Speech by Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki at the University of Heidelberg

solidaryzm.eu 2 years ago

Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki visited Ruprecht and Charles University. It is the oldest university in Germany and 1 of the most renowned in Europe. During the visit, the head of the Polish government had his speech at the University of Heidelberg.

The main subject of the speech was Europe at a historical turning point. The importance of European values towards the Russian invasion of Ukraine was besides an crucial issue which the Prime Minister spoke about.

Your Magnificence, prof. Eitel,
Mr. Prime Minister Kretschmann,
Ladies and gentlemen,
Dear Students,

Thank you so much for inviting me to Heidelberg. It is an honor for me to execute at 1 of the oldest universities on the continent. At the university, where dozens of generations of prominent Europeans have been educated for centuries, of course many large Germans, but besides many Poles. 1 of them was even the rector of this college.

Heidelberg is simply a beautiful city erected and nurtured by generations. And yet this wonderful city, which is in many ways a miniature of Europe itself, has seen for centuries many evils, fights, wars, atrocities. Today, unfortunately, we are again present on our continent.

Europe is at a historical turn today. Even more serious than erstwhile communism fell. These changes were mostly peaceful. Today, erstwhile the full planet is threatened by a war caused by a Russian aggressor, more like 70-80 years ago.

I want to tell you present about 4 issues that are of fundamental importance to Europe's future. So I will divide my message into 4 parts.

In each of them, I will mention to a fundamental issue now: the function of national states.

I'll start with the first, extended issue:

What does Europe’s past teach us?

Then I'll decision on to:

The meaning of Ukraine's fight against Russia and the conclusions of the Ukrainian War for Europe for us?

I will then take the 3rd point:

What are European values and what is threatening them today?
Finally, how can Europe win the race for global leadership?

1. What does Europe’s past teach us?

If we are asking what the past of Europe teaches us, I would like to start with the relation between us – Poles and Germans.

We've been neighbors for over eleven centuries. We live, work, worry and solve our problems not only side by side, but frequently together. Our first universities were founded almost at the same time, in Cracow in 1364 and in Heidelberg in 1386. For centuries there has been no shortage of Poles of German origin or Germans of Polish and Slavic origin.

Today, Poles and Germans work closely together economically, which creates interdependence. We are the 5th largest trading partner for Germany, after China, the USA, the Netherlands and France. shortly we will be in 4th place, ahead of France. And then even on the third. Many do not realize it, but Russia is only the 16th in this ranking.

Poland together with another Visegrad Group countries is simply a much more crucial partner than China or the USA. It is worth realizing how crucial Germany and Poland are to each other. Although we have different perspectives on any issues, we besides have many common problems that we besides gotta overcome together due to our neighbourhood.

Poland is inactive struggling with the cruel legacy of planet War II. We lost our independence, freedom and more than 5 million citizens. Polish cities were destroyed, and over a 1000 villages were brutally pacified. erstwhile Western Germany could usually develop, Poland, as a consequence of planet War II, lost 50 years of its history. I do not want to sacrifice this issue of my speech, but I cannot ignore it Poland has never received compensation from Germany for the crimes of planet War II, for the destruction, stolen property and treasures of national culture. Yet, complete reconciliation between the perpetrator and the victim is possible only if there is simply a reparation. At a turning point in Europe's history, more ever, we request specified reconciliation, due to the fact that the challenges of the future are enormous.

The past of Europe, with its biggest wound – planet War II, threw out my country, along with many others, for almost half a century outside the "iron curtain". My peers and I grew up, went to school, started working or studying in the shadow of communist crimes. Millions of young Europeans surviving behind the Iron Curtain knew there was freedom on the 1 hand and Russian colonialism on the other. For any sovereignty, for others imperialist domination. On the 1 hand desired free Europe, on the another hand barbaric totalitarianism. Life under russian Russia's shoe.

If individual had told us that we would have seen the end of communism, we would not have believed him. Like most russian Russian specialists in the West. And yet that's what happened. Polish Solidarity, the War in Afghanistan, Pope John Paul II and the United States' tough stance in Reagan's presidency led to the collapse of criminal communism. It's time for democracy.

Today, I would like to emphasise the function of national sovereignty in maintaining the freedom of nations.

In fact, the fight against the enslaved peoples of Central Europe was just a conflict for national sovereignty. This case brought together all patriots on both sides of the political scene due to the fact that we saw that our freedoms and rights could only be exercised within the limits of sovereign, regained states.

And we were right. This was peculiarly evident in times of social and economical crisis. besides during the fresh COVID-19 pandemic, we saw that efficient national states in Europe are the foundation for protecting citizens' health.

Earlier in the period of the debt crisis, we have clearly seen a conflict between the countries of confederate Europe: Greece, Italy or Spain, and the supranational institutions that made economical decisions on behalf of those countries without a democratic mandate.

In both cases, we have hit the limits of transnational governance in Europe.

In Europe there is no better warrant of the freedom of nations, their culture, social security, economic, political or military than national states. another systems are illusory and utopian.

They can be strengthened by inter- and even in part transnational organisations like the European Union, but national states in Europe cannot be replaced by them.

Europe was born much earlier than the American republic, whose unity was besides forged through civilian war. Therefore, referring to this historical analogy is so misleading.

A political strategy that does not respect the sovereignty of others, democracy, or the simple will of a nation, or sovereign sooner or later, must lead to utopia or tyranny.

Christian Europe spawned a civilization that most respected human dignity. This civilization is worth protecting. Especially with hard and increasingly strong civilizations for which democratic and freedom values do not count.

We want to build a Europe that is strong adequate to meet the global challenges of the 21st century. It is the scale of the European Union that makes it a crucial force in the world, not its increasingly incomprehensible decision-making system.

We request a Europe with the strength of national states, not a Europe built on their rubble. specified a Europe will never be strong due to the fact that the political, economic, cultural strength of Europe takes from the energy supplied by national states.

The alternate is either technocratic utopia, which any in Brussels imagine, or neo-imperialism, which modern past has already discredited.

The conflict of nations in Europe for freedom did not end in 1989. This is best seen behind our east border.

2. At this point, I want to decision on to an issue that is of large importance to Europe. Ukraine.

I will besides talk about the importance of her fight for our common European values. And what lessons we should learn from it.

What are the Ukrainians truly fighting for today? What are they willing to hazard their lives for? Why didn't they surrender to the world's second strongest army? The conflict of Ukrainians for the right to self-determine about their national being is another heroic manifestation of defending the national state, defending freedom. But to have the will to fight, you truly gotta believe what you're fighting for.

Today, Ukrainians fight not only for their freedom. Since 24 February 2022 they have besides been fighting all day for the freedom of all Europe. And the destiny of this war depends on our future. The defeat of Ukraine will be a defeat of the West. He'll be the defeat of the full free world. A defeat greater than Vietnam. The defeat after which Russia will go unpunished, and the planet as we know it will be dramatically different. A long series of unpredictable events will follow. The defeats of the free planet may push Putin, as the appeasement of the 1930s encouraged Hitler. Unfortunately Putin also, like Hitler then, enjoys large public support. It is not an exaggeration to say that we are facing the threat of planet War III. So we're dealing with a threat of escalation. The way to avoid it is to halt feeding the beast.

There's a communicative in front of us. erstwhile our children look into the textbooks, they ask if we've done everything we can to guarantee a peaceful future. Were we reasoning about them and the long-term welfare of our countries, or were we just reasoning about temporary convenience and putting aside hard decisions? Have we learned from the mistakes of the past, or will we proceed to repeat them?

2.1 Why is this a turning point in Europe's history?

Until the last days of February 24 I heard Putin would not attack Ukraine. Many politicians in Europe preferred to believe this, hoping that the "Wandel durch Handel" could proceed with Russia at the expense of Central Europe.

In this context, let us return to the question: what are the Ukrainians fighting for? If they were afraid only with material possessions, and not their community, they would have given up long ago. Putin was counting on it. He thought the Ukrainians would choose peace alternatively of fighting. But he made a mistake.

Why? What was Kremlin's mistake? Putin's not crazy, as he's trying to tell us many of those who've done business with him for 20 years. Putin believed besides much in his own imagination of the world. He was incapable to see that the Ukrainians were a nation. And that they yet have a national state – possibly far from perfection, but inactive 1 for which they are willing to give their lives.

Russian propaganda claims that there is no specified thing as a separate Ukrainian nation. We know the saying that if the facts disagree with the theory, the worse for the facts. That's why Russia uses its fist to effort to explain to the Ukrainians that they have no right to their national identity.

And yet they are the grandchildren of soldiers who hazard their lives present for free Ukraine, they will talk proudly at school – my grandpa fought under Cherson! And mine resisted an attack on Kiev! My grandpa died in Mariupol.

And today's soldiers, these future grandparents, know they're fighting for their grandchildren to live in a free country. Remember: the nation is simply a community of the living, the dead and those who are yet to be born.

Europe is now witnessing crimes committed in the name of anti-national ideology. This is what Putin is reasoning – the desire to destruct all differences, destruct national identities and melt them in a large Russian empire. In a Russian mirre. In Russian propaganda, we have heard false accusations against Ukrainians about fascism many times. That is precisely what Stalin said: “Call the opposers fascists or anti - Semites. You just gotta repeat these epithets enough."

It must be made clear: the fascist is the 1 who wants to destruct another nations. It is anyone who wants to impose his will on another nations, against global law, violating human rights, trampling on human dignity. The fascist present is Vladimir Putin and all co-conspirators of Russian aggression. As Europeans, we have a work to argue Russian fascism. That is the European identity.

2.2 What lesson should we learn from the war in Ukraine?

The Ukrainians remind us present what Europe should be. Our goal should be a Europe of free people and a Europe of free nations. all European has the right to individual freedom and security.

Democracy can be implemented at the level of the city, region or nation, wherever there are bonds based on a common identity. Therefore, a vote in which 140 million Russians would vote “in favour” of the incarnation of Ukraine into Russia and 40 million Ukrainians would be “against” would not be democratic, would it not?

What further lessons come from over a year of war in Ukraine? 1 thing for me is obvious. The policy of settling with Russia went bankrupt.

Those who wanted a strategical alliance with Russia for decades and made energy-dependent European states were in a terrible mistake. Those who warned against Russian imperialism were right.

Those who have financed Russian war preparations for many years, disarmed Europe and imposed a partnership with Russia weaker than themselves, bear the political work for the war in Ukraine and for the current economical and energy problems of hundreds of millions of Europeans.

Putin acted like a drug dealer who gives the first dose for free due to the fact that he knows the drug addict will come back and agree to any price later. Putin is cunning, but he was not superb at all, and Europe gave in to him so easy due to its weakness. This weakness was to prosecute peculiar interests at the expense of another countries.

If the individual peoples of the European Union search to dominate others, Europe can again fall victim to the same mistakes. And all the decisions to halt the Russian aggressor can be reversed again. This will happen if respective major states consider that it is more profitable for their elite to do business with Kremlin, even at the expense of blood. present it is Ukrainian blood. next day it may be Lithuanian, Finnish, Czech, Polish, but besides German or French. We have a work to keep this from happening.

3. Lessons given by the war in Ukraine should prompt us to ask a fundamental question – what are European values present and what threatens them?

In terms of material welfare, we live in the best times of history. But did not this prosperity kill our spirit? Do we inactive care what we live for? Would we be willing to defend our homes, our loved ones, our nation if we were attacked?

This tension between spirit and substance is evidently not new. We are yet at the university where Hegel was a professor. In literature, fewer have given this problem as well as the large Thomas Mann, German conscience in the era of German Nazi crimes. It is the characters of Mann who long for a higher, more sublime sense of life than just the accumulation of goods and their consumption.

Over the past decades, many Europeans have believed that consumption with a sauce of ritual claims of "European values" is the final phase of history. We're against that. Smacking another "European values" with no agreement on their definition and no knowing of which country needs changes is in Mann'owsk – self-destructive to the European Union.

Once the symbol of Europe was the ancient agora. A place where all citizen on equal terms could speak. Today, besides frequently European agoras are replacing the offices of Brussels institutions, where decisions are made behind closed doors.

As 1 politician erstwhile said about the mechanics of action of the EU institutions: "We are dedicating something if there is no noise, due to the fact that most people do not realize what has been decided, we are continuing step by step until there is no return."

It is simply a simple way for the EU to become an authoritative dictatorship.

In parallel with the fresh geopolitical circumstances, the destiny of the Union is now being decided. Will it be a democratic community or a bureaucratic machine, a centralist structure?

Politics is always about choice. But this choice must be made at the ballot box, not in the privacy of bureaucrats' offices. Do we truly want a pan-European cosmopolitan elite with large power, though without an electoral mandate? I respect everyone who dreams of creating a superstate governed by the narrow elite. If we ignore cultural differences, the consequence will be a weakening of Europe and a number of rebellions, and possibly a fresh spring of peoples like the 1 from 1848.

The Germans then put large effort to build a united and modern state. They had to wait 20 years for its political effects, but they did. present we face a akin dilemma. If the ruling Europe, akin to the then Metternich aristocrats, prefers the power of the elite and the top-down imposition of their values, they will face the reaction of resistance. It may come sooner or later, but it will be inevitable.

It's worth going back to the basic question: What are European values?

More importantly, what is Europe? Her communicative didn't start decades ago. Europe is over 2 millennia. Europe grows from the heritage of ancient Greeks, Romans, and Christianity. These are our roots, we grow out of them, we cannot separate from them.

There is no Europe without the shooting Gothic cathedrals, and there is no Europe without university buildings. Europe has always risen on the wings of religion and reason. And the university model of education created in Europe has spread worldwide.

This is due to the fact that the European university is simply a space for discussion and the abrasion of opposing rations – the best environment for discovering the truth.

There cannot be area for censorship or ideological indoctrination in Europe. We've been through this in the past erstwhile the communist authorities have been telling us what to think. It was besides experienced by Germany in Hitler’s time erstwhile books of unrighteous authors were burned.

Europe should be a cathedral of good and a university of truth!

Here too, it is worth noting that various prohibitions, arbitrary decisions which can and cannot be presented in the walls of universities and political correctness accept the eternal mission of the academy – the search for truth.

And just as we defender material heritage, so should we safeguard spiritual heritage, which is created by respective twelve members of different cultures and linguistic traditions. The strength of Europe has been its diversity for centuries. We have common values, but all nation has its own identity. Glacier, savvy, that's the way to nowhere.

Germany and France are 2 key countries of Europe. In 75 years between 1870 and 1945, 3 bloody wars were fought, and reconciliation was not achieved until the last. This reconciliation is being fruitful present in peculiar political relations between Berlin and Paris. This peculiar common sensitivity to rations and sensitivity of both capitals has grown on the basis of the tragic past. For the European balance, but besides due to a much more tragic past, we request the same model of common sensitivity to Warsaw's rations and interests. present we have no sense of this sensitivity in Warsaw.

The foundation for that reconciliation was laid by 2 large Europeans – Charles de Gaulle and Konrad Adenauer. They both wanted to build a lasting peace in Europe. They both understood that common respect and awareness of their roots were a prerequisite for cooperation. Chancellor Adenauer said: “If we turn distant from the sources of our European civilization, born from Christianity, it is not possible for us not to neglect trying to rebuild the unity of European life. It is the only effective means of maintaining peace."

General de Gaulle was besides profoundly aware of both the large cultural heritage of Europe and the "internal war". De Gaulle said: “Dante, Goethe, Chateaubriand belong to Europe as much as they were Italian, German, and French respectively. They would not service Europe very much if they were stateless and if they thought or wrote in any Esperanto or willow peak."

Our basic identity is national identity. I am European due to the fact that I am Polish, French, German, not due to the fact that I deny my Polishness or Germanism.

The effort made present in Europe to destruct this diversity, to make a fresh man, rooted out of his national identity, is to subdue the roots and saw the branch on which we all sit.

Look out! We can easy fall, strong cultures around us and hard dictatorships from another parts of the planet just waiting for it. I'm certain they'll be glad that Europe will fall to nothing.

Do we want all Europeans to forget their languages and talk only in the willow? I wouldn't.

Some effort to negate the European contribution to the improvement of the planet due to the fact that they see only the dark sides of history. And indeed, states liable for exploitation and colonialism, imperialism and terrible crimes, specified as German Nazism and Russian communism, as crimes in colonies, should account for their own past. It is part of our European DNA: striving for fact and justice. But historical Europe is not just a reason for us to be ashamed. The full modern phenomenal improvement of discipline and prosperity is, 1 might say, the kid of Europe.

Europe's way to improvement is not "political mcdonalisation", but drawing on its own diversity. An effort to artificially unify Europe in the name of eliminating national and political differences will in practice lead to chaos and conflicts between Europeans.

Cooperation with competition is the best way to accomplish Europe's success in the global world.

Millions from all over the planet visit Paris, Rome, Cologne, Madrid, Vienna, Kraków and Prague all year. The wealth of these beautiful cities and their power of attraction comes from the fact that each of them has its unique, unique identity.

We do not want a Europe that puts an ultimatum: either you will voluntarily treat your national affiliation, or we will apply any political and economical force to you.

Poland has accepted millions of refugees in fresh months. The Ukrainians have found shelter in our homes. In our knowing of European values, aid is surely included to the neighbour who is in need. However, we received minimal help. And in this context, we see differences in the treatment of countries in the same situations, and that is, after all, the definition of discrimination.

Poland is besides experiencing this discrimination due to a complete deficiency of knowing of the reforms that the country that came out of post-communism had to carry out. Due to the engagement of the European institutions in interior disputes in a associate State under the slogan "Law enforcement".

I would like to make it clear here: in Poland we have the same knowing of the word “lawfulness” as in Germany. And fewer things I am as certain as I am that to a much greater degree my political camp defends the real regulation of law than it did in the first 25 years after 1989.

He defends against the oligarchization of life, from the dominance of closed professional corporations, against poorness and against corruption. He's defending against these pathologies. This is not the subject of my fundamental point, so I will halt on these remarks here.

However, in a deeper sense, the dispute is present between the sovereignty of states and the sovereignty of institutions. Between the lower democratic power of the people and the advanced power of the narrow elite. For 2 1000 years of the existence of Europe, no 1 has always been able to submit politically to the full continent. It won't work now either. The imagination of a centralised Europe will end in the same place as the concept of the end of past announced 30 years ago. The sooner we leave this vision, accepting democracy as a origin of power in Europe, the better our future will be.

It is worth noting that there is no end to history. past accelerates and creates challenges of infinite proportions!

Unfortunately, a large part of today's EU elite functions in an alternate reality.

If the EU's elites insist hard on the imagination of a centralised superstate, they will face the rebellion of further European nations. The more they insist, the harsher the rebellion will be. I don't want polarization, divisions, fights and chaos. I want a strong and competitive Europe.

4. Now I will decision on to the last fundamental point: how can Europe win the race for global leadership?

Above all, the policy of the Union must change. Not towards greater centralisation, giving power to respective key institutions and strongest states, but towards strengthening the balance between the nations of North, Western, Central, east and South Europe. As well as completing EU integration into the Western Balkans, Ukraine and Moldova, in line with the geographical boundaries of Europe.

The question should be asked: how seriously do we all take the substance of building a strong, influential European Union?

Today, pro-Europeanism is expressed in our relation to enlargement policy, not in focusing on ourselves and centralising the EU.

Strangely enough, those countries that like to introduce themselves as pro-European and propose turbo-integration are at the same time the most skeptical of enlargement policies, playing political poker.

The values that unite the EU must not be referred to and Europe divided into those who deserve to be in it and those for whom access to it is closed.

A larger common market, the diversification of its economical assets would make us a stronger player on the global stage.

I frequently hear that in order for the EU to grow it should reform. Under this thesis lies the most frequently camouflaged federalization proposal, that is, the centralization proposal.

Under the slogan “federalisation”, there is simply a concentration of decision-making imposed on top of it.

In the assumptions of the authors of this centralisation, called "federalisation", the decision-making process must be changed by moving distant from the rule of unanimity in favour of a qualified majority in a number of fresh areas. The argument behind this is that it will be hard to accomplish unanimity among more than 30 countries.

It is actual that it is more hard to get a unified opinion among countries. The question, however, is whether this should prompt us to conclude that decisions should be pushed by the majority against the interests of minorities in the following areas.

I have another proposal:

Let us refrain from interfering in cases in which the national interest remains divided.

Let's take 1 step back to take 2 steps forward.

Let us focus on areas where the Treaty of Rome has granted the Union competence, and in another cases let us follow the rule of subsidiarity.

We have seen the process of spilling out EU competences to another areas for decades. It is critically assessed in many associate States. Nevertheless, he has late accelerated. The question of how many countries stay “rulers of the treaties”, as the Constitutional Tribunal in Karlsruhe erstwhile said, is more applicable today. So if the EU is to introduce changes in its decision-making process that will have democratic legitimacy and let for action in a spirit of common trust, associate States must regain full power over the treaties. They must not lose their decision-making in favour of the "centrals in Brussels" and the "coalition of power".

In another words, let us review the areas under Brussels and, in the spirit of subsidiarity, reconstruct appropriate proportions. More democracy, more consensus, more balance between countries and EU institutions. Let us reduce the number of areas of EU competence, and then the Union will be more controlling and democratic with even 35 countries.

More centralization is more of the same mistakes. It's not listening to the voices of those countries who were right about Putin. It is the commitment of power to people like Gerhard Schroeder who have driven Europe into dependence on Russia and exposed the full continent to existential threat.

An example: only a fewer months ago, in June 2021, a European Council gathering with Vladimir Putin was attempted. As if no aggressive action by Russia had occurred by then. Where would we be if Poland, Finland and the Baltic States were not opposed? If the rule of unanimity were rejected?

Polish abroad policy, in this context, is decided in democratic elections by Polish citizens – people for whom aggressive neighbour is simply a real problem. They are not people who live thousands of kilometers distant and perceive Russia only through the prism of Pushkin's, Tolstoy or Tchaikovsky's works.

Today it is not adequate to talk about rebuilding Europe. We request to talk about a fresh imagination for Europe. So that peace and safety become a lasting foundation for improvement for the coming decades.

If fresh months can be considered successful in any way, it is surely a safety cooperation. Transatlantic cooperation, and in peculiar NATO, proved to be the most efficient defence alliance in history. Without the engagement of the USA and possibly Poland – there would be no Ukraine today.

NATO, strengthened by the urgent accession of Finland and Sweden, is crucial for Europe's security. They request to be strengthened and developed. At the same time, we must besides build our own defence capabilities. Poland is doing so now. We are building a modern army not only to defend ourselves, but besides to aid our allies. We spend up to 4% of GDP in defence, which is possible only by repairing public finances, after gaps left in them by our predecessors. And we propose that defence spending should not be covered by the Maastricht Treaty criterion, which is simply a limit of 3 percent.

Europe disarmed itself by looking at Russian aggression like a rabbit in the headlights of a car.

Today, ammunition and basic weapons are scarce to respond to Russia's invasion. Not to mention further threats that may happen in another parts of the world.

It is my want that the countries of Europe should be so militarily strong that, in the event of an attack, they do not request external assistance, but they themselves can supply specified support.

It's not like that today. Without American commitment, Ukraine would be gone. And the Kremlin would scope out for more victims.

Many mistakes were made in the 1970s. That era ended with a russian attack on Afghanistan. The West responded correctly. This time Russian aggression of the last 20 years has not caused specified concern. Sobriety came late — February 24, 2022.

4.1 What else do we request to strengthen Europe's position?

We all remember Bill Clinton's election slogan: economy, fool! At the time, there was a common belief that money was a cure for all pains, that even in countries specified as Russia and China money builds the mediate class and democratizes public life.

Things have turned out differently.

Today we know that the economy must go hand in hand with social aspirations and safety requirements. Many of Europe's contemporary problems come from the frustration of young people whose prospects are frequently worse than their parents. Middle-class erosion is happening practically throughout Europe. A planet where 1% of the richest accumulates more wealth than the another 99% is outrageous. And that's what happens in fresh times. taxation havens, which are more suited to the definition of taxation hell, rob the mediate class and budgets of Germany, France, Spain and Poland.

Europe's strength is primarily due to the strongest foundation of the strong mediate class. The sense that improvement and prosperity can be attended not only by a narrow group of richest, but by the full society, it has been since the 1950s, the main driving force for the improvement of the Western world.

Unfortunately, this belief is getting weaker present and inequality is getting bigger. This is very dangerous, due to the fact that on the 1 hand it strengthens extremist movements demanding the demolition of the current economical and political structure, and on the another hand discourages work and development.

We gotta reverse this process. due to the fact that we are facing a failure in the race with rivals – tough, tough and ruthless civilizations that otherwise arrange social and economical relations.

It is our occupation as political leaders to guarantee that everyone is able to keep up with honest work. The European labour marketplace should supply decent earnings, facilitate young people's career way and give them a sense of stability. We must besides make the best possible conditions for starting families. Then Europe has a bright future. Well-functioning families are basic to a healthy, happy and unchangeable life.

We must besides prevent Europe's dependence on others. Cooperation with China is simply a major challenge. It's a immense country with large ambitions. As a Europe, we must be at least an equivalent partner for China. Dependence on China is simply a road to nowhere. Europe must work urgently on this. Next to Ukraine winning the war, it is another large challenge for the coming years.

There are no mistakes that can't be corrected. At least in part. erstwhile I hear that our government was right about Russia and Ukraine, I feel satisfaction. But I would quit even the top sense of satisfaction for the European will to fight. For an even stronger political will than before to proceed supporting Ukraine. Above all, to confiscate Russian assets amounting to EUR 400 billion. Just freezing them is not enough. Russia must answer for its crimes and the material harm it has caused. Violent aggressors must know that sooner or later their country will pay for the harm caused by violence.

I call again present for all the leaders of the European Union – time for the full and lasting confiscation of Russian assets and the usage of them to rebuild Ukraine and reduce energy costs for European citizens.

Europe is much stronger than Russia. But in addition to our potential, we must besides have the will to usage it. If we let Russia win this war, we hazard more than losing Ukraine. We hazard marginalizing our full continent.

The basic conclusion is simple. In the world, only strong, efficient, assured states matter. Putin attacked Ukraine due to the fact that he considered Europeans to be coming off the stage, weak and dull. After a year, we see that he was wrong. At least in part. Europe is not dead yet. While we're alive. But she hasn't won yet either.

Ladies and gentlemen,

I mentioned in the beginning that the university in Heidelberg besides finished many Poles – doctors, lawyers, philosophers. 1 of them was our excellent poet Adam Asnyk. In the spring of 1871, virtually erstwhile united Germans were born, Asnyk besides dreamed of the revival of independent Poland. He understood that large tasks can only be accomplished through patient, systematic work, through the collective effort of the full community. He wrote:

“Let us despise the triumphant pride

And applaud force let's not go!

But we don't have the glory of defeat

And of our weakness let us not boast”

Europe must prove its strength and value. This is our minute “to be or not to be”. Unlike Shakespeare's Hamlet, however, we must not hesitate. The German poet Ferdinand Freiligrath in 1844, while the Germans were inactive like the ruins of the castle in Heidelberg – awesome but incomplete, he observed: “Deutschland ist Hamlet!”. The Germans are besides hesitant to stand firm on the good side.

John Paul II, as 1 of the leading advocates of the unification of Europe, played a key function in the liberation of the peoples of Europe. And together with his large German successor, Benedict XVI, this unique Polish-German duo, was an crucial voice on the future of Europe, its culture and civilization.

Finally, I will sum up these 4 fundamental issues that I have dealt with here.

Firstly, we cannot build the future without learning from the past. past shows that a policy that does not respect the sovereignty and will of the nation will sooner or later lead to utopia or dictatorship. Europe has a bright future if it respects the diversity of its own peoples.
Secondly, Europe's future is forged in the conflict for freedom that Ukraine is fighting on our behalf. It is our work to support Ukraine. The Hart spirit of the Ukrainians should be our inspiration and guide to action.
Thirdly, a democratic community of states, based on the heritage of the Greeks, Romans and Christianity, which cultivates peace, freedom and solidarity is the foundation of European values. European integration was formed on the basis of these values, and they could be the spirit that drives the continent.
The threat that could weaken these forces is centralization. Governments of the strongest and arbitrary entrust the future of Europe with heartless bureaucracy, trying to make a "reset of values". specified a "reset", or bureaucratic centralization under the cloak of "federalisation", is simply a grain for future large conflicts and social revolts.
Fourth, in order for Europe to win the race for a global leader position, it must change. It must be ready to adopt fresh states, but also, in view of a larger community, to partially limit its competences. In the face of external threats, it must strengthen its defence potential. In the face of economical and social challenges, it must build an egalitarian and ordliberal system. And he besides has to fight taxation hells disguised as taxation havens. Europe must keep rational alliances, but besides build independence, avoiding being the victim of energy or economical blackmail.

Europe was erstwhile the centre of the world, a respectable 1 on all continent. Do we inactive care if Europe and our civilization survive?

And not only will they survive, but in what form?

Do we have ambition to be a leader?

Or have we made peace with the supporting role?

Do we have the courage to make Europe large again?

For Europe to win?

I believe it is.

Europe has large potential. It is due to its past and heritage, but besides to its present countless advantages and assets. But Europe needs will and courage today. And I firmly believe that if we work hard, on our behalf The countries and the continent as a full will dominate Europe. Europe will win!

Thank you very much!