Five years ago, if someone had said that Great Britain would leave the European Union, he would have been considered insane. However, something happened that was not supposed to happen. What is taking place in the European Union?
The EU has found itself at the crossroads because, for the first time in the sixty-year-long history of European Communities and the EU, a country is unexpectedly leaving these structures. It should be reminded that the constitution of the Soviet Union, and of course I’m not comparing the EU to the Soviet Union, theoretically provided for the possibility of a republic leaving the union. European treaties did not prohibit an exit from the Union, but neither did they regulate or refer to such a possibility. It is as if the people who drafted them did not consider such an option possible. One could say that Greenland has left, although it is not a country, but an autonomous territory and a part of Denmark. Now, however, an entire country is making that move, and what a country – number two economy of the EU, a country which was one of the three most important players on the EU’s turf, a country which is still vital to global politics because of its colonial past and size. Therefore, this is a blow to the very heart of the Union, although I am under the impression that the EU is not drawing any conclusions from this event or learning anything from it, and this leads to pessimistic inferences, including whether or not the European Union has been in a downward spiral since 1 February 2020. Those who witness historical evnts and are unable to perceive their sense of historical importance are frequently only aware of it from the perspective of the passing of time.
I have this feeling that history is being made before our very eyes, which will change the future of the entire continent.
You have mentioned a downward spiral, which the EU has found itself in. Immediately after Brexit, people started talking about Polexit or Polout. Is this a type of a political boogeyman, an attempt to discipline Poland and the Polish government?
- Nigel Farage, who said it at the press conference in Brussels, did not want to scare anyone, but spoke about it with hope. However, this was then taken up by those who wish to cause alarm. I am a pragmatist, and I believe that there will be no more “exits” from the EU within the next decade. If anything, I believe that we can expect some serious public debates about “exiting” the euroland. Fortunately, we are not a part of the eurozone, thank God. I think that especially the countries of southern Europe, such as Italy, Greece, Spain, and Portugal, my start these discussions in earnest in the next few years.
As for Poland, I would say that there are three groups of people in this country who, for various reasons, will increasingly question – not necessarily our presence in the EU but they will act as Eurosceptics in the sense that they will increasingly depict the EU as something bad for our country. The first group includes people who think that the European Union generates a certain ideological pressure in the moral and social sphere, which is incompatible with a certain system of traditional and conservative values applicable in Poland. One could argue, of course, that this is not necessarily linked to the EU as such, as it is a global process, yet the fact remains that EU institutions spend a lot of money on various foundations, organisations, and projects which are controversial when it comes to traditional values. This is the first group of citizens who are increasingly distancing themselves from the EU, to say the least, because of these particular moral, social and religious reasons. The second group, which I would describe as preoccupied with a sense of dignity and sovereignty, comprises people who for the most part voted for Poland’s entry into the EU, but who also say – “Hang on, the EU will not be putting us, proud Poles in the corner, it will not tell us what to do and how to live, how to run our Polish home. The EU will not be telling us what is wrong and what is right with Polish law. Enough of these double standards which give Germany and France the freedom to do what they want, while Poland or other countries like Portugal have no such ability.” This is the second group, and, in my opinion, it is increasingly becoming more numerous. A recent survey which shows that as many as 46% of Poles see the future of Poland outside the European Union is solitary; however, these people must have come from somewhere.
There will also be a third group, which is yet to be created. I expect this to happen within a decade. This group of people will look at the EU mostly from a financial perspective. Today these people say – “The EU is OK because it gives money”. Maybe in five, eight, or ten years from now, when Poland becomes a net contributor, these same people will say, “But wait, are we now supposed to maintain the EU? Our membership fee is now higher than our income from the European Union. We can’t agree to that.”
Poland’s geopolitics, after we witnessed imperial Russia’s actions towards Georgia or Ukraine, teach us to keep certain assurances in place.
Visegrád Group countries are all countries of the so-called Enlarged EU. Sometimes, it is felt that they are treated slightly like younger brothers who still have a lot to learn. Will Brexit affect our situation in the EU – I’m thinking about the states located in our region?
- Strategically, it is fundamental for us to form regional alliances, rather than exotic ones. In my opinion, Poland is the only country which is the mainstay of such zones. The first zone, which you have just mentioned, is the V4 group and countries, such as Poland, Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic. The second zone comprises the Baltic States with Poland, i.e. Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, and finally the third group is Poland with the Balkans. Poland is the only country able to reconcile the interests of the Baltic States, the Balkans and the Visegrád Group. Poland has a direct presence in the first two zones and also has a very serious presence in the Balkans, putting a lot of effort into the process and supporting, for example, the EU accession of countries such as Serbia, Montenegro and North Macedonia. It is good that we have such policy, but let us not deceive ourselves, I am a man of realpolitik, and I see how much they are playing us. President Macron has recently visited Poland, the same Macron who travelled to the Czech Republic and Slovakia a year and a half ago, and destroyed the solidarity of the V4 countries in the context of the mobility pact, in the context of the free flow of transport services so that Poland was unable to count on the votes of the Czech Republic and Slovakia in the forum of the European Council. Of course, in Poland this issue concerns 500 thousand people, while in the Czech Republic only 50 thousand people, it’s a different scale, but here solidarity did not work. I do not consider this to be an argument against alliances, because they are necessary and beneficial to us. When Poland is forming alliances such as V4 or the Three Seas initiative it encounters opposition from Brussels, Germany and so on, but let’s not be under any illusions – this is not mentioned at all in Poland, but I am convinced that Věra Jourova’s behaviour was caused only by the fact that she was second-guessing the whims of the EU establishment. I am convinced that just as Frans Timmermans attacked Poland in his time, not only because Poland is right-wing and he is left-wing, but also because Prime Minister Morawiecki, as part of his proposal to reform the European Union and increase the EU budget, proposed to cut all rebates, as a result of which the Netherlands would suffer the most, so in this case Věra Jourová, who is not mentioned in Poland at all, took these steps, in my opinion, also to divert attention from the Czech Republic, from her own government, which made her a commissioner. Prime Minister Andrej Babiš and Věra Jourová are liberals from the same formation, and it was decided that it would be better for the Czech Republic if the European Parliament stopped focusing on Andrej Babiš in the context of his companies that took money from the EU and continue to do so – and instead started talking about Poland.
This shows that these alliances are important, required and must be set up; however, they continue to face considerable challenges. We should also have in mind what Věra Jourová’s compatriot Petr Nečas told me when he said that the more our western neighbours wonder why we cooperate with each other in the region, the more we should work on this cooperation. I think so too, it is a necessity and moreover, you are right, this was recently in Strasbourg, during one session three countries from our region were, so to speak, placed against the “execution wall”, first Hungary, then Poland, and then the Czech Republic. It is not a coincidence that the “Themis of the EU” is closing its eyes to France or Spain on Catalonia, but it has them wide open when it comes to Poland and other countries in our region.
The countries in our region are sometimes referred to as Three Seas. Poland and Hungary are mentioned as the two leaders of the Three Seas initiative. What opportunities do you see for economic, political and social cooperation between Warsaw and Budapest?
- The idea behind the Three Seas initiative is worthy and just. It could be said that it is an illustration of the veracity of the thesis put forward by a left-wing sociologist, namely, Ludwik Krzywicki, who wrote about ideas travelling in time. This is simply the ABC concept – the Adriatic, the Black Sea, and the Baltic. Here, of course, it is very important that as many countries as possible are interested in this. For the time being, I am under the impression that this is not so much a strategic issue for these countries as a tactical one. Let us take the example of Croatia, a country which currently has the EU presidency and which has recently held elections. Croatia was in the vanguard of the idea of the Three Seas initiative thanks to the involvement and commitment of President Kolinda Grabar-Kitarović. She was replaced by a left-wing politician who is saying: “The US is not cool, the EU is great, let’s place our bets on the EU.”
As you can see, one presidential election was enough for this idea of the Three Seas, which was the flagship concept for the previous Croatian president, to lose its importance.
As a historian, I can say that a great paradox of the period between the Treaty of Versailles and the Second World War was that Poland and Hungary were countries that had extremely close relations with each other, despite being on the opposite ends of the political spectrum, as you know very well. It was in Poland’s strategic interest to maintain the order established by the Treaty of Versailles, and in Hungary’s strategic interest to overthrow the Treaty of Trianon. In consequence, Poland was in favour of preserving the political system in Europe and the Hungarians wanted to abolish it. Despite the above, both countries engaged in mutual cooperation. In my opinion, currently we have no conflicting interests, because the close relations between Hungary and Russia have a tactical rather than a strategic dimension. That cannot be a reason for the lack of cooperation. I believe that Poland and Hungary have a unique position in the Enlarged EU for the fact that they take the sphere of values and traditions quite seriously. This is visible on the example of defending Christians in the Middle East or of various pro-life campaigns, joint actions at demographic summits where the USA, Brazil with its new president, Poland, and Hungary are at the forefront of the countries which are pro-life and stand against the promotion of abortion and which step away from this demoliberal choir, which not only sings the loudest in the EU but also on other continents. I think that strategically Warsaw and Budapest are destined to work with each other, especially in Europe, which is stepping up its interventions. What has Brexit done? Is there any reflection that Great Britain has left the EU also because of being regularly “slapped” by it? The EU establishment decided that what is needed is more sugar in sugar, more integration, and more intensive mixing of this tea. It decided that it is not so much about the enlargement of the EU, because that is impossible for now, but about the deepening of European integration. This will, of course, lead to further attempts to place countries that have different outlooks from the liberal federalist superstate against the wall.
We started our conversation with Brexit and ended it with Brexit, which means that this is an extremely significant event for our continent. Thank you so much for talking to me.
Interview by Marcin Bąk