No Place for Retaliation

This is the exact moment when we ought to be considering the issue. And taking action. If we start making mistakes now, in two or three years it will be too late. Poland has just witnessed something uncanny. We have succeeded in halting a populist government and are returning to the democratic and European path. Yet the universally expressed public will ties in with colossal related hope tied to the political class. This is a huge responsibility – we have to prove to the people that they made the right choice.

What has to happen?

First of all, conciliation has to be treated seriously. Social divides are massive – claiming they are not would be naïve. Yet political debate can either be handled in ways that take advantage of these divides, or with intent to “take away” from the dispute as many things that we have in common as possible, and ultimately to create space to build a common good together. While aware of how idealistic this sounds, I am deeply convinced it is very important.

“Settling scores” now seems to be the phrase of the day.

Scores can be settled in a variety of ways – in the name of justice or vengeance. Vengeance has nothing in common with conciliation, and there is no place for it. There is no place for retaliation. Identifying persons who have broken the law, on the other hand, and bringing them to justice, is necessary – otherwise, we encourage impunity. We should be equally clear about the new people in power – should any of them break the law, they will be brought to justice as well.

The political logic of recent years – not only in Poland – has proven that extremism pays much better than moderation. Extremism fosters political careers.

Because it is a much easier way of winning distinctiveness and popularity. It goes without saying that opting for the common good is much more difficult, requiring balanced communication. Restraint in judgement. A different narrative. It is much easier to choose radical words and use them to gain public attention.

PiS won the 2015 elections with a narrative based on a claim that the state has to be strengthened and remedied rather than with radical populism.

Indeed, conciliation apart, we need to truly strengthen the Polish state.

What does that mean?

Remedying public services, first and foremost. Education – we have to do everything we can to prepare young people for contemporary challenges. The healthcare system is highly inefficient; meanwhile, as people are working longer, they will need continually improved medical treatment. We will not be able to sustain a stable economy otherwise. Courts of law are a public service too – we have to take action to ensure shorter judicial proceedings. In recent years all we’ve heard is gibberish about some kind of “caste”. There is one other public service, one of key importance: security. Both internal (an efficient police force) and external, the latter of paramount significance. We need highly functional armed forces. This will require considerable investment and a wise spending policy. Poland must be a state of high defence capacities. We want a state capable of managing all these areas effectively and well – this is something we owe to our citizens.

Is that to become your narrative, one more attractive than PiS’ stories of the struggle for sovereignty?

Sovereignty means a robust economy, a well-educated society, successful businesses, and a well-organised state. Only then can we speak of true independence and sovereignty, defended by highly effective armed forces capable of collaborating with our allies.

Why are such politicians as Trump returning to the political scene?

This is due to a combination of enormous issues. We have hit a giant social media-related communication-and-media deadlock. It has become an obstacle to maintaining a space for objective, calm discussion. The other problem is that democracy has evolved in a direction wherein democratically elected authorities have limited agency. Current events are the result of not only parliaments, but also business, international equity, and technological trends. People are also afraid of a wave of authoritarian aggression – like Russia’s, for example – and acts of terrorism.

But your government will not be able to eliminate all these problems either.

Even the best government has limited options. Democratic formations should not choose a populist guise. Promising everything to the public does not pay, simply because it is impossible to deliver everything.

Will a well-organised state and better use of European Union funding require stronger local governments?

The Polish state’s efficiency has to be embedded in the sound systemic solution of a powerful position of local governments and their separate legitimisation. The local government structure’s base needs to be strengthened, in terms of funding in particular. Yet greater responsibility has to offer greater gain. The viability of implementing EU-funded investments, on the other hand, requires no systemic changes. PiS did not alter local governments’ strong position in these terms.

Let’s talk about international challenges. Concerns have been raised as to whether our NATO allies will come to our defence if needed. I, on the other hand, am wondering, whether we will not be the ones breaching the alliance’s rule of solidarity. Should Putin attack Latvia, for example – will we approve sending our troops to recapture Daugavpils?

Yes, the question is justified. Rightly outraged Polish lorry drivers have been blockading roads on the Polish-Ukrainian border for weeks, and the PiS government has done practically nothing about it. Action should have been taken to prevent the protest. We should have immediately sat down at the negotiating table with Ukraine, those organising the blockade, and the EU. Even the most salient interest of a single economic group cannot take precedence over matters of strategic security. Western countries are looking to Poland, thinking: if Poland – with a threat right across her border – has allowed the organisation of a blockade that impedes Ukrainian defence capabilities, why should we choose to defend Poland?

Are you concerned about a large-scale war with Russia? Or Russian aggression against the Baltic states?

The Kremlin openly states that Russia’s goal is to destroy the West. Not conquer it (that would be impossible), but tear it apart – the European Union in particular. Only then can Moscow hope to regain full control of Ukraine and post-Soviet territories. Furthermore, Russia is interested in the West’s disintegration so that it can have a greater say in regional matters. Russia wants the West’s decomposition so that it can become an equal partner for Europe, or even impose its will upon it. As long as the EU and NATO operate efficiently, such a scenario is impossible, which is exactly why we should care about how both organisations function.

Some time ago it seemed that Russia might be disarmed with sanctions.

Sanctions are certainly harmful to the Russian economy’s innovative and technological capacities. Yet – while having caused the deterioration of living standards in the country – they have failed to bring it to a halt. For a variety of reasons, however, Russian society is prepared to endure such suffering for years. This means we will have a powerful and aggressive enemy just over the border for a long time. The Russian issue cannot be resolved easily or swiftly. The matter demands permanent or long-term management.

Given the circumstances, should we not restore military conscription?

Firstly, we should keep the public continuously aware that there is a war being fought close by. While it may cost us money, it is a matter of life and death for Ukraine. The idea of providing absolutely no financial support is simply stupid. There is no other word for it – I am aware of the unquestioned shortage of responsible political narratives backing investments in Kyiv’s defence capabilities. Armaments are another matter – an audit will likely be needed, as we are unaware of what contracts are currently in place for arms supplies, and we have no idea which of them make actual sense. As concerns military conscription – the public are far from ready for that.

What about reducing history and modern studies classes in favour of more civil defence training at schools?

This is exactly the kind of effort to militarise society that we have observed in Russia, a goal we should not share. European nations – Poles to a lesser extent – have become complacent in their sense of history’s end, of eternal security. Yet we have found ourselves at a point in history when incessantly striving for comfort is simply becoming impossible. I would begin with working on pro-community attitudes. Let us start with a sense of responsibility for the greater community rather than seeking personal comfort in the commercial sense. ©Ⓟ