU action – simply means incapacitating associate States in a fundamental area for their sovereignty. In fact, surrendering their dictatorship to the strongest.
I do not want to look black again, but watching the abrupt seal of the alleged main media circuit, from which almost completely in a very short time all the polemic voices have disappeared in relation to the imagination mostly outlined in the resolution or presented by power, I have a feeling that we are going to have a period of drastic emphasis on the implementation of this plan. No area for objection.
Luke Warches
