History /
"GANGING UP" ON POLAND? [99]
Not quite: the Treaty of Riga violated the Treaty of Warsaw, not the other way round.
Right, thanks. That's what I meant to type (really!), except that I haven't been thinking too well as of late. I can survive harsh training conditions, food rationing, dehydration, heat, exhaustion to the point of muscle failure, any psychological trauma I've ever been exposed to... except lack of sleep. Interrogation would probably fail on me, so long as nobody ever thinks to try extended periods of sleep deprivation. =(
I know that Harry but 2 or 3 years of almost virtual existence - I don't call it much of the country.
Thing is, the Polish government did, and made such recognition clear and binding in the Treaty of Warsaw. The writing was very clear: According to all parties involved, an independent Ukrainian nation existed, with defined borders and a right to sovereignty. The writing was also clear on that no separate peace was to be made by one party to the disadvantage of another. Poland did exactly that, which easily constitutes a very cold, hard betrayal. Whether Poland made this decision before or after the signing of the Treaty of Warsaw (when 'circumstances changed') is a matter of little consequence.
If Harry were putting a misleading twist on the truth, or telling only part of it, I assure you that I'd only be all too ready to call him on it. Because I'm not here to participate in a propaganda war; I'm here to discuss Polish Politics and History, and try to see it done as accurately, informatively, and thoroughly as possible. And while I am a Pole, and I do enjoy reading good things about my country more than I do bad, I also value a harsh truth over a pleasant fantasy. So, let's not argue the facts: Poland signed a treaty with the Ukrainians. They then went back on that treaty in such a way as to screw those people over. Overall, I think, Poland's history presents more favorable an image than most, but it's a fairy-tale Poland which has done no wrong in all its existence.
So, I'm not here 'taking sides' on whatever agenda battles may be happening on these forums at this time, but Harry is definitely right here. There's no question about it. He is correct in judging the Polish violation of the Treaty of Warsaw as a betrayal practically a textbook example of 'betrayal' both de jure and de facto. A Harvard Lit professor couldn't construct what appeared to be an effective argument against this fact.
What I didn't find, though, Harry, was the Polonisation procedure as having been what is well described as 'brutal'. Pretty harsh, yes, and by no means something to be supported, but 'brutal' implies 'violent'. And if I recall correctly (which I think I do, though it's hard for me to keep my eyes - er, think right now), the German kulturkampf and Russia's attempted eradication of Polish culture and identity were far worse during those oft-mentioned 200 years of occupation.
