Return of the wonderer

To be truthful I didn't really go anywhere, I just hibernated in the real world over summer as is often my way. However I am now back online and ready to write ironic witticisms on the basis of what I observe around me.

Now is that quadrinal (is that a word?) affair that is the bane of most countries these days: the national election campaign. As a political scientist by profession perhaps I should be more supportive of the democratic process but I am often reminded of Winston Churchill's comment to Parliment when he described democracy as the worst form of government except all of those others that have gone before it!

Churchill's other famous remark about democracy is perhaps never quite so fitting than during an election campaign: that the best argument against democracy is to have a five minute conversation about politics with the average voter.
The crazy fever that is modern politics brings to the fore many of the manipulative streaks common to the human condition.

Take the Law and Justice party for example; they have based their campain on the percieved injustice suffured by Poland (read them) as a result of the Smolensk aircrash. Rather than dealing with any real issues affecting Polish people they divert attention.

That is not to say that Civic Platform are any better. Rather than explaining why they have failed to solve the pension problem left over from communism they focus attention on GDP growth and infrastructure projects. GDP is all very well but it often provides an inaccurate inducator of real standards of living for the majority of people. Take India or Brazil as cases in point: GDP growth has been phenominal in recent years, yet poverty persists.

On the one hand we have PIS who uses campaign strategies based on a reliance on their voters having a complete ignorance of the issues being discussed. Take their campaign message calling for the slashing of fuel tax for example (where exactly do they plan to get the money from to run the country?) while on the other hand PO are no better in some respects as they focus on non-controversial goals that they can plod on with and show that they 'are doing something'.

This in many ways is indicative of the state of Poland's political scene. A colleague of mine said to me a while back that she would not discuss politics with most people as they would become aggressive and dogmatic. Polish people have lost the ability to debate in many ways. By ability I obviously do not mean Linguistic but rather cultural. Divisions within society have been allowed to be monopolised by political forces to the extent that the normal definition of a pluralist democracy is in fact ironically misplaced as what choice lies in such diametrically opposed positions? There is no to and throw of political ideas; rather people are entrenched and fight a war of attrition.

Presidential Ambitions

Head in the Stars

 It is not often that I get accused of being a PiS supported, but that was my wife's whimsical reaction when I commented on current situation in Poland with regards to the EU Presidency.


On 1st July Poland took over the six month presidency of the EU. In itself this is a hugely historic moment for Poland as it is the culmination of Poland's struggle to free itself from the shadow of World War Two and its communist past. Obviously the Polish government are proud of the achievement; yet, they in them selves have had little to do with this. It was of course Prime Minister Tadeusz Mazowiecki who begun the process by voicing the feeling of the Polish government with the formal application for membership being lodged in 1994 under Prime Minister Waldemar Pawlak thus Prime Minister Tusk's government have in fact done very little to further the process.

Given that that by 2011 the Polish Presendency of the EU was a given fact, it is perhaps starange that it gets so much media and governemnt attention. It wa upon remarking that it is in fact a distraction from the real 'issues' that my wife asked if I had become a PiS supporter as they had been saying exactly that. PiS (Law and Justice Party) are for those who don't know, the main opposition party in Poland. They are, to put it mildly, a bunch of lunatics led by an even more bizarre figure who invariably uses cheap tricks to gain attention. Does that mean I have become a lunatic? I hope not. However, buy instinctivley stateing the opposite of whatever the government line is, PiS have in fact hit the nail on the head.


The government have filled every available space to promote the presidency, while drawing attention away from more important matters. In doing so they have been aided by a general lack of knowledge of EU internal politics. This is, alas, not by any means a Polish condition; few EU citizens truly understand the nature of the beast that is the EU and thus they are easily swayed by scare politics or in this case overly positive politics. Why overly? Well to be truly honest the rotating presidency amounts to very little indeed.

The Presidency will come and go and little will change. That is perhaps the sad part. The presidency means an excuse for the government to put of vital reforms for another six months.

Review of Radosław Sikorski's Speech to Parliament

The Minister of Foreign Affairs 

on 

Polish Foreign Policy for 2011

 I know I've been a bit slow with this one, and generally several English language articles have been already written on the subject, but I though I'd give my own opinion on Minister Sikorski's ideas.

On 16^th March 2011 Foriegn Minister Radosław Sirkorski addressed the combined houses of the Polish parliament. His speech was significant, as he himself remarked upon, in that he is the first post-communist politician to hold the position for a full term of office. Therefore, the address represents a rare continuity in Polish foreign policy, at least in terms of the politicians directing it. I will therefore analyse the speech in order to see whether the official program for 2011 indeed lives up to such a momentous occasions :)

It is important to note that although technically the minister's address, it was undoubtedly both the position of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Government. Not only is Minister Sikorski the only post-communist politician to hold office throughout a whole term, but Civic Platform (PO) are also the only party who has held government for a whole term. This indeed, as remarked upon by Sikorski, is a unique event for Poland and as such his address bears scrutiny.

It is also worth noting that the speech was given just one day before the UN Security Council vote on intervention in the Libyan conflict and three days before airstrikes began. This was a point highlighted by a journalist on the Economist blog where they remarked how there was:

 Almost nothing on the question of whether to intervene in North Africa--surely the most pressing issue of the day. Does Poland agree with Germany and the non-interventionists? Or with Britain and France and the "no-fly zone"? It would be nice to know. Polish diplomacy has indeed never been more solid or more effective. But those are means, not ends.

During the speech Sikorski was conscious of the importance of representing a continuum in Polish policy and made reference to various predecessors of his. To that end he talked of the fact that Poland has rebuilt its state (since 1989) and “made it part of the global democratic architecture.” This reference to a global democratic architecture echoes sentiments by such people as ex-President Aleksander Kwasniewski when he referred to a European Family after the 2003 referendum on EU membership. 

A large part of Sikorski's speech dealt with Poland's image and position in the world. Sikorski stated how the parliament “wants Poland to become a secure and prosperous country, but also one with influence. A serious country. So that we, like Spain or Turkey before us, will be able to regain our bygone prestige.” This is in fact a recurring theme in Polish politics; as Foreign Minister Bronislaw Geremek stated in 1999:

We want and we have to gain among the Allied states a position that will enable us to co-define de facto the Allied strategy and policies in a way that corresponds with our interests, particularly in Central and Eastern Europe. We have the potential to develop our human and economic resources and our pivotal strategic geographic location over the coming years into a position that will rank Poland among NATO's principal member states.

This has an obvious self-esteem motivation. Sikorski clearly states in the following paragraph that the concept involves a country able to fight for the interests of the region and be in a position to give development and humanitarian aide. This ties in well with the idea of “for their freedom and ours”, an ongoing theme in Polish mentality, and allows for the feeling that Poland is a country that stands up for its ideals. 

Both the concepts of community and security are again touched on with reference to the Middle East, where Sikorski illustrates how the situation there “is a test for the common foreign policy that is currently in the making. The European Union must speak with one voice, and all must be heard throughout its neighbourhood.” Sikorski, although speaking at times from a European perspective, does not fail to show the broader community aspect of his policy when stating how Polish experiences of transitions can help others currently undergoing transition. This sense of a dual community is perhaps a common theme; where both the euro-transatlantic and the wider world are seen in communal terms.

Sikorski concludes his address with reference to three key ideas that have guided him during his term in office; those of: reliability, solidarity, and modernisation. 
 

Beginning with the concept of reliability, Poland has made a conscious effort to ensure that it is a reliable security partner for NATO and the EU. Sikorski mentions how Poland has maintained a 1.95% GDP defence budget and this ties in with the sense of being reliable, and again reinforces a postitve of image of self.

Moving on, solidarity is an obvious synonym for community. Sikorski reffers to that fact that solidarity holds a special place with in the Polish psyche and thus it is important to support especially Belarus in its struggles.

Finally, modernisation is perhaps the simplest and most easily discernible. After the period of communism following World War Two Poland was in a poor state compared to its European neighbours. Modernisation is a practical necessity which affects primarily the core desire of security but also self-esteem. While the argument for why modernisation affects security is perhaps redundant, self-esteem need a little more clarification. As part of Sikorski's image of a 'serious country' the minister defines how this includes the concept of a country “whose youth does not emigrate to find work, and whose opportunities attract at least its own diaspora.” At first this looks like a purely economics-related statement, yet in fact it has more to do with self-esteem. Economically a diaspora can be greatly beneficial to any country, further there is no inherent benefit in attracting the diapsora back per se. Any manpower gaps could just as well be filled by other workers (eastern European etc). However, it is a matter of pride that people do not need to emigrate for financial reasons. Thus modernisation will in turn improve living standards and help to keep the youth of Poland and possibly attract returnees.

Overall, the speech of Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski shows a positive side of Polish politics, so greatly missing from the mainstream press. Sikorski took the opportunity to speak of the fact that the present Poland is the best anyone has ever known and people should not be so quick to criticise it, a point I happen to agree with.