Exactly 30 years ago, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was dissolved. In December 1991, Borys Jelcyn, Stanisław Szuszkiewicz and Łeonid Krawczuk signed the Białowieża Agreement concluded on the territory of the former First Republic of Poland. The Commonwealth of Independent States was established and Mikhail Gorbachev, the last leader of the Soviet state, was sent on premature political retirement. Perhaps this would have been the cause of melancholy over man’s pride and the fall of great powers, had it not been for the fact that the world had only just circulated that the American intelligence had provided allies with evidence of the possibility of a resumption of Moscow’s military aggression.
The president’s bluff Vladimir Putin or not? Nobody knows the answer. Nevertheless, it was immediately remembered how many Russians still regret the collapse of the Soviet motherland. The thought of regaining former geopolitical influence, closely related to the belief that one can again become a victim of an attack from outside, as in 1812 or 1941, creates a toxic explosive mixture in the minds.
Poland is in a special situation. The last 300 years of history should be enough to take the threats from the East seriously. In theory, everyone shares this position, both the government and the opposition. However, one has to juxtapose words with deeds to realize what Polish diplomacy is doing. On the one hand, the mouths of politicians are stuffed with phrases about maximum geopolitical sovereignty, and on the other, they make decisions that cannot be assessed positively from this point of view.
Here in Warsaw a political “salon of the rejected”, politicians of the second tier who believe that they will be in the first tier, has been convened. Maybe yes maybe no. Nevertheless, there was a strong bet on one card. Let us take a French example. There is a whole bunch of candidates for the office of the head of state. The Law and Justice government invited the currently devoid of any influence, pro-Russian Marine Le Penby celebrating her like the head of state.
I do not know what our diplomatic services do, but the choice proves the propensity to take risks, which is far from the standards of diplomacy, and the poor knowledge of the realities on the Seine. The French election race for the presidency in 2022 has already started, the favorites are changing places. It is clearly visible on the extreme right. Yes, a few months ago Le Pen was a sure-fire until the second round. Suddenly, however, a counter-candidate appeared, a rebellious journalist, Eric Zemmour, which started modestly in polls with approx. 5.5 percent. (June) to reach 17 percent. and outrun Le Pen (mid-October). The politician we fake with 28 percent. the support dropped to 16 percent. Zemmour has publicly stated that Le Pen is intellectually weak and cannot win.
The fight is fierce. Zemmour, rushing for weeks, got short of breath, now it has dropped to 13 percent, Le Pen has slightly risen to 20 percent. However, it was about his convention that the French media sounded left and right. Le Pen has a recognizable name, but that doesn’t guarantee success or influence.
However, this is only a fragment, because in the primaries, the center-right has just selected a candidate whose name will tell you nothing. Nevertheless, a rule may work here: where two fight, the third one benefits.
I am mentioning this because the fact that our government puts one of the entire pool of candidates in this situation proves the lack of recognition of the foreign territory. The willingness to play “mainstream” politicians in the country and beyond sometimes turns out to be more important than the sense of reality and real thinking about guaranteeing our sovereignty.
The fact that in the face of a real threat from Russia, which we are being informed about by our American ally, we are betting on a politician who may win, but – beware – may not win either, proves bravado. What’s more, it is about a politician who speaks with far-reaching freedom on geopolitics (e.g. that the French will pay for Turów, please put it between fairy tales).
Le Pen tells what her saliva will bring to her tongue, because she will not incur any consequences for it. Her sentences are unbearably light. Nevertheless words about the fact that Ukraine belongs to Russia’s sphere of influencethey sound differently on the Seine, differently on the Vistula.
Politicians like Le Pen, should they ever gain power, will be driven solely by their own geopolitical interests – not to a moderate or large degree, but to the extreme. For such politicians, our part of Europe is an area that used to be signed “hic sunt leones” on maps. It is not known why in an interview in the future – if it were just beneficial for her – she would not say that Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia also belong to Russia’s sphere of influence? How did it ever go to the USSR?
Government politicians tried to powder the whole “faux pas” by, for example, attacks on ambiguous German ties with Russia in terms of business. Only that this is a typical distraction, from which practically NOTHING for our safety results. Because it’s obvious that you can criticize both.
In the Le Pen case, it would be better to admit your mistake, learn from this dramatic mistake and stop betting on the political second and third leagues in Europe. In the name of our safety, I will even swallow if government politicians do not apologize to us publicly for this lack of diplomatic discernment and common sense. It’s hard. More importantly, they should draw conclusions – seriously, as long as possible.
Only … can you count on it?