I will not hide that erstwhile I listened to an appearance in which the head of the MFA summarized the last year of work and assigned fresh tasks for his ministry, it crossed my head that he was a bit boring. No fireworks, no fresh doctrine christened by an awesome name. Radosław Sikorski did not say anything that we did not know before. Yeah, I guess if individual had turned on his speech 2 years ago, most of the listeners wouldn't have noticed the difference.
A minute later, I complained about it in my mind. due to the fact that is it truly a abroad minister's function to surprise and supply entertainment? Should he compete with gossip portals, supply quotes under the headlines and build tension? Politics in fresh years – most likely like all area of life – has been based on incentives, on which we all lose. In this sense, Sikorski's speech was a bit from a different era. Very good.
It is no wonder that Sikorski devoted most of his place to Ukraine and the threat from Russia. The minister talked about the act of diversion, about the fact that Russia is investigating our borders and, finally, it is worth quoting here, that we should be ready for war on the scale in which our grandparents were ready. individual could say that it was a cliché and that Sikorski said the same thing a year ago, 2 years ago, and even in 2014, erstwhile the Russians occupied Crimea. However, if we cut ourselves off from average media – newspapers, radio and tv – and started building their full worldview on the basis of the Internet, it might turn out that Sikorski's words are a uncommon and highly essential voice of reason.
For a long time, I feel that Facebook and Instagram are the places where Russian communicative won the conflict for comments. Just enter any proukrian post. Even for the collection of units for people sitting in the winter without power. alternatively of simple solidarity – laughter. “I was in Lviv and I saw no war.” Yeah, 'cause the front's a fewer 100 miles away, so everything's fine. Additionally, texts that war is simply a Ukrainian business, that they "do Poles", that it is all a setup.
Then comes Maria Wiernikowska's study from Russia, from which the war evaporated. They were sympathetic Russians who liked Poles. Yet this omission is present the most convenient form of propaganda.
It is besides impossible to ignore the fact that Grzegorz Braun and his environment have about 10% of support. People who would welcome Russian tanks with flowers cease to be a margin, and polls indicate that without them they will not be able to build the majority in the future Sejm.
Last but not least - Leszek Miller. The man who introduced Poland to the European Union present is desperately seeking a place on the lists of the Confederation. And he does so by lecturing the fighting Ukrainians and abruptly discovering in himself the request to remind Poles of the "truths about Volyn" – as if he had consistently struggled throughout his erstwhile political life to discover the white pages of history.
From this perspective, Sikorski's words are a uncommon manifestation of honesty and Polish patriotism. Similarly, it was with the minister's words about undermining the function of global organisations in the modern world. We all know that the power performance began again, and yet in times erstwhile Donald Trump ignores the UN and creates a bizarre Council of Peace, it is worth repeating. Sikorski did this skillfully, building historical comparisons and saying that after the fall of Nazi Germany, the US wanted Stalin's aid to fight Japan. They succeeded, but at the expense of freedom in our part of Europe. So it is not that the US business is always in line with the Polish business.
And again, it seems that these are words that we could hear the same way in 2017 – during Donald Trump's first word – as well as today, almost 10 years later. Well, since there are no shortages of MPs in the Sejm who applaud the American president with their distinctive red caps.
Historical parallels are the strongest part of Sikorski's rhetoric. I think they sound peculiarly powerfully towards those who name themselves prominent experts of history, that is, to a large part of the right side of the political scene. In this way, the head of the MFA argues why we should stay with the European Union. Ultimately, it was thanks to this organization for more than half a century that we managed to halt the particularisms and nationalisms in Europe, which in itself is simply a phenomenon that will most likely be discussed even in a 1000 years.
So do I see any weakness in Sikorski's speech? I could choice on how much the government was praising, and it is hard to require the abroad Minister to distance himself from his own political background at specified a time.
Radosław Sikorski is what he is. After all these years in politics, we know him through and through. He can be rude, haughty, sometimes arrogant. He walks through the seismic corridors like the character of Sting's song "Englishman in fresh York" – a bit out of place, like from another planet and another era. With distance, any ostentatious separation.
Only that it is the sobriety of thinking, judgement and stableness that makes it a policy of large format. 1 who can talk state language in moments of tension, not organization language. A policy that, although formally approaching retirement, most likely hasn't said the last word yet.
