The invitation of president Charles Nawrocki to the Council of Peace Donald Trump proved to be a political grenade with delayed ignition. The Polish head of state signals readiness to talk, but in Davos announces that he will not sign for the time being.
On the table is simply a plan of a fresh organization, in which Trump is to become a life boss, and at the same table are besides to sit Vladimir Putin and Alexander Lukashenko. Additionally, there is simply a thread of billions of "entry tickets" for countries wishing permanent membership. In specified an environment, Nawrocki's decision to refrain from legally binding Poland to the Council of Peace has sparked an avalanche of comments – from careful praise, to cold skepticism.
Władysław Kosiniak-Kamish: a relief in government that the president remembers the Constitution
The head of the MON, Władysław Kosiniak-Kamish, reads Nawrock's movement primarily through the prism of procedures. In his words, we can hear any relief that the president has not decided to take a solo action above the heads of the government and parliament.
– I think that's a good move. Rejecting without analysis would be a mistake, accepting without a constitutional process would be impossible. So the advice we gave, but besides our public statements, has come to the president and does not act against the Constitution. Where is the decision of the Council of Ministers, admission in parliament, global agreement, its ratification and the signature of the President. So you gotta operate in specified a strategy – said the head of MON in the program "Graffiti".
The Minister stresses that the immediate rejection of the invitation would be a mistake, but it would be equally grave to accept it without a full constitutional procedure – from the decision of the Council of Ministers, by the consent of the Sejm, to ratification. In his opinion, it was this signal from Warsaw that penetrated the Presidential Palace and made Nawrocki accept the function of a associate in talks, not of a signed document.
Kosiniak-Kamish besides draws attention to the political game around the full project. In his opinion, the Council of Peace is simply a classical example of "lycitation": first, the maximum overclocking of tension, then the gradual cooling of emotions, the correction of records and the negotiation of conditions. In this sense, Poland's current position – "we are, we are talking, but we are not yet signing" – is an acceptable compromise for the government.
– I'm certain what I said in this case confirms that this is part of the negotiations, the bidding. First there is string pulling, then calming the situation – he adds.
Andrzej Duda: Rejecting Trump's "good morning" was a mistake
Former president Andrzej Duda stands in a amazingly clear contrast to the voices he would like Poland to cut off immediately from Trump's initiative. In his opinion, Nawrocki's gesture, which goes to Davos, but does not yet sign, is simply a manifestation of political reason alternatively than wobblyness.
– There is 1 serious problem in all of this, if anyone wants to question this idea. That is, the fact that president Putin and Lukashenko were besides invited to this Council – says Onet erstwhile president Andrzej Duda.
Duda admits that the biggest problem of the Council of Peace is the list of invited – including Putin and Lukashenko – but recalls that the planet is already sitting with Russia at 1 table on the UN safety Council. If individual wants to be absolutely primal and declares that "they will not sit with the aggressor", they would gotta boycott this format as well.
In his narrative, something else is crucial, namely not to burn bridges with the White home just due to the fact that the construction of a fresh organization raises concerns. Duda claims that the rules of the game should first be thoroughly understood, and then it should be assessed whether Poland should participate in it at all – even to influence the form of an institution that will arise anyway.
– If we want to accomplish peace, and in a expression where no 1 will have the right to veto in the UN, then the question is whether it would not be worth becoming a associate of this Council of Peace. due to the fact that we would like to be at the table erstwhile things are crucial to the world. The presence in specified a body, which would actually have decision-making and acting power, would be a major accomplishment of Polish diplomacy – says Andrzej Duda.
Krzysztof Bosak: Without a treaty and numbers, this cannot be estimated
Krzysztof Bosak speaks in a completely different tone. The Deputy talker of the Sejm of the Confederacy is primarily the information chaos around the Peace Council. In his opinion today, politicians and the media are discussing Trump’s general thought alternatively than the organization’s actual project.
Bosak points out that there is not yet a ready text of the Treaty or a clear description of the legal position of the Council of Peace. It is not known precisely what obligations associate States would assume, who would actually manage the funds paid or what the decision-making mechanics of this institution would look like. In the background, there is besides a question of the astronomical amounts to be paid by the states for permanent membership, but it is not even known to which money they would go to.
– If this is to be an global organisation, then a draft treaty should be established or ready to be assessed at the Ministry of abroad Affairs and by experts and lawyers. At the moment, nothing is known about specified a project, so we are actually discussing an thought that we do not know the details of", said Krzysztof Bosak of DoRzeczy.pl.
As Bosak argues, in this state of information the liable decision is simply impossible. First you request to see a concrete draft document, give it to the lawyers and experts on global law, and then decide whether Poland should company with its presence a plan in which Trump has almost unlimited privileges, and at 1 table the Western allies, Putin and Lukashenko sit.
What about the Council of Peace and Polish policies towards Trump?
All these statements combine 1 thing, namely the awareness that Nawrocki's invitation to the Council of Peace is not a polite gesture, but an effort to arrange a fresh architecture of influence around the White House. For Poland, it is an chance to keep a close relation with Washington, but besides the hazard of entering into a task that is just being created and already raises considerable controversy.
For now, the president assumes the function of a associate in talks, not a co-founder, which the government and part of the opposition see as a manifestation of political caution. However, the course of events will depend on what will truly be included in the papers of the Council of Peace: whether it will be a serious, though controversial organization or alternatively a political vehicle built around 1 person.