Piotr Beniszys: Talks about the 2023 elections with the manager of the European Solidarity Centre are not possible to begin with so frequently in the comments of the parallels cited between these elections and the June 1989 vote. Do you besides see specified analogies?
Basil Kerski: I am very happy about this comparison. There's quite a few parallel. I would like to point out that I do not want to compare the regulation of the Law and Justice with the communist period, but we have been dealing with a single-party strategy that sought to limit democracy and spoke openly about it by operating with the notion of "non-liberal democracy". The answer to these actions could not be the triumph of 1 formation or the placing on 1 party, but the building of lists throughout the social space. Just like erstwhile the strength of Solidarity and its characteristic was its heterogeneity. These analogies, of course, are not direct, but this is about any inspiration. Well, Solidarity created, first under the umbrella of the trade union and then under the umbrella of the electoral list, a community of communities from the left, including even powerfully atheistic and distanced to the Church and Catholicism, after believing Catholic-conservatives, who, however, did not imagine their lives in a state that is not a regulation of law and pluralist democracy.
In this year's elections – likewise – there was most likely a block of eleven groups, which, however, was not so much the sum of these parties, as represented a wide social movement from left to right. Its aim was not primarily to fight the common political enemy, due to the fact that it was not adequate as a binder, but as a joint repair program.
In 1989, it was besides the strength of Solidarity. She went to talks at the circular Table and to the elections in June 1989 not to overthrow communism from the ground up, but to take up the concept of building the economy and structures of the Polish state completely from scratch. present we are dealing with a very akin situation.
The voters went to elections with Solidarity behind their heads?
In all these protests of fresh years, whether women or judges or local governments or another groups, people sought inspiration from the past, they wanted to be part of any tradition. So there were motives on the streets referring to the Solidarity Revolution – a celebrated poster with Gary Cooper, the Solidarity logo that already carries another content. The run of local governments, not only metropolises, but besides smaller municipalities and regions, which referred to the symbolism of Solidarity and utilized the 1989 pro-event slogan "Do not sleep due to the fact that they will vote you out" written in solidarity. This was completely transferred to the 21st century. (www.niespij.pl)
Both then and now we had a multi-generational social movement. The contemporary democratic movement has been co-founded in fresh years by the most crucial surviving actors in August 1980 – Lech Wałęsa, Bogdan Borusewicz, Henryk Krzywonos, Bożena Grżaczewska-Ribick, Władysław Frasyniuk or Bogdan Lis, to name any – after 18-19-year-olds. So it was not only a politically broad social movement, which was organized in 3 letters, but besides an alliance of 3 generations. From the Gdańsk Agreement of 31 August 1980 to the elections of 15 October 2023.
History has returned to change modern reality. All analogies to 1989 are interesting if we talk about certain lessons and traditions. On the another hand, it is not that past repeats itself, due to the fact that neither these 3 letters are Solidarity nor the PiS is communist power.
However, there are akin challenges in terms of how Poland will gotta change after the elections. We'll have cohabitation. In the summertime of 1989, Solidarity could theoretically scope out for full power, but she felt that there were no social and global conditions. We presently have a president who is active in an anti-liberal, nationalist environment, but inactive has full democratic legitimacy, so there is no alternate to developing any form of cooperation between the fresh government and him, at least on the most crucial issues. Like any co-habitation, this will besides be marked by a field of conflict and differences and a search for a field of agreement. It will so be a transitional period.
Photo by Justyna Malinowska CC BY-SA 4.0 DEEDIt will now be essential to rebuild the state and democracy, not according to ideas, but by adapting reality to be found. There's definitely no simple return to any model state. Also, the first years of solidarity transformation were not about drawing academic plans from drawers, but about adapting ideas and values to reality, e.g. economical ones with advanced inflation and debt found at the time of the collapse of communism. besides here before the coalition that will set up a fresh government, likewise challenging challenges.
The reality present is the war in Ukraine and in the mediate East and another geopolitical tensions, the very hard situation of public finances and the crisis of the German economy facing us. The last 4 years are besides the usage of economical resources developed by the Law and Justice Office by Jarosław Kaczyński, and, in fact, the stagnation of long-term investments.
In conclusion, I would call this election a "peaceful revolution at the ballot boxes". In this respect, I see a full analogy with 4 June 1989, and it is in the spirit of Hannah Arendt's texts, who, erstwhile coming from central Europe and then having contact with the Anglo-Saxon world, clearly recognized the weakness and shallowness of democratic traditions, even those longer existing. Arendt stressed that democracy is not something permanent and static. It is not something without periodic crises, or even authoritarian collapses and bloody civilian war-style conflicts in the US that intersected the expected over 200 years of American democracy, which then long burdened the deficiency of full civilian rights for all Americans. Arendt said that all generation of democracy is susceptible to experiencing very deep crises and to profound systemic changes in its logic. So in Poland we had an "authoritary moment". And now, independently of it, we are going through a phase of a fresh definition of our democracy. These elections on October 15 rather unexpectedly proved to be the mentioned peace revolution, which not only removes any formation from power, but besides requires us to rebuild our democracy.
And how do you measure the origin of this election success? Was it a more heroic feat of Polish society, which turned the country back from the abyss? But did it besides turn out that this written authoritarian strategy in this current phase of its formation was weak, was specified a paper monster?
I would not agree at all that this authoritarian strategy was weak. It was very consistently implemented. True, this camp is now falling, and their failure was due to deficiency of consequences. I don't see it that way – it was a systemic, deep, thoughtful change of the political strategy that lost due to the fact that it encountered large and strong resistance. That opposition had many faces. On the 1 hand, organized opposition – for example from the community of judges, which impressed me very much. It showed its face, went out on the street, organized lobbying against these actions, utilized the European institutions, including EU orchards, to block them. On the another hand, naturally, there was a spontaneous protest on the streets.
These elections showed something that happened sooner than I thought. Social resistance, erstwhile it failed to accomplish full success in blocking change, had to change its strategy. A preemptive set of legal changes was developed. For example, women who have organised the longest-lasting opposition to the decision to tighten the abortion bill. At 1 point, the thought came to them that their opposition lasted a long time, but it does not change anything. It has thus moved to the preparation of legislative initiatives for the future. So it was considered that it was not adequate to object, that legal reality should be created. For me, symbolic is that the first laws filed with the fresh Sejm are laws related to women's rights.
It was amazing to accelerate these spontaneous, mass protests towards political and systemic initiatives. It happened very quickly. These activists besides entered very profoundly into these elections, were included in election committees, in the election control movement, or even in the candidate lists.
Is this a substance to be expected?
In the last 2 years I have preached specified a thesis and at the same time hope that – yes – we are dealing with a systemic change in Poland, but its completion will be very difficult, due to the fact that Polish society, despite its distance to politics and criticism towards political elites, is simply a society in democratic depth. Under his frequently criticized civic passivity in fresh decades, there was his belief that there was no alternate to surviving in an open society and a democratic state.
The test of this was these choices with incredible attendance. Many people went to the urns who are not active citizens all day. They understood that this was an chance to express their extremist pro-democratic views. So it is very hard to make an authoritarian strategy over the heads of the democratic society, and democracy needs a society convinced that there is no alternate for it.
This was not, for example, in 1933 in Germany. Hitler's coming to power was not based solely on the coup d'état and the force of the NSDAP. Hitler may have relied on the fact that most of the society was authoritative. Although not Nazi at the time yet, but right-wing authoritarian. She didn't identify with democracy, so barely anyone wanted to stand up for the Weimar Republic.
In fresh years, in all area – police, troops, authoritative staff – I have met people with an ethos who have sided with my institution and did not enter into the political expectations of the rulers. This was not so much a disobedience to the superior instance as alternatively obedience or allegiance to the constitution and its principles. I was besides afraid that 1 more triumph of the Law and Justice would make so much systemic force that it would be very, very hard to face this systemic change.
Let's decision on to the global exchange. 1980 and 1989 built a certain image of Poland in the planet and strengthening it is the mission of the European Solidarity Centre. Undoubtedly, the last 8 years have placed a very thick question mark alongside the thesis on the authenticity of this image. However, elections 2023 bring akin experiences to 1989. What will be their importance for the global reception of Poland – the country that first broke out of the socialist bloc, and now gives the planet hope of defeating populism by liberal democracy? Isn't this a profound experience even in view of the choices that the US is facing next year?
Let me start with a fewer words about history, so as to emphasize the strength of certain associations. The past of Solidarity is part of the past of the world's wave of democratisation. Postwar generation, globally reasoning and surviving in a common mass culture, demands at any point peace and love and human rights. specified a planet fell in love not only with Solidarity, but with all the dissidents of east Europe. This wave of democratisation and human rights was strengthened not only by writers and intellectuals, but besides by musicians and artists.
After a terrible planet war, then a “cold war”, bloody local wars — Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan — and decolonization along with its consequence to it, the planet movement for democratisation grew, with centres specified as South Africa (solidarity of the planet culture popular with so many years imprisoned Nelson Mandela became a universal symbol, influencing globally), South Korea, many Latin American countries and our region with an emerging political earthquake. In the meantime, we besides have the relaxation of the "cold war", which is mainly expressed by the Helsian process, the papers of the CBWE of 1975, to which dissidents and Democrats can now appeal. specified an atmosphere arises: the planet is changing, and universal pro-democracy forces defend human rights, are attractive and have strength.
There are 3 phenomena in Poland. The first remains poorly seen. Polish culture has become universal since 1956. It uses restricted spaces of freedom in all area – literature, film, graphics, painting, theatre – to address the most hard topics, specified as the experience of totalitarianism (only seemingly one, this related to the 3rd Reich). Polish artists confronted with the experience of Holocaust, war and totalitarianism created universal works. Never before has Polish art been as strong in so many areas as in the 1960s and 1970s.
The second, however, was the election of Wojtyla as Pope in 1978. It was just a revolution inside the Church, a universal institution, it was everyone's interest, including Protestants and atheists. The man from the east bloc is the head of a state independent of the russian Empire! States that are systematically allies of the West. individual from there abruptly has a mandate for external action for human rights in Poland and Central Europe. Wojtyla's character is very positive. This is simply a man who understands that war has brought Poles a very hard and universal experience. This is individual to whom the judaic destiny is very near, the experience of the Holocaust, who sees a commitment. This is simply a completely different communicative than the 1 PiS is trying to give to this pontificate today. Wojtyła's language and position on the destiny of Central Europe were universally unnationalistic. Of course, there was besides a strong subject of ecumenism.
So Wojtyła evokes a cultural and political revolution, becomes a very crucial actor besides outside the community of the Catholic Church and speaks on behalf of Poland and Poles.
The 3rd component is, of course, Solidarity. She fascinated the planet as a very broad social alliance, from left to right, or in the sense of an alliance of workers and intellectuals. This is the time erstwhile in the West after 1968 many young people enter the political sphere, but do not want to be part of any narrowly defined tradition, organization or idea. specified people find themselves better in broad alliances against something, specified as the Vietnam War. It's not just, sorry, any "young lefties". A critical approach to the way this war is conducted besides unites people from right to left. Solidarity then besides fascinated as a link to a modern model of policy organisation.
We frequently forget that there was no specified symbolic figure as Lech Wałęsa in the past of communism. A worker, a real worker, with a typical workman's biography and all the tragedies typical of her, who in specified an crucial for the propaganda of the PZPR workplace, as the Gdańsk Shipyard named Lenin, said that he did not accept this political evolution, in which the organization representing the interests of the workers guaranteed it by organising a dictatorship. That was novum in global history, that the individual said that only human rights-based democracy guarantees workers their rights: social promotion, prosperity, occupation security. It was a revolution. Many have said this before, but this is the first time a individual has done it here, who, in addition, was open to dialog with communist authorities, did not accept force in political dispute. This evidently focused on Poland, although this democratisation was a movement throughout the region and drew from people specified as Havel, Šimečka, young Orban... [Laughter] Sakharov and his wife Jelena Bonner. The planet knew that it had to look at this region, due to the fact that there are more than just labour strikes in Poland.
What about our image today?
Moving on to the present – this is the problem. In the eyes of the planet in the last decade there has been a extremist change of political culture in our region. This is not only the experience of the Law and Justice, it is besides the experience of Czech president Zeman, and earlier besides the Euroscepticism of the Prime Minister and Czech president Klaus, who blew up the Western intellectual consensus, for example negating climate warming. The Czech Republic had 2 presidents after Havlu who denied his legacy. In Slovakia, the situation is dramatic, a permanent conflict between democrats and populists since the 1990s. We have a very painful situation in Hungary, due to the fact that there is now an crucial actor of democratisation, which reminds Poland a bit. However, what is definitely different about the Orban non-liberal revolution from the Polish Law and Justice is the restoration of the proposition of waiting for border revisions, at least in the form of the restoration of intellectual revisionism. And that's a very dangerous populism. We besides have a very late understanding, of course, that the transformation process in Russia at no time at all after the collapse of the russian Union did not lead to building democratic potential.
In summary, we lost before 15 October as Poland and as a region absolutely all the affirmative connotations that have been created since the 1970s and culminated in the effects of Poland's accession to the European Union. At the time, however, the West was amazed that Poland's accession brought specified good and tangible economical effects. It was noted that despite large successes already before 2004, despite the affirmative perception of the reforms of Mazowiecki and Balcerowicz, the presence in the EU gave Poland further effects and benefits for both parties.
The acquisition of power by the Law and the construction of another political strategy completely ended this affirmative perception, with gigantic fear, moments of powerlessness, the reflection that we should fundamentally say goodbye to specified countries erstwhile it comes to EU membership.
Now we can effort to change the rhetoric. Show as fresh president Petr Pavl and the government in the Czech Republic, who again mention the ideals of 1989, the heritage of Havel and human rights as a precedence of national interests. And now besides the change in Poland and the chance to add additional factors. Ukraine, on the another hand, may be a problem, which has focused so much attention and fascinated the world, but questions arise about the efficiency of this country and about the constant problem of corruption. Ukraine present is ideally very close to Western democracies, it is loyalty to it and the will to support the transformation of this country towards NATO and EU membership, but increasingly, the Ukrainian elite are being asked uncomfortable questions about whether their country and political practice truly are appropriate to our Western values.
Either way, Ukraine, which was not 30 years ago an crucial origin in the perception of our region, is definitely a origin now.
Let's talk about the future. Donald Tusk said he would win first – it had already been done – then he would fix the harm, then he would settle the blame and yet reconcile. How realistic is the simultaneous implementation of both last objectives in specified deep political divisions and strong emotions as we have in Poland?
As far as settlement is concerned, it must be implemented according to clear criteria of the regulation of law. First, of course, this strategy of the regulation of law needs to be reconstructed, especially the prosecutor's office, and then there is absolute autonomy and the prosecutor's office, and the courts, in order to legally settle the policy of the last 8 years. This is always a long-term process and must be a process independent of people's public sphere, the media and, of course, politicians who are liable for the state. So the task of Donald Tusk, as the political manager of the majority, will only be to reconstruct the justice strategy independent of him and his majority.
What is different is communicating and documenting the harm done, both criminal and public finances. This communication is simply a very hard task. We request to show everyone what reality decisions come into being today. This is needed to return to rational decisions and discussions on all hard topics, from financial possibilities in wellness care, through questions of peri-demographic and retirement.
The feature of populist politics, as we have seen over the 8 years, is that specified a debate has not taken place. Therefore, erstwhile we talk about accounts, I think not only about the legal aspect, but besides about creating a space where we are trying to think rationally again.
For reconciliation, in the light of what Jarosław Kaczyński signals, that is, the adoption by the Law and Justice of the attitude of a actual "total opposition", deescalation is besides essential from the future government. It may be naive, but I want we wouldn't enter the language of escalation anymore.
From a rational point of view, it should surely be so. But politics is dominated by emotion. The information itself that 1 of the PiS politicians has been questioned, possibly arrested, or convicted, has the possible to rekindle an atmosphere of hostility from the core of the PiS electorate, which will most likely never believe the guilt of its favorites. Isn't this a fresh phase of conflict recipe and a fresh phase of reconciliation?
Reconciliation cannot mean questioning a legitimate settlement with a crime. These are the areas PiS mixed up. PiS tried to deprive the Polish state of independent justice mechanisms. The symbol of this was the committee on Russian influence, an authoritarian-revolutionary creation.
The law-abiding settlement of possible crimes is completely independent of politics or publicism, has its logic. These are lengthy trials and they will be in the hands of independent courts. They will not collectively embrace all those in power. It will besides be hard processes, due to the fact that they were creating their legal reality, which their defenders will be referred to. This is simply a difficulty known for efforts to settle communism or fascism.
I have pointed out an crucial area and not adequate in our perspective. PiS has done a very crucial thing for Polish politics. He said, "No more social policy practice according to the logic of transformation, belt tightening logic." The strength of the Law and Justice was that politicians of earlier governments told people that we inactive couldn't afford any things. In the 1990s, social peace in Poland with specified dramatic changes and poorness levels managed to preserve itself by saying, "We do not know if your surviving generation will benefit from the transformation efforts today; but already a generation of your children will live in a state of European prosperity." It was a transfer restriction. The PiS did a very intelligent thing, or possibly it just hit the time erstwhile he said, “We can already afford higher transfers; we are more wealthy.”
Now we request to find a fresh language of communication with citizens and citizens on the possibilities of the Polish state. And they will now be partially dependent on the factors that the Law and Justice have created, whether in the financial or in the economical dimension.
From our point of view, as democrats, this will be a very comprehensive process. The settlement will be a definition of realistic standards and conditions on which we are building the Republic of Poland again today.
And that's what the media needs. Media that controls all power, but as public media, is besides part of the state. They are not only to criticize, but besides to enter into an alliance with the state to communicate the rationality of certain decisions.
After her defeat, the main thought of the PiS for a fresh communicative seems more aggressive than always to criticize the European Union. Are we standing, like the British around 2000, at the threshold of a situation where 1 of the main political forces, however, is inclined towards the thought of leaving the EU?
You have raised an highly crucial problem. On the 1 hand, we have the announcement of the radicalisation of the Law and Justice in opposition, which hopes that with the President's aid he will be able to block the actions of the fresh government and lead to a failure of social confidence. But the second thing that worries me is that the PiS are becoming an anti-integration party. The Copernicus revolution in the heads of Poles, which led us to sovereignty and to change geopolitics without changing geography, was a revolution of acceptance of post-war borders and knowing that real sovereignty of Poland will gain as a nation through European integration. She led to subsequent revolutions in our heads. Not just the elite! So we had reconciliation with all our neighbors and a focus on building affirmative relationships, in a situation of specified a large burden and so much ease in generating negative emotions, especially in relations with Germany, Ukrainians and Lithuanians. There was the thought: “Let us talk about what unites us and build specified historical cognition and symbolism.” Already in Solidarity was written reasoning about politics, state and sovereignty in many dimensions: yes, no 1 questions the national state there, but the country is preferred to a decentralised state, and that is something that the Law and Justice have challenged. Finally, there is the thought of subsidiarity, which is part of the multi-levelity of the political structure, and which is followed by the awareness that peace in Europe present will not warrant us self-government, nor alone national states, but only broader alliances with large authority.
Questioning European integration is simply a question of an alliance that is just ensuring Poland's sovereignty and Europe's peace. It besides gives Polish politics an instrument of influence and power. The EU is besides a model of self-limiting these largest countries of the continent, Germany and France. It is besides a sphere where large players effort to relax and limit the sphere of influence. specified zones proceed to exist, but the logic of equality between national actors is introduced, which is revealed in the voting methodology in the European Council.
Here, this anti-European policy of the Law and Justice Union blows up the full architecture under the name of “Polish sovereignty”. This is not something that Poles invented in the mid-1990s that they had to enter the European Community market, it is simply a holistic thought about peace in Europe and about our sovereignty, looking at Russian ambitions questioning these rules of the game.
In Western-Russian relations Putin invited Germans, French or British to close bilateral relations beyond the logic of European integration, as she is of course anti-imperial logic.
This PiS strategy of me, I must say, scares me. This first, full opposition, is dangerous due to the fact that it can discourage citizens completely from politics, which will service no one. The latter, in turn, is the usage of political atomic weapons, is the blowing up of Poland. And I besides say this in the interest of the PiS voters, due to the fact that I do not believe that there is anyone curious in the conflict in Central Europe and Poland, which is so weakened that it abruptly becomes an attractive area of direct expansion for Russia.
From this, in their take, secures an alliance with Washington enough...
I remember Zbigniew Brzeziński's last visit to Poland, just in Gdańsk, in 2013 Brzeziński, who felt any things in our homeland, emphasized that the alliance with America and transatlantic relations are not an alternate to European integration, nor are they an alternate to very strong alliances with neighbours. He even referred this to Polish-German relations in Gdańsk. He said that in the interests of the United States there are very strong alliances here, for example Polish-German, very strong EU, reconciliation with neighbours. I am talking about this due to the fact that there is specified a communicative that the process of deepening European integration, including military integration, is directed against NATO. On the contrary. The North Atlantic Alliance is not focused solely on Europe, but is simply a global alliance. Therefore, the additional military resources here are in the interest of this alliance.
There is simply a fundamental incompetence on the part of the Law and Justice in the assessment of the safety policy of Germany and France. Germany inactive knows that their safety is based on the United States. In the Law and Justice neither do they see that France, yes, wants to be an crucial actor in safety policy, but knows that it is weak itself. I request strong alliances for that. And despite French patriotism, almost all French president was curious in very good transatlantic relations, especially in the military area.
Reading the statements of the politicians of the Law and Justice in this matter, I am terrified of their specified ignorance. Why did Germany and the French commit themselves to helping Ukraine? This can be analysed culturally, as sympathy and solidarity, but above all, these countries have understood well that Putin is tipping over the full European order that arose after 1989, as a consequence of the Solidarity Revolution. All of it. And that it will affect their own safety. That's why we have business here.
The success of democratic parties has many mothers and fathers, but surely 1 of its main authors is Donald Tusk. You've known him well for many years. How you measure his achievements on a broad plan, on the plan of the latest past of Poland. Is he equal to those large men of the first years of Polish independency – Mazowieckie, Geremek or Kuroni? Or is that what the next years will decide?
I'd love to say something about Donald Tusk, but first I want to appreciate another actors. We started with civilian society not due to the fact that we are so politically correct and sympathetic, just due to the fact that it truly was specified a large surprise how many people in their everyday lives were ready to cross the comfort line! Many people besides amazed me with very conscious choices. besides those who do not function professionally in this area as citizens and politicians understood very well what Poland meant. It's truly the same as in the '80s. They made individual choices: “I will take my chances”, “I will commit.” Even the best political leaders are incapable to win unless they become moderators of a social movement that has a multitude of leaders.
On the political scene, we are dealing with respective phenomena. As far as the score is concerned, the left side fell rather poorly. It seems that this is the consequence of the meanders of Polish history, that we were left by systematically killing people of the Polish democratic left by Hitler and Stalin cut off from the social democratic element; the democratic anti-bolshevik socialist movement. It was not possible to make specified a strong left. However, it is affirmative that different environments, including the left, tried to draw the best possible consequence from what is available in this transitional state. Today's left is no longer a post-communist left, here a generational change took place. But it's inactive far from what PPS was. Against the background of this crisis and the wider crisis of this formation in Europe, the environment has someway been consolidated, and this is simply a non-popular language.
As for the 3rd Way, I value Władysław Kosiniak-Kamish very much. He and his people are accused of being uncharismatic, but I think they're a small narcissistic. Meanwhile, this is simply a value that can be attractive to voters. I am very curious in the improvement of this policy. He's young, and he already has quite a few state experience. It can bring a lot to rebuilding Polish democracy with its style.
As far as Simon Holovnia is concerned, in this run – along with Tuski – he did a key job, each in a different dimension. They've been all over the country. It sounds banal, but it is to know very different Polish realities. They did it before the election run began. They entered the dialogue. Simon had to due to the fact that he was building the structures of his party. In creating structures, he tried to build, extract competences and agenda at the lowest local level. This mixture, professionalism of the structures and conservatism of the PSL and the social Holown gave the 3rd Road rather a importance. I was besides very impressed by Holowna's speech in the tv debate. It was best done, not only rhetorically, but besides presented its political priorities, popular language, not populist.
We're getting to Donald Tusk. I'm very impressed with what Prime Minister Donald Tusk did. He had large courage, returning from the highest position in Europe to the political everyday life of the PiS state. He could have chosen the function of an intelligent observer, a commentator, elder statesman. Yet he actively joined the movement to rebuild Polish democracy. He's been driving around the country for the last 2 years. He visited, of course, the structures, the actors of the Platform and the coalitions, who were in a deep crisis, but, above all, triggered a process of dialog with the community, the whole. Not just with his constituents. Its activity has fundamentally built relations between political elites and voters again. The nature of these meetings was not rallying, he was very open and courageous. Rafał Trzaskowski in a conversation with me told me how impressed he was already with these pre-election meetings, that there are besides people coming to these meetings critically oriented to the KO, but they want to perceive and get their opinion. They are not curious in Tusk or Trzaskowski, they are curious in circumstantial topics. There's a hunger for politics. And people are not afraid to go to the villages dominated by the Law and Justice and the Church to meet Tusk, they are not afraid of what the neighbors will say. And so it was during the last presidential campaign, told Trzaskowski.
This Tusk occupation was a basic occupation that gave people a sense of the sense of specified dialogue. And she showed politicians who they were dealing with, what people and what expectations they had. And it wasn't fake. I wonder how this experience will change Tusk and the politicians around him.
Maybe I shouldn't have told you. Anecdotes, as you know, are dangerous. In 2005, Donald Tusk ran for president and seemed to have a chance to enter the second round. At a gathering with him in the summertime of 2005, I said what I am ashamed of today: “You know, Donald, I late read Winston Churchill’s biography by Sebastian Haffner, an anti-Nazi German immigrant. Haffner fled to England, was fascinated by Churchill. Before that I knew small about Churchill, in fact it was limited to the classical cognition of a Pole who admired this character. I didn't know in 1939 he was kind of at the end of his career. He was a complete outsider. And no 1 would believe that this character would play another key function for Britain. I guess it's in politics and life that you never know what your destiny is. And possibly these presidential elections are not the most crucial minute of your biography.” I suggested that if he didn't succeed, another chance would come, another minute of political destiny. He looked at me, and I spent a fewer days wondering why I told him...
And then he lost that presidential election in 2005. But he became a key figure of Polish politics. In 2007, as he won the parliamentary election and became Prime Minister, I thought, "Oh, this is the churchillian moment!" He didn't want to be Prime Minister, he wanted to be president, and it turned out the another way around. He became Prime Minister at a hard minute just before the global financial crisis.
In fresh days with a sense of humor I had to think frequently about this conversation we had in 2005, due to the fact that possibly the real historical function of Donald Tusk will only begin now. possibly the scale of work with which he will be confronted now will be a completely different league.
Whether individual likes him or not, Donald Tusk will now represent the Polish government based on the majority created in specified circumstances that he will become the leader of Europe rejecting the Orban model. This brings a large deal of responsibility. It will be the Prime Minister of a country that has a major impact on Europe and the European Union is waiting for fresh leaders.
Through this symbolic phrase in Poland, through this "peaceful revolution at election urns", the Prime Minister of Poland can become a political player of dense importance due to the fact that the Polish society is now fascinating for Europe. Polish society is no longer a society of post-communist transformation, it represents the experience of the full of Europe today. The symbolic phrase in Poland gives Europe any hope, although Europe knows that this triumph will affect the continent, only if it is simply a triumph not individual Poland, it will not stay within our country and this democratic energy will decision to another Europeans. Just like it did in Solidarity.
Basil Kerski – Culture manager, editor, political scientist and essayist of Polish-Iratian origin, since 2011 manager of the European Solidarity Centre in Gdańsk.
