Witold Jurasz: Depends on how you define the challenges we face. If we accept the premise that we are threatened full-scale armed conflict with Russia, it is not, because the decisions that will be taken in Warsaw, strengthen our security, but at the same time will be far from sufficient to stop the hypothetical invasion.
However, if assumed that they threaten us – only and up – all kinds of provocations and impact “hybrid” that Russia is indeed a country that does not move forward if you feel some resistance, and the fact stationed in us and in the Baltic countries, even limited contingent of forces of our allies will be an effective deterrent argument hostile actions of Russia, then it should be considered to determine the summit as a breakthrough.
How not to look for the first time since the end of the Cold War comes to the real dislocation – limited, but still – forces “old members” of NATO on the territory of the former countries of the Eastern Bloc – the only exception to this rule are the US installations on the territory of Romania.
Another thing that NATO decisions are not such, what we would want, but of course now we will say that they are.
PAP: And what we want?
W.J .: As once said Radoslaw Sikorski – two brigades. And I would add that optimally even more than two.
But you have to remember that the North Atlantic Treaty include various countries, including those that if they are not pro-Russian, at least to show Russia’s great understanding. It has a global superpower such as the United States, which are with Russia, a whole range of common issues. Americans and Russians have of course their disputes, but Russia in many parts of the world is also the United needed. Added to this is the issue of the US “piwotu”, the growing concentration of US politicians on the region of Southeast Asia and the rivalry with China.
PAP: Usually as a “brake” a more ambitious policy of NATO are filled, however, Germany.
W.J .: Germany is one of the key members of the Covenant. Under the leadership of Angela Merkel they try, in accordance with the tradition of Bismarck, play in international politics, the role of “honest broker”. In practice this means today that Germany wants to respond to Russia’s behavior enough to protect allies, but also to do it in such a way that there will be – in their opinion – crossed the channels of contact with Moscow.
The relatively modest scale of the strengthening of the eastern flank is the result of these different aspirations, as well as budgetary constraints, because you have to remember that the West – although still wealthy – is not as rich as it used to. In the case of the United States at stake also relatively limited resources – on the background of the situation until the end of the Cold War – when it comes to the armed forces.
You could say that we live in a sense of deja vu + + – return to a situation of conflict between the West and Moscow; so that once was a powerful conflict between the West and the powerful Soviet Union, and today we have to deal with the conflict still strong, but still much weaker the West with a much weaker Russia. I reserve here, that the objective economic and military weakness of Russia does not mean that it is not a threat, since it makes up for the weakness of a very high combat readiness of its army, which allows the Kremlin to send to fight the relatively large forces in a short time.
You can on the sidelines to add that as far as actually balanced attitude characterized by Chancellor Merkel, who is trying to reconcile with each other opposing values, so you can not say the same about derived from SPD chief of German diplomacy Frank-Walter Steinmeierze .
For the European Left, especially German, French and Italian, all the while lingering belief that the imperial tendencies in Russian policy is an anomaly, an accident at work, when in fact it is a fig sustainable and consistent. For the tensions in relations with Russia blamed on left Russia not as such, and personally President Vladimir Putin, suggesting that without him, the Kremlin would lead a different policy. There is no way this call other than an expression of a very large naivety. Already complete and it is absurd situation where for ‘provoking Russia, “blaming the actual or potential victims of the Russian aggression, primarily Ukraine, the Baltic states and Poland, and other countries of our region. The European Left falls into such a strange trap, blaming the United States blame for some of the negative aspects of capitalism falls into a scheme that where Washington is bad, there is good Moscow. He forgets that such a wild market, as in Russia, there is nowhere in the West. On the other hand the European right – in a similar way – find the Russian state conservative (not respond to a “gender ideology” etc.). It’s just that this is exactly the same absurd as the belief of the left in Russia.
PAP And whether decisions to be taken in Warsaw are – in your opinion – to contribute to the dynamism of the Alliance, to give him a kind of wind in its sails? This may strengthen the eastern flank proves to be such. Step on the road to NATO enlargement?
W.J .: NATO not only creates the peak of a new chapter in its history, but rather goes back to the roots. It is worth noting that the impulse to strengthen the eastern flank and thus the strategy of NATO, primarily Russia’s actions. This is her aggressive rewanżystowska policy meant that NATO had finally react, even forgiving approach to the Kremlin a significant part of the European political elite. It is worth to emphasize, because the Russians are very fond of doing himself a victim of the West. So if you now complain about the actions of NATO, it is worth to speak, that these actions are only a reaction to the actions of Moscow.
As for the extension, do not expect it here, unfortunately, some acceleration. There are, of course, States supporting, or at least taking into account the possibility of adopting the Pact of new members. From the point of view of Polish security it is absolutely crucial would be to join NATO Sweden and Finland.
PAP: Polish politicians more often than these two countries speak in the context of enlargement to Ukraine and Georgia. How can they look the relations of NATO with these countries at the Warsaw summit?
W.J .: In my opinion, there can now be realistically talk about any prospect of these countries in NATO. Unfortunately, we are moving between the two options. The first option, for us, the worst would be done by these countries in the long-term part of the Russian sphere of influence. The second option would be that in which these countries constitute a kind of “buffer zone” between NATO and Russia.
This is not to say that we should give up demands inclusion of Georgia and Ukraine into Euro-Atlantic bloc. Even if the chances of their implementation are – how to say – questionable, the existence of NATO strong supporters of expanding east moves the center of the debate, and reduces slightly the risk that there will be a scenario for us the most undesirable, increasing the chances that a possible compromise falls ” somewhere in the middle. ”
If you can protect Ukraine and Georgia before entering into the orbit of Russian influence, perhaps in 20 years – when Russia, it seems, cease to use the “annuity” oil and gas, and in the public life of the country will be dominated by people raised detached from Russia – will be able to return to a realistic asking questions about their full inclusion in the structure of the western world.
PAP: How can you protect Georgia and Ukraine against Russian influence, not letting them at the same time fully to their own structures?
W.J .: The advantage of the West against Moscow is its cultural soft power of attraction. The second factor, which in Poland is underestimated is the fact that the East is the most elite and not the society determine the direction of development of their countries. Therefore, should these elites to work, and that in the countries of post-Soviet elite that is very common nomenclature for a long time, we should get rid of expression of disgust, which often appears on the faces of Polish politicians when talking with them.
PAP: Call in the near future to the Covenant Sweden and Finland is more likely?
W.J .: NATO enlargement towards the north is conceivable perspective may be slightly shorter than 20 years, but still quite distant. This would require a sizeable breakthrough on the side of public opinion both of the Scandinavian countries; today there is the support for joining NATO better than a few years ago, but it’s still not enough.
However, this is a project which we should think of warmth and with all my strength to support. Enter Sweden and Finland to NATO, it would be a real breakthrough for the security of the entire Baltic Sea: including primarily the Baltic and Polish. Russia, of course, as is heard, it reacts in its own way, which promises something between nuclear annihilation and the Armageddon, but no diplomacy Moscow already has and we have to accept that. Paradoxically, the Kremlin’s aggressive behavior may indeed help us to believe the Swedes and Finns for accession.
PAP: Polish diplomacy treats the issue of NATO expansion in this direction as it deserves?
W.J .: Bio diplomacy in both the execution of the former and the current leadership team is quite critical. Diplomacy is not grown either kneeling or standing up from his knees, but either standing or sitting at the negotiating table; grown taking her card and writing on the left is what we want, and the right is what you will have to pay for it. We meanwhile some politicians write only the left side of the paper, while others – only the right. The Scandinavians on the entry into NATO at this stage but it is too early to balance the grading of our diplomacy.
He talked to Marcel Sommer
No comments:
Post a Comment