Post-Soviet Eastern Europe issues

[Bonobo]

NATO summit took place in Bucharest, Romania, two days ago. Member countries agreed to the construction of the anti-missile shield in Europe.

More importantly, though, Ukraine and Georgia, two countries which aspire to become members, were given red light, but only temporarily. The political situation in both is still unstable, that is why the process of their accession will protract.

But NATO generally agreed to their access in some unspecified future despite opposition from two major NATO members.

While France and Germany were vehemently against the access of Ukraione and Georgia, Poland led the group of countries from Eastern Europe which were strongly for.

Leaks from the summit have been appearing every day now. Today German press reported that Polish Foreign Minister, Radek Sikorski, used masked threats to convince French and German leaders. He was heard saying: If Berlin and Paris hamper or anihilate the fulfillment of strategic interests of Poland in Ukraine, it shall have its consequences. Poland will remember it for long.

During the summit Sikorski said: “We're encouraging NATO to send Ukraine and Georgia a message that they may be allowed to join the MAP in the foreseeable future. The skeptical countries say that the question is no longer of whether Ukraine and Georgia can join the NATO , but solely of the timing. If so, then we'll be sending messages that rapid progress is possible.”
[/i]

Why do Polish officials so eagerly support the access of Ukraine into NATO?
Who knows?

[falkenberg]

The bigger NATO, the lesser influence of Russian Federation. Our interest is in Ukraine and also in Georgia, when one can bring it to the Alliance. But it must make Russia angry.




From the other hand, we (as EU) could be able to gather former lands of the Both Nations' Commonwealth under Union. I'm NOT talking about the imperialism, I'm recalling the old federalism.

[Bonobo]

Apr 12, 2008 13:14:40 GMT 1 falkenberg said:

The bigger NATO, the lesser influence of Russian Federation.

Do you think Russia can`t be trusted?

Our interest is in Ukraine and also in Georgia, when one can bring it to the Alliance. But it must make Russia angry.

Russians have been angry with us since 1989 when Poland broke away from communism. Don`t you think one day they will cut off our oil and gas supplies?

From the other hand, we (as EU) could be able to gather former lands of the Both Nations' Commonwealth under Union. I'm NOT talking about the imperialism, I'm recalling the old federalism.

Accept them into the Union at any cost, the sooner, the better, or only after they fullfill required conditions?

[falkenberg]

Apr 12, 2008 21:11:45 GMT 1 Bonobo said:

Do you think Russia can`t be trusted?

Tzardom of Russia? It can't be at all in coming decades, if ever. We have learned well about Russia during last 500 years.

Apr 12, 2008 21:11:45 GMT 1 Bonobo said:

Russians have been angry with us since 1989 when Poland broke away from communism. Don`t you think one day they will cut off our oil and gas supplies?

They can do it, but then must be forced by EU to continue sending supplies. Next bright point of EU.

Apr 12, 2008 21:11:45 GMT 1 Bonobo said:

Accept them into the Union at any cost, the sooner, the better, or only after they fullfill required conditions?

If we give conditions normal for "western' states, we can send them straight upon Throne of Moscow. This can be avoided.

[valpomike]

I take it you don't like the Russians, what do you think of the Germans?

Poland will again be on top, with all the great people, working together.

[falkenberg]

It is not a matter of dislike. I like some aspects of Russian culture, perhaps liturgy in VChurch Slavonic the most . Man can not like a type of civilistaion, historical circumstances etc, but dislike of any nation, including Russian, Germans and Poles, in general, is a kind of ignorance.

Poland shapes with Germany one community in EU. Russia is the other player in the game. Interests of Poland forces me to agree with enlarging NATO.

[Bonobo]

Now it is not only Ukraine, but also Georgia which are advocated for as NATO members. Lech Kaczyński, the President of Poland, is a confirmed supporter of accepting new states into NATO.


Russia's Foreign Minister to meet with Sikorski and Tusk
The Warsaw Business Journal
10th September 2008

Later today, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, will arrive in
Warsaw.

The visit, which has been planned for several months, is the first of
a high ranking Russian representative to the West since the beginning of the crisis in Georgia.

The Russian diplomat is to meet with his Polish counterpart Rados³aw Sikorski and Prime Minister Donald Tusk. The PM declared that this visit might be a "step in the right direction," but added that
Russia's partnership is currently causing difficulties.

The latest poll shows that not only is Russia a difficult partner,
but that it is also badly received, as 77 percent of the public
believes that Russia could some day be a military threat to Poland.
Moreover, the public is afraid of Russia's economic and political
threat.



What a pity that the two biggest Slavic nations, Poles and Russians, view each other with suspicion and sometimes animosity.

[Bonobo]

Georgia and missile shield cloud Lavrov trip to Poland
Tue Sep 9, 2008
By Gareth Jones

WARSAW (Reuters) - Russia's relations with Poland have rarely been easy but Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov visits Warsaw on Thursday amid particularly sharp disputes over missile defense and Moscow's army offensive in Georgia.

Polish President Lech Kaczynski has been among the most vocal critics of Russia's policy in Georgia, flying to Tbilisi to demonstrate Poland's solidarity with the ex-Soviet republic and helping to mobilize protests in the European Union.

Prime Minister Donald Tusk's government has been more measured but its decision to host part of a U.S. missile defense shield on Polish soil has also infuriated Moscow.

Poles view the fact that Lavrov is coming at such a time as proof that being firm with Moscow pays off and that the Kremlin has understood the need for dialogue with Poland, the largest ex-communist member of the EU and NATO, and with Europe.

Lavrov is due to meet Tusk and Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski but not the more combative Kaczynski.

"I don't expect a new era of love and 100 percent trust to break out between Warsaw and Moscow because we differ about too much, but neighbors need to have good, normal ties," Krzysztof Lisek, head of parliament's foreign affairs commission and a member of Tusk's Civic Platform, told Reuters.

"I think this visit should mainly be seen as a sign of good will from Russia, which is willing to mend relations with all of the European Union, without excluding any country."

Tusk has said the visit shows Poland has moved toward improving relations with Russia after they hit rock bottom under the previous cabinet of Kaczynski's twin brother Jaroslaw.

"We will not allow a situation in which Poland, of all EU countries, has the worst relations with Russia and is isolated in its radicalism. This would be a dramatic mistake," Tusk told the Polish edition of Newsweek in an interview this month.

Poland relies on Russia, its communist era overlord, for 95 percent of its oil and nearly half of its gas. Russia is also Poland's second biggest trade partner after Germany, with trade worth some $18 billion.

HOSTILITY

But few expect any major breakthroughs in the Lavrov talks.

Poland is expected to try to reassure Lavrov that the decision to host 10 interceptor missiles on its territory is not aimed against Russia but, as Washington has long argued, against possible attack by 'rogue states' or terrorist groups.

"The shield issue can only be discussed in terms of reassuring Russia again that this base is in no way a threat to its own security and in terms of possible Russian inspections of the (missile shield) site," Lisek said.

Moscow sees the shield as a threat to its nuclear defenses and Medvedev has vowed a military response to the shield decision, without specifying what shape that might take.

Warsaw has also irked Moscow by championing the bid of both Georgia and Ukraine, Poland's large ex-Soviet neighbor, to join NATO and the EU. The EU was set on Tuesday to offer Ukraine encouragement on closer ties at a meeting in Paris.

Opinion polls show most Poles believe Russia is hostile towards Poland and behaves aggressively towards its neighbors.

"The Lavrov visit is an important sign for many Poles that when you are tough with Russia they will treat you seriously," said Lena Kolarska-Bobinska, head of the Institute of Public Affairs, a Warsaw think-tank.

"It also shows that Russia, despite its hostility, wants to talk to us and to the EU. Despite all the perceptions of imperialism, there is a dialogue, there is a will to talk."

************ ********* ********* ********* ********* *****

Lavrov: Poland made a mistake agreeing to the shield
Polish Radio
09.09.2008

Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov has said that in his opinion
Poland made a mistake agreeing to the deployment of parts of the US anti-missile shield on its soil and claimed it was connected with the conflict in the Caucasus. The Russian foreign minister arrives in
Warsaw on Thursday. He said, however,

the visit was planned a long time ago and is not connected with the
developments in the Caucasus. Moscow does not intend to meddle in Poland's politics, the Russian foreign minister declared but added that Polish-Russian relations are worsened because someone in Poland is fuelling anti-Russian sentiments. He said that his country is not going to turn off the gas tap for the states criticizing Russian actions in the Caucasus. The head of the Russian diplomacy added that Europe has every right to be concerned with energy security but there is no threat from Russia

************ ********* ********* ********* ********* ***

Russia no threat to Poland, says Lavrov
thenews.pl
09.09.2008

In an interview for TVP Info Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that in his opinion Poland made a mistake agreeing to the deployment of the US antimissile shield on its territory.

Three days before his official visit to Poland Lavrov criticized the fact that the decision to deploy the defence system in Poland is being connected to the conflict in the Caucasus.

He added that Polish-Russian relations have worsened because some politicians in Poland are fuelling anti-Russian sentiments.

The head of the Russian diplomacy declared that his country is not going to turn off the gas supply to the states criticising Russian actions in the Caucasus, as had been speculated in the western media. He added that Europe has every right to be concerned with energy security but there is no threat from Russia.

Lavrov’s official visit to Poland is planned for September 11. The Russian Foreign Minister is to meet PM Donald Tusk and his opposite number Radoslaw Sikorski. It is also likely he will be received by President Lech Kaczynski.

The politicians will discuss bilateral relations in the context of the US missile defence installation planned in Poland, as well as the future of the Russia-EU cooperation.

************ ********* ********* ********* *********

Mikheil Saakashvili grateful for Poland's support
Polish Radio
08.09.2008

Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili thanked Poles for their involvement in the problems of his country during the recent crisis in that country.

In a interview for public television channel TVP Info, Saakashvili expressed an opinion that there is no other nation that would understand the Georgian so well. He went on to explain that both nations have a lot in common including not only a similar history but also passion for freedom and sovereignty.

The Georgian president also thanked his Polish opposite number, Lech Kaczynski, for visiting Tbilisi soon after the Russian invasion had started. He is convinced that had it been not for the presence for the four presidents there the city would have been bombed. It was on the fifth day of the crisis in Georgia, and after Russian President Dmitry Medvedev declared an end to Moscow's military operation that the presidents of Poland, Ukraine, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia headed for Tbilisi.

[Bonobo]

Poland Was Right
TOL
12 September 2008

The need is greater than ever for the EU to embrace Warsaw's Eastern Partnership.

Georgia's military is a wreck, its economic locomotive derailed, and
even a drunken gambler would think twice before wagering on its
political future. In Ukraine, the unhappy marriage between the
president and prime minister grows more desperate, while the country remains riven over whether it belongs with the East or West.

If this picture from behind the old Iron Curtain isn't enough to
bring on depression, look again. Moldova worries that Russia could
launch another "humanitarian intervention" in disputed Transdneister, while voters in Azerbaijan and Belarus will go to the polls in the next few weeks knowing that no change can happen.

This all goes to show that Poland was right. These countries
desperately need help, and they need more than diplomatic niceties
and crumbs of hope dropped from the banqueting tables of European Union summits.

Poland, backed by Sweden, this spring proposed an "Eastern
Partnership" to provide special attention to the EU's right flank.
The concept essentially shifts the Poles' longstanding foreign policy
of fostering democracy and stability in former Soviet states to a
European stage.

The Eastern Partnership got drowsy nods of support from other EU
states when it was presented at the EU summit in June, and nearly got lost in the debate over Nicolas Sarkozy's grandiose plans for a
Mediterranean Union for North Africa and the Middle East. Both the
French and Polish proposals have been derided in some quarters as an unnecessary repetition of the EU's neighborhood policy of economic incentives and doses of aid which already applies to many of these countries.

But after the August war in Georgia, Poland's idea now looks both
clever and prescient. It proposes extending free trade and visa-free
travel to eastern countries that embrace pluralism, combat corruption and adopt EU values on human rights. The Polish concept also foresees closer cooperation in less politically loaded areas, including transport planning and environmental protection. It would channel more development aid through the European Investment Bank and other lending organizations.

The EU's reaction to Russia's aggression in Georgia is more proof
that the bloc remains a stoop-shouldered weakling in security
matters. The Polish Eastern Partnership, however, mobilizes the EU's many strengths while minimizing internal opposition. First, unlike the southern union Sarkozy proposed, it does not create another vast bureaucratic structure. Secondly, Polish and Swedish officials were wise to separate closer relations with eastern neighbors from promises of EU membership, thus minimizing destructive debates about whether the Caucasus nations are "European" enough or whether the bloc needs another infusion of corrupt ex-communist states polluting its image. And third, the EU's Eurobarometer surveys show strong public support for helping eastern countries become more democratic and more stable, particularly Ukraine, Belarus and Moldova, which share borders with the EU.

GO WEST

Governments in these countries, particularly Georgia and Ukraine,
have all acknowledged that there are big dividends from closer ties
to Europe. The EU is Ukraine's biggest trading partner and business
ties are growing every day, and even the Belarusian ruler is taking
steps to burnish relations between his Soviet-style state and
Brussels.

But it's not just official policy that is in favor of Europe.
Ukrainians are voting with their feet. The Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development released a study this week showing that Ukrainian migration to the West continues to grow significantly. In Poland and the Czech Republic, two popular destinations, job-seeking Ukrainians comprise the biggest immigrant group.

The Caucasus conflict does complicate the already delicate task of
dealing with countries the Kremlin sees as untouchable by outsiders.
Moscow fiercely opposes NATO expansion to the regions, and may
eventually come to resent EU missionaries proselytizing about
democracy and respect for human rights on its frontier. Furthermore, Moscow's armed intervention in Georgia's separatist disputes has emboldened ethnic Russian populations and pro-Kremlin factions in Ukraine and Moldova. In Ukraine, governed by a dysfunctional
coalition and a Kremlin-friendly opposition, Deputy Prime Minister
Hryhoriy Nemyria this week warned that his country's domestic
political turmoil could undermine hopes for closer ties with the EU.

Poland's partnership offers nothing in the way of guarantees that
Moscow will not continue to make life hell for the very neighbors it
proclaims to nurture. Poland is right to press for closer trade,
economic assistance, and reduced travel restrictions to show that the
EU offers a more promising future. With the EU too indecisive to
really stand up to Russian belligerence, the least it can do is use
its economic and moral power to give its eastern neighbors the
opportunities they are not getting from the Kremlin.

[Bonobo]

An interview with Z. Brzezinski

Crucial moment
Zbigniew BRZEZINSKI: the leaders' helplessness paves the way for
foreign interference
Interviewed by Mykola SIRUK
The Day Weekly Digest, Ukraine

Washington - In spite of a tight minute-by-minute working schedule,
Zbigniew Brzezinsky, a one-time national security advisor to
President Carter and now a counselor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, found time to grant an interview to The Day.
This American political scientist is also professor of US foreign
policy at the Johns Hopkins University's Paul Nitze School of
Advanced International Studies, an advisory board member of Freedom House and the Trilateral Commission (US—Europe—Japan) , and a board member of the Polish-American Freedom Foundation and the Polish- American Enterprise Fund.

In an exclusive interview to The Day Dr. Brzezinski speaks on the US
foreign-policy priorities and the foreign-policy makers in the Obama
administration.

"FROM EASTERN EGYPT TO WESTERN INDIA"

Mr. Brzezinski, what positive and negative legacy in the US foreign
policy has George Bush Jr. left behind? For example, Secretary of
State Condoleezza Rice told a recent press conference in Brussels
that the admission of nine Central and Eastern European countries to NATO can be considered a positive achievement of Bush's foreign
policy.

"Yes, it is true. As far as a desire to create a stable and secure
Europe is concerned, this was a useful contribution. The signing of
the US–Ukraine Charter on Strategic Partnership and a similar US–
Georgia charter in the last days of the Bush administration was also
conducive to stability. In this sense, it is a positive legacy.

"But the problem is that the positive effect was undermined by the
negative consequences of the US position in the world. President
Bush's initiatives generally worsened the US position in the world.
If you think that European security depends to some extent on NATO and if someone assumes that the independence of Ukraine or Georgia depends to some extent on the closeness of relations with the United States, then I must say that the beneficial effect of Secretary of State Rice's or President Bush's special initiatives was weakened, washed out, and undermined by the overall legacy that he left behind."

Speaking of the new President Barack Obama, what priorities is he
going to set in the US foreign policy?

"Judging by the specific, not general, changes in the attitude and
atmosphere, which he has already expressed to some extent in his
inaugural speech, the answer is: focusing his attention on the part
of the world that extends from Eastern Egypt to Western India. This
is this region that the US should devote its attention to and pursue
its interests in. The US is facing serious geopolitical challenges
there. So Obama will have to offer a different approach in the next
few weeks."

"RECONSIDERING THE OVERALL US APPROACH TO THE WORLD"

And who will be forming the approach? There have been of a lot of
publications in the last while, including some by the Brookings
Institution, which advise the president on a wide range of
questions — from the improvement of the US image to the schedule of his international visits.

"First of all, one should understand that all the so-called think
tanks in Washington have prepared advice packages for President
Obama. You can fill a room with them. But there are very slim
chances that he will fully read at least one of these packages. To
sum it up, any plan that specified, six or twelve months ago, what
Obama was to do is an exercise in writing science fiction, not
strategy. The events that have occurred in the past six to twelve
months showed that one should give those recommendations a second thought.

The crucial moment is in reconsidering the overall US approach to
the world. Now the president will have to reformulate the approach
to policies in the part of the world where the US is most actively,
heavily, and potentially most dangerously involved."

The Middle East?

"This is what I mean. From Eastern Egypt to Western India. But it is
not only the Middle East. There is also Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and
Pakistan."

Mr. Brzezinski, you said in an interview that Hillary Clinton could
be a successful secretary of state if strategic guidance was
provided from the center—the White House. And who is going to guide Ms. Clinton?

"First of all, it is quite clear that Obama will be shaping the
overall policy. And Ms. Clinton is aware of this. She possesses
political common sense. Secondly, he has the National Security
Advisor Jim Jones, the former NATO Supreme Allied Commander in
Europe and a general of the Marine Corps, an elite US force. If a
coordinated policy is to be pursued, it will be strategically formed
in and carried out by the White House, which means Obama and Jones."

"I DO NOT THINK THAT EXPANSION SHOULD STOP"

Do you think Obama will agree to the Brookings Institution' s
proposals that the deployment of the US anti-missile system in
Europe and NATO's eastward expansion be suspended?

"I do not think that the expansion should stop. The administration
now believes that the expansion is somewhat less probable because of certain facts that concern the potential candidates. Uncertainty over the August 2008 events in Georgia has somewhat complicated Tbilisi's chances of joining NATO faster, no matter how desirable it may be. The fact that fewer than 40 percent of Ukraine's population support the country's accession to NATO does not make it easier to become a member of the alliance—not to mention the self-destructive political struggle in Ukraine's top echelons, which considerably complicates the Western line of argumentation that the top leadership of Ukraine is a serious partner of the West. The reason why such countries as Poland or the Czech Republic quickly joined NATO is that the bid of these countries' leaders—Walesa and Havel, respectively— for membership had the complete support of the populace. It was therefore easy for these countries to enlist the political support of NATO member states, as far as their accession to the alliance was concerned."

THE STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP CHARTER AND THE MAP

Mr. Brzezinski, as you remember, last year it was the question of
Ukraine being given the Membership Action Plan, not being admitted
to NATO. The Ukrainian government hoped this would speed up the
country's movement towards NATO.

"The Strategic Partnership Charter signed later last year by the US
and Ukraine provides everything that the MAP would have provided."

But this must be insufficient to get the support that Article 5 of
the Washington Treaty provides.

"The MAP does not call for Article 5 either. The question is that
Ukraine should stop behaving like a child. It should behave like an
adult. How can Ukraine be given Article 5 if a mere 36 to 38 percent
of the population want to be in NATO? And Ukraine's top democratic
leaders, who were elected just because they were democratic and
wished to lead Ukraine to the West, are spending most of their
energy to fight each other. Everybody is doing their best in public
to undermine each other. Meanwhile, Yanukovych is looking on and
rubbing his hands, while Putin is roaring with laughter."

How is the Obama administration going to build its relations with
Russia? You noted after the Georgia conflict that the independence
of the post-Soviet countries was at risk.

"I think the current administration should develop relations with
Russia in a way that guarantees that Ukraine will be gradually and
steadily moving towards and maintaining closer relations with the
West. The charter signed in Washington clearly shows US support for
the independence and territorial integrity of Ukraine. But, in a
good analysis, a 46-million-strong country should be able to define
its position in the world on its own and do this on a democratic
basis. The problem is that Ukraine's democratic majority, which came
to power several years ago as the result of a democratic triumph, is
helpless and personally disjointed. Moreover, this paves the way for
foreign interference, intrigues, corruption, and bribery. To some
extent, all this reminds me, a Polish-born American, of 17th-century
Poland, when Polish magnates—an equivalent of Ukrainian oligarchs— and the political elite of that era were all objects of external manipulation, bribery, and corruption, which resulted in the loss of independence. "

"THERE MUST BE A CLEAR-CUT DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP IN UKRAINE"

What do you think the Obama administration would like the Ukrainian government to do in order to give Ukraine greater support in its aspiration to join the European and Euro-Atlantic organizations?

"First of all, there must be a clear-cut democratic leadership in
the country instead of the strange and difficult-to- understand
things that we can see on television screens — when Ukrainian
members of parliament are engaged in fighting rather than in serious
governing. The president and the prime minister stood side by side
when they were being elected. But they showed utter inability to
work together. If they cannot work together, the Ukrainian people
should decide that it is perhaps time for a new generation of
leaders to come. But it is not up to Obama and Americans to decide
and it is not up to me to advise. I think Ukraine is a serious
country. So it is high time its leadership behaved as that of a
serious country. One political leader is publicly approving the
operation in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, on the Georgian territory,
which creates a juridical precedent for doing the same in the
Crimea. Meanwhile, the other two figures are desperately attempting to destroy each other.

"Incidentally, I would like to recall John Kennedy's famous dictum:
don't ask what the country can do for you, ask what you can do for
the country. Do not ask us in the West what we can do for you, ask
what you must first do for yourselves. Only then will you be treated
as a serious country."

Mr. Brzezinski, how would you describe the current relations between the US and Ukraine? Are they allies or friends?

"I think `partners,' and maybe some others, would be a good word.
Under the existing circumstances the relations cannot be defined
very precisely. But this does not depend on us. This also depends on the other sides. And it should be very clear what they want."

Would the US like Ukraine to send a military force to Afghanistan?

"Your country once sent troops to Iraq. If it sends a military force
to Afghanistan, I am sure this will be met with approval. I am a
critic of our policy on Afghanistan. I think that we need more of a
political, rather than purely military, approach. But a military
approach is also needed. I can imagine the circumstances when
additional foreign military presence will be welcomed. But, on the
other hand, I am also aware that Ukrainians had no other choice but to do and die when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. I do not think Ukraine will be enthused with sending troops to Afghanistan. I am very well aware of this."

"PERSONALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE UKRAINE IN NATO"

Maybe, this could somehow help Ukraine join NATO faster? At any
rate, this is the opinion of some experts because the other NATO
countries are not exactly eager to enlarge their military
contingents in Afghanistan.

"There should be no illusions. You cannot quickly join NATO unless
public opinion supports this step. And it will not provide this kind
of support as long as your leadership keeps doing nothing to effect
a constructive change in public opinion. President Yushchenko is
saying good words about NATO. Prime Minister Tymoshenko is also
saying positive things about the alliance. But, at the same time,
they are neutralizing each other. This, no doubt, reduces their
influence on transforming the Ukrainian population's attitude to
NATO. But I am a realist and a democrat, and I will say that this
will not happen until the public comes out in support of the
alliance membership."

Speaking of integration into Europe, do you think the EU is doing
enough to draw Ukraine closer, which, in your words, would
facilitate its stability?

"There are standards to be met by every country that wishes to join
the EU. I mean effective governance, effective legislation,
transparency, and an all-out anti-corruption approach. And you can
answer yourselves to what extent Ukraine is meeting these
standards."

EUROPEAN STANDARDS AND EU SIGNALS TO UKRAINE

Mr. Brzezinsky, I would like to opine that if the EU gave Ukraine a
prospect of membership, this could further prompt us to carry out
reforms and combat corruption.

"The European Union cannot give you this kind of prospect or a
promise to start negotiations before you fulfill certain
preconditions that every EU country has fulfilled. There really is a
negative reaction in the EU to the membership of Bulgaria and, to
some extent, Romania. This was partially caused by the feeling that
the EU had been sufficiently insistent and clear that these
countries should comply not only with the preconditions but also
with the 32 articles that were negotiated and later—after accession—implemented.

"Until Ukraine shows that it can meet European standards, the EU
will, naturally, have a lack of enthusiasm. At the same time, the
European Union is trying to signal that, historically, culturally
and geographically, it regards Ukraine as a European country and
would like to help Ukraine become its member one day. But, again,
this is a question to Ukraine about what it is prepared to do."

Yevhen Kaminsky, head of a department at the Institute of World
Economics and International Relations, suggested in a commentary to The Day that the Obama administration would favor strengthening the commercial, economic, and investment factors in the US–Ukraine relations so that Russia relaxed its economic and energy-related leverage it is using to politically subjugate Ukraine. Does this forecast look realistic, given the recent gas bust-up between Ukraine and Russia?

"First of all, I would like to say that, in my opinion, Russia
suffered a political defeat in its recent confrontation with
Ukraine. On the economic level, the result was more or less the
same. But, in reality, the main aim of the Russian maneuver was not
to wrest more money from Ukraine but to try and force the EU to join Russia in condemning Ukraine. In other words, the goal was to cause a major rift between Ukraine and the EU. But Russia lost. Most of EU people are putting more blame on Russia than on Ukraine. And if you look at the future in a broader sense, more responsible people in the US and the EU are looking on Ukraine as a future member of the European Union. But `in the future' does not mean that this will occur next year. It may take even more than 10 years. Exactly when this will occur depends 80 or even more percent on Ukraine, not on the EU. The European Union is not a club that is seeking new members but a club that countries want to belong to. This means Ukraine should do many things it has not yet done."

But still, Mr. Brzezinski, what can you say about increasing the
commercial, economic, and investment cooperation between Ukraine and the US?

"This requires more transparency and rule of law as well as greater
emphasis on complying with international standards. It is good that
Ukraine is now a WTO member. This is a good step forward. But
whoever lives in Ukraine knows the real rule-of-law situation better
than I do. This is a problem. There is so much skepticism now about
Ukraine's economic prospects. This was partly caused by the existing
policies. Look at the difference between Poland and Ukraine in this
respect. Poland is also suffering from the financial and economic
crisis. But please compare the situations with the national
currency's rate and the prospects of economic growth or
unemployment. And the reason is not that the EU forced Poland to do
something but that Poles have been pursuing a more sound policy.
Look at the difficulties in some other EU countries, such as the
Baltic States, Bulgaria, etc. The EU is a very multifaceted
community rather than a single model in which everybody is doing,
suffering, or achieving success in the same way."

ON THE DISAPPOINTMENT WITH THE POLITICAL ELITE AND ON THE YOUNGER GENERATION

Do you see that the current Ukrainian leadership is aware of what is
to be done to avoid losing economic prospects?

"I am beginning to be more worried than I was before. I admire
Ukraine very much and I have always wanted it to be independent. I was very happy, in the deep sense of this word, when Ukraine became independent because I thought that it deserved to be independent. Its people have suffered a lot. There is no reason why it should be subjugated to an imperial system.

"However, what has happened in the past three years has disappointed me very much. In particular, this applies to the behavior of the political elite. I have a feeling that the younger generation, the under-40s, are starting to become entirely different. I hope we will not have to wait too long for them to assume responsibility for their country. They deeply impress me by being much more pro- European and knowing very well what it means to be a modern, more perfect, and transparent democracy.

"Your mass media are better now. I am more optimistic in the long
term and more worried in the short term. It seems to me that if a
great, politically all-absorbing financial crisis prevails in the
world and everybody focuses their attention on themselves only,
everything may happen in the regions, where there are hungry and
strong neighbors who are nurturing nostalgic imperialist ideas."

But you do not think that Ukraine will be part of Russia, do you?

"This depends on the Ukrainian people. Indeed. If the Ukrainian
people are convinced that independence is more important than
anything else, then even a strong neighbor will be unable to do
anything. Ukrainians are good fighters. They should strengthen their hearts and feel that independence is a way to achieve their personal dreams and to fully satisfy their sense of identity. In this case, Ukraine will be safe. But this should emanate from inside of them. This is something no one else can do for Ukrainians."

[valpomike]

Looks like, I would say, that Mr. Zvigniew Brzezinski, like me doe not trust or like Obama.
What do you think?

Mike

[Bonobo]

Feb 8, 2009 19:47:14 GMT 1 valpomike said:

Looks like, I would say, that Mr. Zvigniew Brzezinski, like me doe not trust or like Obama.
What do you think?

Mike

Where did you read it in the interview? I read it but couldn`t find it.

[Bonobo]

Walesa appeals for Ukraine to be welcomed to Europe
thenews.pl
26.02.2009

Lech Walesa, speaking today as the guest of honour at the Europe-
Ukraine conference in Kiev, stated that there is no Europe without
the Ukraine and no Ukraine without Europe.

"Bringing the Ukraine into Europe is our duty. Cutting ties with the
country means that the West is acting too nationalistic, " said Walesa at the conference organized the Warsaw Institute of Eastern Studies (ISW).

Walesa was critical of older Western European countries, claiming
that they have not perceived just how essential Kiev is for the
stability and safety of the continent.

"In that way, they are showing their egoism," stated the Solidarity
hero.

The forum was attended by 400 guests from twenty countries. Besides Walesa, Poland is represented by Deputy Prime Minister Waldemar Pawlak.

[Bonobo]

The EU's Eastern 'Sphere of Influence'The European Union on Thursday is set to sign a partnership agreement with a number of countries on its eastern border. Russia, though, fears that Brussels is trying to move in on its territory. German commentators on Wednesday agree.
Spiegel Online
5/6/09
From the European Union's perspective, of course, Thursday's meeting in Prague, to be attended by a number of the 27-member bloc's eastern neighbors, looks like an important regional gathering aimed at strengthening economic and strategic partnerships.
Not surprisingly, though, Russia has a slightly different take on the EU's Eastern Partnership, as the plan is called. The six countries invited -- Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine -- are all seen by Moscow as belonging to its sphere if influence.
"What is the Eastern Partnership if not an attempt to extend the EU's sphere of influence?" Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov asked in March, according to the news Web site euobserver.com. "Is this promoting democracy, or is it blackmail?"
Ostensibly, the €600 million ($800 million) agreement, originally proposed by Sweden and Poland in May 2008, is meant to pave the way for improved trade relationships as well as to ease travel restrictions. Both political and economic instability in the region, however, has led many to see the pact as an important measure necessary to increase stability on Europe's eastern border. The Georgia-Russian war last summer lent urgency to the project and ongoing friction between Russia and Ukraine has likewise made many in Europe nervous.
"The aim is to avoid any freezing of relations with the eastern partners (and to) prevent the emergence of some vacuum between the Union and Russia," Czech Deputy Prime Minister Alexandr Vondra told Reuters.
EU representatives have brushed aside Russian criticisms as unfounded. "This is not about spheres of influence," Vondra said. "It is based on voluntariness and free will on both sides."
Indicating the importance Germany attaches to the partnership, Chancellor Angela Merkel has decided to attend the Thursday summit. Interestingly, Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko has opted not to attend, despite widespread elation in his country that Belarus was invited in the first place, a gesture ending years of isolation for Minsk. Observers, though, say that his decision is meant to avoid potential embarrassment for Western leaders who might prefer not to be seen with the man who has been referred to as " Europe's last dictator."
German commentators take a look at the Eastern Partnership on Wednesday.
The center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung writes:
"The Eastern Partnership was initially just meant to counter French President Nicolas Sarkozy's proposal for a Mediterranean Union. But then Russia's war with Georgia in August increased the urgency of launching a political initiative for the region. And then it grew even more with both the clashes between Russia and Ukraine over natural gas supplies and the economic crisis. But the €600 million set out to ease trade and travel arrangements is rather skimpy. And, in organizational terms, things are not very well-defined. Unlike the rather pompously staged Mediterranean Union, there is no secretariat and no president at the top. And prospects for joining the EU are expressly not part of any new offer of friendship."
"Indeed, with all of its frozen conflicts, the minefield to EU's east requires any initiative that will bring some degree of relative calm. But Moscow sees the initiative as a provocation is protesting against the EU's involvement in a regiont it sees as its own sphere of influence. In reality, the Eastern Partnership is really nothing more than an EU attempt to buy more influence at a relatively cheap price."
The Financial Times Deutschland writes:
"Those wishing to take advantage of the opportunities offered by closer cooperation with Ukraine and Georgia should be very clear about what that entails. By following that path, there is no doubt that the EU is expanding its 'sphere of influence,' even if diplomats in Brussels prefer to steer clear of the term. It is very much in the EU's own best interests to have neighbors on its borders that share similar values and norms. It's not just a matter of thinking that democracies make nicer neighbors. Over the long term, they are more dependable trading partners, present less of a military threat and attract more investors."
"Russia has a very different view of the region. It's not just that Russia is not interested in seeing former Soviet states become democracies; the fact is that such a process goes directly against its own plans. For years, Russia has been ruled by a political caste that is closely intertwined with business interests that are not too inclined to support transparency and open political debate. Nothing would weaken this caste's position more than having a formerly Soviet neighbor become a democracy -- and an economically successful one at that."
"Under these circumstances, it is becoming clear that the EU must both admit to itself that it has a sphere of influence but also accept the consequences. Partnerships with the EU can't just be used to placate countries in the region and avoid having to offer full membership in the future. Whoever shows a serious interest in being accepted into the EU must also be given a chance to do so -- even if such a step would only be possible at some point in the distant future."


-----------------------------------------------------------------


EU tones down commitment to Eastern Europe
The European Union has watered down a pact with Eastern European countries including Georgia and Ukraine because of fears of a domestic backlash against migration.
By Bruno Waterfield in Strasbourg
telegraph.co. uk
07 May 2009
Internal divisions within Europe worked to Russia's advantage ahead of the EU "Eastern Partnership" summit with Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia.
Political fears in key European governments, led by Berlin, has undermined the initiative to forge a new pact with former Soviet states and to counter a newly assertive Russia.
During talks in Brussels on Wednesday night, Germany and Holland forced changes to the Eastern Partnership summit communiqué because they feared fuelling domestic popular opposition against future EU enlargement.
The term "European countries", to refer to the six former Soviet countries, was dropped from draft texts to avoid any hint that it would imply future EU membership and migration rights, an issue which is controversial in many European countries.
Instead the six are described as "Eastern European Partners" and "partner countries", a development that will deeply disappoint Ukraine and strengthen Russia's attempts to build a "sphere of influence" in the region.
EU ambassadors have also watered down commitments to "visa liberalisation" , allowing people from the region greater work and business access to European countries.
The question, regarded as a vital benefit cementing the region to the West, has been delayed to become a "long-term goal", a major climb down from an original text that promised progress towards "visa-free" travel.
Ahead of German elections this September, the issue of migrant workers is seen as too politically sensitive in Berlin, eroding EU unity and allowing Russia exploit divisions.
Ukraine is becoming the main location of a battle between Russian and the EU over the country's future as an Eastern or Western facing country.
A letter written by the Frank-Walter Steinmeier and Radoslaw Sikorski, the German and Polish foreign ministers, last week warned of "destabilising effects" for the EU of Ukraine's relations with Russia.
"Negative developments in Ukraine could have wide ranging consequences, " they wrote.
Following the Georgian war last year, Ukraine has complained that Russia is systematically issuing Russian passports to Ukrainian citizens living in Crimea.
EU visa liberalisation, allowing more Ukrainians, including people from the Crimea, to work in Europe is seen as vital for winning influence from Russia.
The Georgia war last August, where Russia used military force to recognise breakaway regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, has raised the spectre of a similar conflict in Ukraine.
Almost 60 per cent of Ukraine's Crimean peninsula is ethnically Russian and some groups have called for the territory to split from Ukraine to a closer alliance with Russia.
A document recently circulated by German diplomats in the EU warns that the Crimea issue could lead to "a serious deterioration of relations" between Russia and Ukraine.
Berlin has suggested "raising the issue of Crimea with Ukraine in a more systematic way" with the goal of "strengthening 'European' identity in Crimea, fostering ties with Europe and the West".

[Bonobo]

Prague's summit starts Eastern Partnership
Polish Radio
08.05.2009
The Eastern Partnership project launched at the summit in Prague hailed has been hailed as a success of Poland's foreign policy.

Danuta Isler reports
Six post-Soviet countries have been officially invited to a closer cooperation with the European Union within the framework of the Eastern Partnership project. The brainchild of Poland and Sweden, its main goal is to deepen political association and economic integration between the EU and Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine.
Although several leaders of the EU's established states were absent there during the inaugural summit in Prague the event was hailed as a success of Poland's foreign policy and the first Polish initiative accepted by the whole 27-nation bloc.

The main goal of the newly launched Eastern Partnership is to create a basis for political dialogue and a trade and security zone between the EU and it's eastern neighbours. The summit declaration, amended several times, envisages cooperation in the field of energy, the creation of the free trade zone, help in the adjustment of the laws of those Eastern countries to the European standards as well as cultural and academic exchange.
Addressing the participants of the Summit European Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso expressed his conviction that the newly launched initiative will help those post-Soviet states come closer to European standards. Although the Eastern Partnership does not guarantee open doors for EU membership, the idea of the project put forward by Poland and Sweden was also hailed as success of Polish foreign policy.
The European Union has allocated 600 million euro to be used for the project until 2013.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Eastern Partnership is our success, says Sikorski
thenews.pl
08.05.2009
Leaders from Poland and the EU hailed yesterday’s European Council summit devoted to the Eastern Partnership as a success.
Yesterday’s summit inaugurating the Eastern Partnership was a success for Poland, Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski claimed Friday morning.
The Eastern Partnership project, launched at the European Council summit on Thursday, is the first all-EU initiative drafted by Poland, together with Sweden. The project enhances cooperation between the EU and six post-Soviet republics.
“This is a logical step,” outgoing Czech PM Mirek Topolanek said. "It is impossible to pretend that there is nothing east of us. There are the countries there, that have European ambitions."
Both Topolanek and the president of the European Commission Jose Manuel Barroso claimed the summit was successful and they have some ambitious expectations for the project.
“The Eastern Partnership will strengthen economic and political reforms, which will bring six [ex-Soviet] countries closer to the EU. It will also lead to the liberalization of visa policy,” Barroso said.
EU leaders were quick to reassure that the policy is not aimed at weakening the position of Mosocw in the region. But it also should not be considered as an alternative to EU membership, Czech President Vaclav Klaus reminded at the dinner for participants.
“We do not want to build any closed, privileged club. The EU will keep expanding,” the Czech President said.
The positive mood of the politicians was spoiled by the fact that only a few of the major European leaders came to Prague. Gordon Brown, Nicolas Sarkozy, Jose Luis Zapatero and Silvio Berlusconi decided to stay at home.
Czech Deputy PM Alexandr Vondra spoke critically of the many absentees: “It is only the matter of their responsibility. But I would prefer they came.”
The Eastern Partnership project, offers Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Ukraine, Moldova and Belarus closer economic and social cooperation with the EU. It plans to set a free trade zone with those countries and gives an opportunity for visa facilitation. The Eastern Partnership budget comes to 600 million euro.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------


Russia flirts with Eastern Partnership
Polish Radio
18.05.2009

Russia announced today that they have not excluded the possibility of joining concrete projects related to the Eastern Partnership, according to Russian ambassador to the EU Vladimir Chizhov.

The statement was made today during a Brussels-Moscow teleconference organized by the RIA-Nowosti news agency as preparation for the Thursday-Friday summit in Khabarovsk in Russia's far east.

"We are not discounting Russia's possibilities, including those of Russia's businessmen, to help implement and complete concrete projects initiated by the Eastern Partnership, " stated Chizhov.

The diplomat added that Russia plans to review its participation in the Polish-Swedish initiative for the European Union that was officially inaugurated on 7 May in Prague.

"For Russia, it is important that the realization of these projects do not create new way to limit or strain Russia-EU relations and Russia's relations with the six countries taking part in the project," maintains Chizhov.

The goal of the Eastern Partnership is to create a dynamic of cooperation between the EU and it's eastern neighbours: the Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, Azerbaijan and Armenia.

[Bonobo]

Poland Touts Eastern Policy Success
The Warsaw Voice
20 May 2009

The government says it has scored an important foreign policy success with the visit of Foreign Minister Rados³aw Sikorski to Moscow and a Prague summit at which the European Union launched an Eastern Partnership program conceived by Poland and Sweden.

"We have achieved what we intended concerning the Eastern Partnership, " Prime Minister Donald Tusk said May 8.

The European Union and six former Soviet republics-Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine and Belarus-agreed May 7 in Prague on the Eastern Partnership Initiative, designed to forge closer ties. The main goal of the partnership is to accelerate political and economic integration, including establishing free-trade zones, between the EU and the former Soviet nations.

"The partnership is not meant as a kind of special assistance to the governments of the participating countries," Tusk said. "It is supposed to make life easier for people living beyond Poland's and Europe's eastern border and bring them closer to Europe and its standards."

At a summit in March, the EU decided to set aside an additional 600 million euros for the Eastern Partnership Initiative up to the end of 2013. Earlier, when negotiating the EU budget for 2007-2013, the EU earmarked 12 billion euros for cooperation with its neighbors. Of this amount, 494 million euros was set aside for Ukraine up to 2010.

"This is a day of Polish success in the EU, a day when the whole EU adopted a Polish initiative for the first time," Sikorski said after the Prague summit. "What was merely an idea a year ago... is now an official plan of the whole EU and the six partner nations."

The day before the Prague summit, at the close of his Moscow visit, Sikorski reassured his Russian hosts that the Eastern Partnership was not directed against Russia, nor was it an attempt to build an anti-Russian alliance in the former Soviet republics. "It is a program to modernize the EU's neighbors," Sikorski told his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov.

"And since Russia is also undergoing modernization, there is no contradiction here."

Lavrov accepted the assurances. "The response about the Eastern Partnership we have received from our Polish colleagues, from Minister Sikorski, satisfies us," he said, noting he was told that Poland wants the partnership program to develop "in total harmony and agreement with Russia."

Sikorski said Russia has been given the option of participating in the European Neighborhood Policy, of which the Eastern Partnership is a part. "We also invite Russia, or at least the Kaliningrad District, to some of the Eastern Partnership programs," Sikorski added.

Apart from the Eastern Partnership Initiative, Sikorski's two-day visit to Moscow also focused on analyzing the state of Polish-Russian relations and preparing for Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's visit to Poland-not yet confirmed by the Russian side-to attend commemorations in September of the 70th anniversary of the outbreak of World War II.

"If the visit takes place, we would recognize that the process of normalizing Polish-Russian relations has been completed and that Poland has joined actively and creatively in the process of building an EU and bilateral partnership with Russia," Sikorski said in Moscow.

New Polish-Russian agreements on other issues that were discussed in Moscow may be signed soon. Among these is the problem of navigation through the Vistula Lagoon. The lagoon is split between Poland and Russia's Kaliningrad District. Russia, which has a large naval base in Baltiysk, has periodically blocked passage for Polish ships through the Strait of Baltiysk, which links the lagoon and the Baltic Sea. Poland has even considered digging a canal across the Vistula Spit to free itself of dependence on Russia and revive trading traffic through its port of Elbl¹g.

Asked whether relations between Warsaw and Moscow have been unfrozen, Sikorski sidestepped a direct answer, saying: "We simply have normal relations now between one of the six largest EU nations and a large country, that is, Russia."

Lavrov said the two sides had emphasized the need to meet each other halfway and to implement agreements reached during Tusk's visit to Moscow in February 2008 and his meeting with Putin during the World Economic Forum in Davos.

Sikorski also said a bilateral agreement on fighting organized crime was almost ready. He added Poland would support cooperation between the two countries' ministries of culture and science and expressed hope that an exchange program would be launched for Polish and Russian youth. Sikorski also said it would be good if the Polish-Russian commission for school textbooks resumed its work.

Lavrov said Russian initiatives concerning energy security in Europe were one of the topics he discussed with Sikorski.

[Bonobo]

Russia wheels out the evil weapon of history
Distorting the facts about the Second World War may well be a prelude to a battle over a land corridor through Poland, writes Simon Heffer.

By Simon Heffer
telegraph.co. uk

06 Jun 2009


Facing the future: Russians march with a poster of Stalin

There are few things more dangerous or terrifying than when a nation, or the state apparatus that controls it, falls into the grip of a collective delusion. Such was the case in Nazi Germany, when a straightforward decision was taken to scapegoat Jews, Communists and, in the end, anyone else who didn't agree with the prevailing madness, and persecute them to the point of mass murder. Stalin, in his own pursuit of totalitarianism, behaved similarly.

Some of us hoped that, in Europe at any rate, such absurdities were over; but a dispatch from The Daily Telegraph's Moscow correspondent last week showed that the madness is back, in Russia at least, and with it the determination to abuse and manipulate history.

A research official in the Russian defence ministry has published an essay saying that Poland effectively started the Second World War by refusing to accede to Germany's "modest" demands. We may take it that this man's view reflects that of the Russian state; it is certainly widely interpreted as such.

Russia has been struggling with its idea of itself since the international humiliation of losing its empire nearly 20 years ago. For a time its sudden wealth – thanks to a high oil price and the value of other of its minerals – restored its amour propre. Although its rulers locked up people who sought to push democracy to its natural conclusions, such as the former oil magnate Mikhail Khodorkovsky, poisoned troublemakers and threw the odd journalist out of windows, the money enabled it to offer the pretence of being a dynamic and powerful economy. Rolexed men in expensive suits climbed in and out of BMWs all over Moscow, and an idea was perpetuated that Russia could feel good about itself.

Then the oil price collapsed, soon after the militarily successful but diplomatically disastrous war with Georgia last year. Once more Russia was poor – with many of its greatest businessmen broke – and an international pariah. So now history, that much-abused weapon, is brought out of the armoury.

To the rest of the world, the Stalin era is one of shame for Russia. The country is seeking to change this. The cynical pact with the Nazis, concluded between Molotov and Ribbentrop a little more than a week before the outbreak of war, is now defended as an essential prelude to the defence against the "inevitable" attack by Hitler. It enabled Russia to occupy half of Poland and the Baltic States.

As the genocide or occupation museums in Vilnius, Riga and Tallinn all show (and I have visited them all), the miseries inflicted by the Communist occupier on Lithuanians, Latvians and Estonians were vicious, bloody, murderous and had nothing to do with protection against Hitler. They were about the Sovietisation of Eastern Europe, a process interrupted by the Nazi invasion of 1941 but pursued with ruthless savagery after 1944-45. Oh, and by the way, Stalin was so reconciled to the "inevitable" Nazi invasion for which this occupation was a "preparation" that he ignored all warnings that it was coming.

The Russian view now is that if only Poland had let Germany have a land corridor to Danzig – then a "free city" but effectively German, with a strong Nazi organisation and surrounded on three sides by Poland in its new, post-Versailles boundaries – there wouldn't have been a Second World War. That is such idiotic nonsense that only a regime founded on lies, as Putin's and Medvedev's is, could seriously attempt to peddle it. Whatever Poland had done, Hitler would have annexed it. It had been his plan since Mein Kampf. It was where Germany's Lebensraum was to be. The Czechoslovaks had made concessions to him (forced by us, not least), and they were not deemed enough: occupation followed.

There is no point trying to reason with the Russians about how they ought to know this. They don't want to know it. Reason doesn't come into it.

Further proof of the madness comes in the suggestion by the Russian government that it is planning to pass a law to make it an offence for Russians (and, more sinisterly, for foreigners – though how that would work remains to be seen) to describe what happened in Poland and the Baltic States between 1939 and 1941 as an "occupation" . If you still cannot grasp how evil this proposal is, imagine if the German government were to do the same – saying that it would criminalise the statement that Nazis had occupied Poland (or France, or the Low Countries, or anywhere else) during the last war. Germany would become a pariah state overnight.

So why are we not exercised by Russia's wicked distortion of the past? And what else is to come? Are we to expect a further revision of the view about the Katyn massacre of 1940, when, on Stalin's specific order, 6,000 Polish soldiers were murdered by Soviet executioners? It is only in the last few years that the Russians have owned up to doing this, having hitherto blamed the Germans. Perhaps now they will blame the Poles for this too, possibly even speculating that it was a collective suicide.

In history there is a distinction between revisionism and distortion. The former makes a sensible reinterpretation of known facts, often with the support of additional and uncontestable evidence, such as newly unearthed contemporary documents. Distortion requires no new evidence, but can require the disregarding of facts we already know. It is clear what the Russians are doing: and I fear it is not merely to make themselves look good, or to rehabilitate Stalin and his ideas, or to use history to seek to humiliate a troublesome and fiercely independent neighbour.

When the Baltic States threw out the Russian occupier in 1991, a part of the former East Prussia annexed by Stalin – Kaliningrad, the former city of Königsberg – remained Russian. However, like that other Baltic city, Danzig, it now finds itself landlocked away from its motherland. Poland is to its south and west, Lithuania to its east. Are the Russians trying to tell us something? Is Russia about to make a demand for a land corridor through Poland to Kaliningrad, for the same reasons that Hitler sought one to Danzig 70 years ago? If so, is Russia intending to argue that the denial by Poland of land access to Königsberg could provoke a big international fight, and possibly terrible destruction, and that it would be Poland's fault for not giving into a "modest" demand?

I simply don't know. But when people start twisting history and wielding it as a blunt instrument without any provocation, we are wise to start asking ourselves why.

[Bonobo]

Belarus raises stakes in dispute with Russia
By STEVE GUTTERMAN
6/14/09
MOSCOW (AP) — Belarus said it would stay away from the summit of a Moscow-led security alliance Sunday to protest a Russian ban on Belarusian dairy products, deepening a politically- charged dispute between the ex-Soviet neighbors.
Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko and his delegation would not travel to Moscow for the one-day meeting of the Organization of the Collective Security Treaty, or CSTO, a Belarusian Foreign Ministry spokesman said.
Plans for a joint security force topped the agenda at the meeting of the seven-nation organization, an ex-Soviet answer to NATO.
The Belarusian boycott raises the stakes in the confrontation between Russia and one of its closest allies. In a statement explaining its decision, Belarus suggested that Russia risks losing its military backing if it withdraws support for its smaller neighbor's economy.
"Without a halt to actions that undermine the foundations of economic security of one's partners, it seems impossible to make decisions on other aspects of security," Foreign Ministry spokesman Andrei Popov said. "We believe that against the background of 'trade wars' waged by some CSTO members against others, this would make a mockery of common sense."
Russia slapped a ban on imports of Belarusian milk and dairy products last weekend, a heavy blow to the country's agricultural sector, which employs one out of 10 people in the nation of 10 million.
Belarus has been Moscow's staunch ally since the 1991 Soviet collapse. The Kremlin's efforts to reclaim a dominant role in the former Soviet space have created constant tension in their ties. The outspoken Lukashenko has clashed visibly with Vladimir Putin, Russia's president from 2000-2008 and now its prime minister.
The dairy ban — which Russia says it imposed because Belarusian producers have not complied with new industry standards it has put in place — came after Lukashenko accused Russia of trying to take over his nation's industries and destroy its sovereignty.
He warned that a long-discussed merger of Russia and Belarus would create "another Chechnya" — suggesting that Belarus would use military force to defend its independence.
Lukashenko has depended heavily on Russia for economic and political support, while earning the opprobrium of the U.S. and European Union during 15 years of authoritarian rule over his nation — a buffer between Russia and NATO members including Poland.
But amid increasingly strained relations with Moscow, Lukashenko has been courting the West. His government has released opposition figures that the U.S. and EU considered political prisoners.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov criticized Belarus but said he and his colleagues from the other members states decided it would not get in the way of their plans, according to the Interfax news agency. He said they approved draft agreements on the collective security force for submission to the presidents, who were expected to sign them later in the day, the report said.
"It is, of course, wrong to link economic problems that should be resolved by the appropriate authorities on the basis of agreements with issues of military and political security that answer to the interest of all CSTO members," Lavrov was quoted as saying.
Popov indicated Belarus would not sign the agreements unless Russia lifts the dairy ban.
The boycott also complicated the summit because Lukashenko was slated to take over as chairman of the alliance's leadership council.
Lukashenko's decision appeared aimed to embarrass Russia in front of other former Soviet republics that are crucial to maintaining its clout in Central Asia and the Caspian Sea region amid competition with the West over political influence, energy resources and export routes.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Nervous neighbors brace for fallout from Latvian crisis
GARY PEACHLIUDAS DAPKUS
June 10, 2009
VILNIUS, Lithuania (AP) — As Latvia fights speculation about default and painful currency devaluation, its neighbors are nervous that the tiny Baltic country's problems could spread well beyond its borders.
Besides the impact on Swedish banks, which are heavily exposed in the Baltic countries, analysts have warned Latvia's ills could see investors flee other European currencies and economies, sending exchange rates down and adding strain on already fraying state finances.
While the Swedes say the can withstand a Baltic shock even in case of devaluation, Lithuania and Estonia, facing their own economic problems, publicly don't consider devaluation as an option. Both have rigid currency pegs to the euro similiar to Latvia's, and they would feel additional pressure if Latvia gives up and devalues.
"There is no need for Latvia to default, and I'm sure they are not going to do it," Lithuania's central bank chief, Reinoldijus Sarkinas, told The Associated Press on Wednesday. "I talk to my colleagues in the Bank of Latvia regularly, and what I hear makes me think they would not devalue the lat."
In the Estonian capital of Tallinn, the deputy governor of Estonia's central bank, Marten Ross, sounded a similar note, telling AP a devaluation of the Estonian kroon "has never been an option ... because it would not solve any problems in our economy."
Recent speculation about a Latvian devaluation has hurt other European currencies including the Swedish krona, the Polish zloty and the Hungarian forint. Investors saw at least temporary relief this week, as the Latvian government announced a new round of stringent budget cuts. Still, Latvia's economy shrank 18 percent in the first quarter alone from a year earlier and is expected to fall 18 percent the rest of this year.
In healthier — and bigger — economies like Poland, government officials are hoping that investors will distinguish between sick and sound.
"We have put a lot of effort into differentiating ourselves from the region, or from eastern markets," Poland's central bank chief Slawomir Skrzypek said Friday.
Poland's economy was one of the few EU economies showing growth in the first quarter. By contrast, the Baltic countries saw double-digit plunges in gross domestic product from a year earlier.
Still, Latvia's situation "will weigh on the zloty until the (currency) issue is cleared out," said Maja Goettig, chief economist with Bank BPH in Warsaw.
Buglarian Finance Minister Plamen Oresharski acknowledged that Latvia's crisis "could provoke a negative pressure on the investment climate in Bulgaria" because the countries have similar currency pegs. However, he added Bulgaria's financial system was in better shape.
"Bulgaria has strong buffers as a result of its careful fiscal policy in times of economic boom," Oresharski said in an e-mail to AP. "That is why there is no threat for the currency board and the Bulgarian lev."
In Lithuania, Sarkinas insisted his country, unlike Latvia, would not have to go to the International Monetary Fund for help.
"I'm optimistic, and I think we will not go to the IMF for money. Lithuania is able to solve its problems without help from the fund," he said.
Meanwhile, Sweden's financial supervisory authority said Wednesday that the country's four largest banks had enough capital to absorb losses of more than 150 billion kronor ($19.3 billion) in the Baltic countries in the next three years.
The authority's chief economist, Lars Frisell, said the stress tests took into account the potential of a Latvian devaluation, but pointed out it wouldn't necessarily increase credit losses in the region.
"The credit losses will materialize, with or without a devaluation, " he told AP.
Separately Wednesday, the Swedish Riksbank said it would borrow euro3 billion ($4.2 billion) from the European Central Bank to safeguard its foreign currency reserves during the financial crisis.
Some analysts say concerns about psychological contagion are exaggerated.
"I don't quite see why little Latvia, which is small in terms of its economy, should have such a big impact on Europe as a whole," said Alfs Vanags, head of the Baltic International Center for Economic Policy Studies.
Lars Christensen, senior analyst at Danske Bank in Copenhagen, said a lot will depend on the state of the global economy. If markets are on the upswing in Europe, U.S. and Asia, a Baltic currency collapse would only have a small effect. But if global markets are down for other reason, Latvia's woes could deepen the gloom.
"A lot of it depends on how the rest of the world is feeling at the time," he said. "That will be key."

[Bonobo]

Sikorski: `Eastern Europe is crucial'thenews.pl
18.06.2009

Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski makes the case for the relevance and importance of the Eastern Partnership to the European Union in an article in Thursday's Wall Street Journal.

Sikorski writes that one of the `fundamental tenets' of Poland's foreign policy is to support its Eastern neighbours. The country, together with Sweden, proposed the Eastern Partnership initiative for the European Union, which was inaugurated at a May Summit in Prague.

The intent of the Partnership is to aid the transformation of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and the Ukraine and engage them with Europe in multi-lateral cooperation.

The Foreign Minister adds that Poland's goal is not to alienate Russia, but rather to work strategically with the country and the former satellite states.

"If we see Russia's future as being in partnership with the European Union, we cannot deny the same prospect to our common neighbours. It would be a poor solution for the EU and Russia to be separated by a region whose contacts with Europea are less substantial than those with Russia," stated writes Sikorski, adding that integration with Eastern Europe and the Southern Caucasus increases the likelihood of Russia to adopt a pro-European stance.

The Pole wrote, as well, that the states are key to the EU, not only in terms of geography, demography and economic potential, but also to ensuring the energy security of the continent as gas pipelines flow through the Ukraine, Belarus and Georgia, with Azerbaijan being one of the world's major oil producers.

[paulo]

I will endeavor (try very hard) to read all of Bonobo's comments, not that they were not good, it was just I COULD NOT GET PAST THE FACT THAT THE EU CLAIMS UKRAINE IS NOT QUALIFIED TO JOIN THE EU!!!

The cowardice of the liberal West never ceases to disappoint. I am sorry to all my friends in the East--please, when you get stronger and richer, try to hold on to your morals longer than we did in the West.

[paulo]

Lukashenko will not attend, even though the EU invited him, because his bosses told him not to. Period.

[paulo]

I wonder if the ex-Soviet bloc countries should start their own EU? Then maybe ask the EU, after they establish their own group, for some help militarily and financially to "get on their feet" (American expression meaning "to get a solid start").
After I wrote the above, I read something about the Eastern Partnership. Maybe that, if we are fortunate, could suffice. It will take a lot of hard work and courage, though, because Russia will not let go without a fight--but hopefully, not a literal fight (war).
I read "Full Circle" by Sikorski and saw him being 'interrogated' by the BBC: I am very impressed with him. Why?
He has strong morals, yet is not a "hot-head" (one who loses his temper in the face of hypocrites--such as the BBC reporter). I think he has the courage AND the patience to actually get things GOOD done for Poland and the world. I think Poland is blessed to have him. Am I on target here? Do a lot of Poles feel the same way??

[Bonobo]

Jun 21, 2009 13:18:38 GMT 1 paulo said:

by Sikorski and saw him being 'interrogated' by the BBC: I am very impressed with him. Why?
He has strong morals, yet is not a "hot-head" (one who loses his temper in the face of hypocrites--such as the BBC reporter). I think he has the courage AND the patience to actually get things GOOD done for Poland and the world. I think Poland is blessed to have him. Am I on target here? Do a lot of Poles feel the same way??

He has been on top of all popularity rankings for months. 60% Poles trust him, the same as Tusk.

[Bonobo]

Jun 21, 2009 13:13:07 GMT 1 paulo said:

I will endeavor (try very hard) to read all of Bonobo's comments, not that they were not good, it was just I COULD NOT GET PAST THE FACT THAT THE EU CLAIMS UKRAINE IS NOT QUALIFIED TO JOIN THE EU!!!

The cowardice of the liberal West never ceases to disappoint. I am sorry to all my friends in the East--please, when you get stronger and richer, try to hold on to your morals longer than we did in the West.

They aren`t really ready yet. They still need to work very hard to fullfill European standards. Poland`s road to the EU was long and laborious. We had had to adopt EU vast legislation, which had taken us more than 10 years since 1992.

[...]
The Europe Agreement does not provide a precise timetable for adjustment of Polish legislation. The Parties recognised in it however “that the approximation of Poland’s existing and future legislation to that of the Community is the essential pre-condition for Poland’s economic integration with Communities”. Poland made as well a one-sided commitment “to endeavour to the best of its ability to conform its future legislation to that of the Community”.

In fulfilment of that commitment inter alia Polish Sejm adopted a resolution of July 4th, 1992 calling for a general adjustment of the Polish economy and legal system to the requirements of the Europe Agreement. The “Programme of the Adjustment of the Polish Economy and Polish Legal System to the Requirements of the Europe Agreement” was adopted at first in 1992. In accordance with Resolution No. 16/94 of the Council of Ministers each draft of a legal act prepared as a bill to be submitted by the Government to the Parliament must be scrutinised taking into consideration their compatibility with EU legislation.

Scope of adaptation

In accordance with Article 69 of the Europe Agreement the process adjustment of the Polish legislation should cover the following areas basic for the Single Market:

* banking law,
* customs law,
* company law,
* company accounts and taxes,
* consumer protection,
* financial services,
* food legislation,
* indirect taxation,
* intellectual property,
* environment protection,
* protection of health and life of humans, animals and plants,
* protection of workers at the work place,
* rules of competition,
* technical rules and standards,
* transport rules.

[...]

www.law.uj.edu.pl/users/bagdzin/word2.htm

[locopolaco]

Jun 21, 2009 13:13:07 GMT 1 paulo said:

I will endeavor (try very hard) to read all of Bonobo's comments, not that they were not good, it was just I COULD NOT GET PAST THE FACT THAT THE EU CLAIMS UKRAINE IS NOT QUALIFIED TO JOIN THE EU!!!

The cowardice of the liberal West never ceases to disappoint. I am sorry to all my friends in the East--please, when you get stronger and richer, try to hold on to your morals longer than we did in the West.

ukraine is not ready. period.

[valpomike]

As per, only you, on this.


Mike

[locopolaco]

obviously you didn't read the thread, did you? ukraine is a mess and that is why they are not in the EU.. once they fix their problems, i don't see why they wouldn't be allowed to join in.

[valpomike]

Everyone has problems, some can't be fixed fast, and some can't be fixed at all. But they are working to make things better now.

Mike

[Bonobo]

East Europeans nervous as US courts Russia
By VANESSA GERA
7/16/09

WARSAW, Poland — A group of prominent former Eastern European leaders wrote to President Barack Obama on Thursday that their region is gripped by anxiety that he could forget their interests as he seeks to repair ties with Russia.

The 22 former leaders said they still feel bullied by their giant neighbor and former master and claimed Russia continues to challenge their sovereignty 20 years after the Cold War's end.

They warned in a letter, carried on the Web site of the Gazeta Wyborcza newspaper and to be delivered in Washington later Thursday, that U.S. credibility would be damaged if Washington abandons plans for a missile defense shield in response to Russian pressure, calling this the "thorniest" of current issues.

The Bush administration reached agreements last year to station interceptor missiles at a base in Poland and a linked radar base in the Czech Republic. Russia vehemently opposes the plan and Obama is skeptical of it and is undertaking a thorough review.

"Abandoning the program entirely or involving Russia too deeply in it without consulting Poland or the Czech Republic can undermine the credibility of the United States across the whole region," according to the letter signed by ex-leaders from countries once in the Soviet-controlled communist bloc but now NATO and EU members.

The signatories include former presidents Lech Walesa and Aleksander Kwasniewski of Poland, Vaclav Havel of the Czech Republic, Emil Constantinescu of Romania and Vaira Vike-Freiberga of Latvia. They describe themselves as U.S. allies who remain deeply indebted to America for helping bring down the Iron Curtain.

Many Eastern Europeans today still feel enormous gratitude to U.S. efforts to oppose their oppressive communist-era regimes, with a particular affection for Ronald Reagan and other Republican leaders. Polish analyst Olaf Osica, with the Natolin European Centre think tank in Warsaw, said the region tends to view Democratic administrations with more skepticism, fearful they will favor a "realistic" approach to Russia over the "idealism" of opposing Moscow's strength.

"Had a 'realist' view prevailed in the early 1990s, we would not be in NATO today and the idea of a Europe whole, free, and at peace would be a distant dream," the letter said.

The letter comes days after an Obama visit to Moscow, where he sought to reboot the tense relationship between the U.S. and Russia, including a renewed focus on paring down nuclear stockpiles.

While missile defense came up in the talks, there was no progress and further discussions were put aside for a later date.

Russia has threatened to deploy missiles near Poland if the U.S. pushes ahead with the shield. Obama has attempted to reassure Moscow that the system is geared to tempering a ballistic missile threat from countries like Iran, a strong trading partner of Russia.

There is "nervousness in our capitals," the authors wrote. "We want to ensure that too narrow an understanding of Western interests does not lead to the wrong concession to Russia."

While they welcome Obama's attempts to "reset" ties with Russia, they warned that Russia still acts as if it has final say in the region.

"Our hopes that relations with Russia would improve and that Moscow would finally fully accept our complete sovereignty and independence after joining NATO and the EU have not been fulfilled," the letter says. "Instead, Russia is back as a revisionist power pursuing a 19th-century agenda with 21st century tactics and methods."

The authors cite economic warfare, including recent gas shortages in past years with Ukraine and others; politically motivated investments; bribery and media manipulation in order to advance its interests and to challenge the trans-Atlantic orientation of Central and Eastern Europe.

A security analyst, Bartosz Wisniewski, said the letter is more "alarmist and defensive in tone" than the reality would dictate, especially since Obama has tried to reassure the region that he would not sacrifice its interests in his rapprochement with Russia.

"But if you want to get something across in Washington you need to be vocal," said Wisniewski, who works for a state-funded think tank, the Polish Institute of International Affairs.

He said it's notable what is absent from the 3,000-word letter. There is no mention of Ukraine or desires for further NATO enlargement and only the briefest mention of Georgia.

"It's about consolidating what has already been gained in the last 20 years and taking care of the allies that you already have and not thinking about the others," Wisniewski said. "It is a very realistic approach given the priorities of the Obama administration. "

[Bonobo]

Poland and Ukraine have great relations. Why not Poland and Russia too?

Poland, Ukraine sign relations road map
By DPA
Sep 7, 2009

Warsaw - Poland and Ukraine signed a 10-point road map for bilateral relations that covers politics, economics and historical memory, Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko said after a meeting Monday with his Polish counterpart.

Relations between Kiev and Warsaw should serve as a model for the European Union, Polish President Lech Kaczynski said.

'I think Europe, if it's to be a Europe of cooperation and not domination, must be a Europe based on such partnerships, ' Kaczynski said, noting that the visit has 'enormous meaning' for bilateral relations.

Yushchenko spoke of 'a test of what road Europe can take,' and asked if it will be a road of 'consolidation, ' or one 'influenced by relations of certain nations.'

Yushchenko's two-day visit to Poland was to sum up Polish- Ukrainian relations ahead of Ukraine's coming presidential elections and will confirm strategic relations between Warsaw and Kiev, Kaczynski's office said.

On the agenda were energy cooperation and joint preparations to co-host the Euro 2012 football championship.

Yushchenko was to meet later Tuesday with Bronislaw Komorowski, the speaker of Poland's parliament. The Ukrainian leader was to take part in the opening of a memorial to victims of Ukraine's famine of 1932-1933 at Warsaw's Wola Cemetery.

Yushchenko's visit was also to include meetings with Prime Minister Donald Tusk and a trip Tuesday to Przemysl, southern Poland, to meet local leaders of the Ukrainian minority.