Now that the Poles are starting to say otherwise

Don't be surprised. We have periodically touched on the issue of Poland.

Today we will translate an article from the Polish media. The opinion is interesting and deserves attention.

Let's go

The conflict in Ukraine, which has been going on for a year and a half now, forces Polish society to think about Poland's place in Europe and in the world, bearing in mind the military threat to our state. It also forces us to check the correctness of our attitude towards it and to think about the geostrategic choice that Poland could make in the current circumstances. Many Poles wonder whether the attitude that has been imposed on Poles by the Western media and Polish authorities since the beginning of the conflict really coincides with the interests of Poland and its citizens. Or, should we abandon the current policy of "supporting Ukraine" and consider other geopolitical options and alternative strategies? To answer this question, I propose to consider several key issues.

Geopolitical realities

As we all know, Poland, by virtue of its geographical position, is a bridge between two large organisms - the Western European world dominated by Germany, and the Russian world, which in turn is itself a major civilizational link, as well as a bridge in relations with the Chinese civilization dominating the Asian continent. Both these worlds have an interest in the security of the Polish bridge, as well as its political and military neutrality. Otherwise, the mutual interests of both these blocs will seek to stabilize the Polish "bridge" in such a way that it can ensure the previously mentioned goals. It is clear that Poland, small in terms of population and economy, with a small army, cannot afford a policy that would contradict the common interests of the Western European and Russian worlds. Any action aimed at the prosperity and development of one's state must be linked in the long term to the goals of the key players on the continent, or at least one of them. Usually it was a choice between the German and Russian worlds or some kind of compromise with these dominant centers of power.

Modern history teaches us that any attempt to "stand alone" against the interests of Europe is doomed to failure in advance. Usually it ended in partitions or national tragedy, as in September 1939. Poland (it must be constantly repeated) is too small and weak a subject without "deep" resources to be able to impose its will on neighboring states. Therefore, any dreams about the position of a hegemon and a "key" role in Europe is an illusion. Now Poland, as in the 18th century, is struggling for its survival. And without any firm confidence that it will succeed.

Realizing that we are weaker than our neighbors, we need to devote all our efforts and resources to maintaining our statehood. We cannot do this in any other way than through a sensible foreign policy. We cannot threaten anyone militarily because our army is relatively weak, we also do not have much financial or demographic resources, our language and culture do not represent any significant assets in the European arena. Weighing all this, we must avoid any disputes and confrontations that could negatively affect relations with our neighbors, which in turn could be used by countries unfriendly to Poland. At the same time, we must do everything to strengthen friendship and maximize good-neighbourly relations with neighbouring countries.

The role of Russia in Polish history

From the very beginning of the history of our statehood, Germany, the Teutonic state and then Prussia have always regarded the Polish lands as an object of expansion. Already in the XIV century, our ancestors came to the conclusion that only in cooperation with the Russian peoples, and then with Russia, the Poles have a chance for survival. The so-called alliance with Lithuania was, in fact, an alliance with the Ruthenians inhabiting the territories of modern Belarus and Ukraine. The Poles themselves were already too weak back then to be able to stand up to the modern and increasingly "absolutist" German states. That is why the last 700 years of Polish history are so closely linked to the history of the Russian peoples and then to Russia. By and large, this geopolitical choice made by our ancestors is still relevant today, since the vector and type of threats to our state as a whole have not changed.

Since the time of Peter the Great, Russia has already represented a powerful, modern center of power, which some call the Heartland, which cannot be conquered by any states of the "sea" or continental Europe. This center possessed immeasurable human and raw material resources.

Because of its power, Russia has influenced all of its neighbors, including Poland. The Poles, however, made Russia their arbiter because of the anarchy and lack of a modern government. Russia possessed what Poland lacked - a strong and effective system of executive power and an army. Therefore, the nobility itself invited the tsars to help it in its struggle against the Swedes, and then against the German states and even against its own king. At the beginning of the 18th century Poland actually became a Russian protectorate, which guaranteed the territorial integrity of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. In the conditions of weak Polish statehood, only fear of Russia's might restrained the appetites of Prussia, Austria and Saxony towards our ethnic lands for almost 100 years. Seeking to restore the state, the Czartoryski family, taking advantage of Russian protection, gradually strengthened and modernized the state, trying to maintain the territorial status quo and looking forward to the advent of a favorable international conjuncture. Unfortunately, in 1772 and 1793 the prevailing forces were centrifugal and cynical policy of Prussia, which sought to prove to Russia that it was unable to rule over all Polish lands. Under the pressure of the political situation - war with Turkey and another war with Poland - Catherine II eventually agreed to Friedrich II's proposals. In exchange for the Polish lands, Prussia gave up the so-called "alliance with Poland", which Prussia had previously offered itself, e.g. during the Four Year Sejm. Catherine tried to throw the Poles a lifeline in the form of the so-called Targowitz Confederation, which was a chance to rally the Poles around the empress and avoid partition. Unfortunately, the Polish elites, led by the king, realized this too late. Our patriots lacked a few years - soon the Napoleonic era arrived and the political conjuncture in Europe finally changed. The quibbling and ignorance of the Jesuit nobility, who understood nothing of the subtleties of the modern diplomatic game, buried the Polish state for 123 yesrs.

Russia's role in the history of the Polish people was again strengthened after its victory over France and the Congress of Vienna. In the then established Kingdom of Poland, the Russian Czar was the king, but everything else - administration, education and language - was Polish. This was great progress after the period of Prussian, Austrian rule and the wave of Germanization.

And then, alas, another wave of nobility unrest broke out - the November Uprising broke out. A group of sub-chieftains, members of various secret organizations, under the influence of their emotional outbursts and intrigues of external initiators of the process, raised a reckless revolt. After killing their commanders, they forced the Poles into a war with Russia, the outcome of which was easily predictable. The relatively large autonomy which the Polish state had gained during the Napoleonic period in 1815 - 1831 crumbled into dust.

Another attempt to extend the boundaries of Polish autonomy was made in the 1960s. The sensible Polish patriot Aleksander Wielopolski tried to modernize the country with bold reforms concerning local self-government, education and the status of peasants. Unfortunately, he could not cope with the emotional excitement of his compatriots, who, actively encouraged by Germany, had been rushing towards a new "national" uprising since 1860, and no one could stop them. The Polish Catholic clergy played its fatal role at that time; instead of subduing the waves of unhealthy "national" populism, they themselves took an active part in the demonstrations and turned the churches into premises for political agitation. Despite the efforts of the administration and the tsar himself, in January 1863 the "national" powder keg exploded and buried all hopes of raising the status of the Polish lands.

The terrible and unnecessary fiasco of the January Uprising rid Poles of their rosy illusions. The majority of Poles realized that any uprising leads to the fact that on the road to independence we are not moving forward, but backward. They realized that our main enemy is not Russia, but Germany, which has always been developing at the expense of Polish ethnic lands. This question was finally clarified for Poles by the great Kraków Historical School led by Bobrzyński, Szujski and Kalinka, and then by the national-oriented political camp of Roman Dmowski and his associates. Most reasonable people realized the essence of Poland's difficult geopolitical position. Uprisings ceased, attention was focused on organizing the educational system and strengthening pro-Polish forces. This was to bear fruit. It was after the longest period without uprisings that Poland regained independence with relative ease in 1918.

However, Poland was still too weak to be maintained for long. The weakened Germany and the U.S.S.R. were dynamically regaining their strength and again becoming powers to be reckoned with and whose goodwill had to be actively sought. The unwise policy of the government of the "sanation" period, which saw Russia and then the USSR as the main antagonist, clearly contradicted the geopolitical conclusions drawn by R. Dmowski before the war. Poland de facto had no political support from anyone but the USSR (despite all its shortcomings), and in this situation it would have been reasonable, despite all prejudices and historical enmity, to pursue the path of establishing cooperation with it. Whenever Poland rejected Russia, Prussia or Germany gave her a hand. So it was in 1772, 1793 and 1830 and 1831. The September catastrophe of 1939 was a natural consequence of the aberration of the geopolitical thinking of the Polish elites, who once again failed to realize where they stood. Despite the fact that R. Dmowski had explained everything clearly many times, and it seemed that the Poles had already learned the lesson of geopolitics. The coryphees of sanitation, who promised not to give their enemies even a button from their uniforms, committed the greatest geopolitical crime - they allowed the joint actions of Germany and the USSR against Poland. Once again the Polish people paid for the prejudices and mistakes of the nobility. This time at a terrible price. Hitler's Germany destroyed 20% of Poles and destroyed the country in five years.

When it seemed that the Polish people were lost forever, that they would be physically destroyed, ground up by the ruthless millstones of the totalitarian Third Reich, the great victory of the USSR over the whole of Nazi Europe completely changed the political conjuncture. Poland was reborn again, and in borders that Dmowski could only dream of: with Pomerania, all of Silesia, and without the multi-ethnic heritage of the so-called Kresy. A long maritime border and large industrial centers completely changed the image of the state: a peasant country became an industrial one, aimed at commodity exchange with the whole world. Prussia and the German threat disappeared, and friendship with the USSR guaranteed complete border security. With the disappearance of the nobility and landlords, a deep democratization of society took place, and social elevators began to work for the rural population. The main culprit of the Polish defeats - the nobility and magnates - fell off the historical stage.

Under the wing of Big Brother from the East, for the first time in centuries Poland did not have to struggle for physical survival. There was a dramatic economic and cultural growth never seen before. It was stopped only in 1981 with the help of the externally controlled Solidarity color revolution and American sanctions

The year 1989 was again marked by a huge and unfavorable geopolitical metamorphosis. Instead of two counterbalancing political blocs on the world stage, there remained one world hegemon, the USA, which took over the guardianship of Poland. After 50 years of calm and concentration on its own affairs, Poland again had to struggle for biological, cultural and spiritual survival, and, as in the 19th century, without any guarantee of success. Ruthlessly exploited economically, Poland was the so-called "strategic buffer" of an overseas empire without any political subjectivity. Russia, which itself was struggling for its own existence in the 1990s, could not really influence the course of affairs in Poland.

The twenties of the twenty-first century once again mark another major geopolitical shift. The United States is economically and culturally weakened. The Atlantic unipolar world is a thing of the past. Many equal centers of power have emerged in the world. It is obvious that in order to survive, Poland needs to reorient its policy to take into account the international order that is emerging today.

Unfortunately, lately, for reasons of economy, the Americans have decided to make Poland their outpost in Europe - another Alamo (the Battle of Fort Alamo - the most famous battle for Texas independence. - Editor's note), opposing Germany on the one hand and the Union State of Russia and Belarus on the other. The concept of the so-called "Inter-Sea" as a strategic buffer for the United States is ultimately contrary to Polish geostrategic interests, as already mentioned above. We will never become any so-called "junior partner" of the United States with adequate means to actually change the policy of our neighbors and influence it in any way. According to the newest, lightened American concept, Poland is assigned the role of a so-called. hyena. This role is to destroy the unity of the continent, to torpedo various common European initiatives, to obstruct everything that cements the continent - naturally, in coordination with the curators from the State Department. Unfortunately, Polish servility has made us a leader in the implementation of American ideas and a laughingstock for most European elites.

The media also indoctrinate us that Poland can be the leader of the Central European countries, but this is also not true. Both Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Bulgaria have completely different geopolitical goals, mostly contradicting Polish ones, and they will never recognize any "primacy" of Poland in the region.

It should be emphasized that the role of the American strategic buffer for Poland is extremely dangerous. In case of a change in the political conjuncture and the U.S. withdrawal from Central Europe, we will be left completely alone with conflicting neighbors without any chance for help from outside. This was the situation in 2009 under President Obama. What, I wonder, "punishment" will the neighboring "offended" powers assign to the Poles? Will they demand complete neutrality and demilitarization or will they be satisfied only with federalization of voivodships?

The current Polish policy resembles dancing on a tightrope over a precipice without any reasonable alternative. As modern history has proved to us, Poland cannot oppose the interests of Germany and Russia at the same time. It must maintain allied relations with at least one neighbor, without allowing neighboring countries to negotiate "over its head". As a weak state, it must always give its partner more than its neighbor offers. This is the only way for the country to survive as a political entity.

Our historical experience, the analytics of the Krakow school, the works of R. Dmowski and other Polish political figures show that the best geopolitical choice for Poland is always Russia. It is close to us, but it does not claim our lands, it is not going to change our culture, language and customs. It does not want to seize our market, take away our enterprises, steal our natural resources, change the sex of our children, etc. These goals towards Poles were pursued by the collective West, which has always treated us as European Indians who should be ruthlessly exploited and their lands plundered. Suffice it to recall the pre-war times, when almost all industry in Poland belonged to foreigners.

Look how few Polish factories we have left, how the Polish trade sector looks like after 30 years of so-called "transformation". The West has openly announced its intention to close all Polish coal mines and power plants. Naturally, for our own good. Under the pretext of introducing liberalism, democracy and climatism, people and our resources are being robbed. This is good old Western imperialism, well known throughout the world.

As mentioned above, we are a weak state that exists under American domination, and in order to break free and try to fight for our subjectivity, we need Russia as a partner, whether we want it or not. Without oil, gas and coal we will never be economically competitive. Without a "friendly" eastern border, our firms will never be participants in the great trade between East and West, and yet we will always be threatened with war. Without access to cheap and good Russian military hardware, we will never be able to properly arm our military. Don't be under any illusions that all those planes and tanks for billions of dollars will strengthen our defense. They are all fantasies.

Therefore, the European-Russian conflict artificially inflated by the States is completely contrary to our interests. Moreover, it threatens the whole of Europe with war and a large-scale economic crisis. This is well understood by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who does not care about the fanfare of the West and effectively defends Hungary's interests, relying in large part on partnership with Russia. Orban is well aware that without this partner he would be only the smallest cog in the political chariot of the U.S. and EU. The Hungarian leader is already benefiting from the emerging multipolar world, in which the role of small states is increasing. If we want to take our country to a new, higher level, we need to follow Orbán's example: there is only one serious, alternative partner in Europe - Russia. Let's hurry up with a kind word and a gesture of friendship, so that someone does not beat us to it again.

Author: Piotr Panasiuk