Return PolishForums LIVE
  PolishForums Archive :
Archives - 2005-2009 / News  % width 40

Does Poland benefit from an Eastern, Western, or individualistic alliedship?


George8600 10 | 636  
19 Oct 2009 /  #1
My question reflects the current situation and landlock that Poland finds itself in from the political and economic stance. We saw this with the missile guidance system withdrawal and economic trade factors of both government/military levels and domestic levels. Truth is, where does Poland benefit more? From structuring a more connected future with the East, with Russia. The West, with the EU stronghold and the U.S.? Or keeping to itself?

My contention for the East speaks for itself. Poland in modern times cannot be denied that it has been helped much by its Russian neighbors. Masses within the military arsenals contain Russian made vehicles, tanks, and aircraft. Nearly over a quarter of Poland's energy comes from Russia. Also with Russian mass industries providing to the east (e.g. Gazprom), you have the majority of Poland?s resources like gas, coal, steel, and so forth coming from Russia. All of which could be easily cut off if Poland chooses to make a move forth with the West which would be something like installing a missile defense system; something of which the Kremlin has already shown mass opposition to. It is also obvious that the West would most likely not make up for these resources would Poland be to lose them. Of course, these industrials would be cut off due to the fact that the vast majority of Russia's resources are state-owned. Surely, Russia is a hassle of a partner economic and political wise, however you cannot deny that their allied ship is a valid one. As for the missile defense system, it's obvious that Russia wants to keep the upper-hand in military advantage around the area, and Medvedev/Putin have noted that such a system would be opposed if it were to be installed in any Eastern country (Poland isn't being "picked on"). We see how hard other countries such as Ukraine are currently situated, that are paying nearly double for their gas/resources than the Poles are and that have an overall bad reputation in the Kremlin. However, Ukraine is also a fine example of how Russian dominance can turn faces and be used as a political leash of unresolving power.

My contention for the West is that the West is better trusted. However what they have to offer in terms of resource might not be the best. Up to now the EU has already put weights on the Polish government, which are hard and economically harrowing. Such as forcing the Euro or forcing all Polish central banks to merge with EU central banks. Something which Poland isn't ready for and that the EU only cares about its self-capitalizing interest. Also with such economics into play, would the EU and U.S. be able to sell Poland the economic and military resource it needs that it would lose from Russia? We have already seen instances where Poland hasn't taken it's deserved "piece of the cake" for what it has offered. With the Polish aid in Iraq, the mentioning of such aid has been forgotten. In both of President Bush?s speeches on foreign aid in Iraq he had completely forgotten to mention the Polish aid, and Polish soldiers were dying on the battlefield. Under NATO, there have been many operations upon which the Poles were under resourced and under represented. Under a NATO pact, France was to give Mirage planes, and Germany Leopard tanks and Poland (which has quite a large army) only received a mere fraction of what other nations received. However, on the contrary it is estimated that if Poland were to go into war, that the West and NATO/EU allied ships would do a better job of defending Poland than would the Russians whom have shown little interest in getting involved with military agendas that is other than their own. Also, with Poland?s increasing economy (due to the communist collapse) we can expect Poland's economy to be capitalized enough to support such resource and trade demands from the EU that now seem like strains.

My third contention is an individualistic Poland. According to all the news sources I have read on Poland and European economics, Poland's economy this year will be the only one in Europe, which hasn't been affected by the recession and will be increasing. (Both HDI and GDP wise.) The consumer rates are high and the position for employment is escalating with the unemployment rates having decreased from the 8% it was a couple years ago down to 6.5% as of this year. GDP growth for this year is a whole 5%, while for all other European countries it's a negative percentage of several points. (i.e. Italy is -7%). The export rates and import rates have increased substantially, and the poverty rate has gone from the 15% it was a couple years ago down to 10% (one of the lowest in Europe). All this has been done by Poland alone. So the final argument rests; is Poland best on it's own? Possible, the only ties it needs are economic ones based on industries and corporations and nothing more. Poland itself needs no outside help if so. If history has taught us anything, hasn't Poland benefited the most when other countries kept out of it's soil and business? Possibly a hypocritical statement in modern times, but the numbers do not lie.

So these are my three contentions, please discuss, add our own, and give me your full out opinion.

Thanks for reading!
time means 5 | 1,310  
19 Oct 2009 /  #2
give me your full out opinion.

Too long and i cannot be arsed to read it.
TheOther 6 | 3,692  
19 Oct 2009 /  #3
All this has been done by Poland alone

Poland itself needs no outside help

All this has been done by foreign corporations and with the help of the Polish government, which created the right conditions for investment. Don't be so naive to believe that your country doesn't need any outside help. As soon as the multinational corporations decide that it's more favourable for them somewhere else they drop Poland like a hot potato. Ask the Irish about Dell... . Besides: what would happen to the unemployment rate and other indicators, if the majority of Poles from the UK, Ireland and Sweden would come home?
Wroclaw 44 | 5,384  
19 Oct 2009 /  #4
All this has been done by Poland alone.

TheOther is correct. Google, Dell, IBM, Ikea and countless others didn't just pop over here on the off chance. They were invited and given all sorts of benefits, tax breaks etc. It's the outsiders that are helping Poland... all be it with Polish labour. It would be very naive to suggest otherwise.
OP George8600 10 | 636  
20 Oct 2009 /  #5
I am aware of such. I mentioned it in my contention, that it's Poland alone political and national-wise. Of course, it's the economy that Poland goes about amongst the globalization of Europe.
TheOther 6 | 3,692  
20 Oct 2009 /  #6
I am aware of such

Well, why then did you claim that "All this has been done by Poland alone"?

Possible, the only ties it needs are economic ones based on industries and corporations and nothing more. Poland itself needs no outside help if so.

So, foreign investment in Poland doesn't count as help? What do you think would happen to Poland if the big corporations move on to the next source (= country) of cheap labour and low taxes?
SzwedwPolsce 11 | 1,595  
20 Oct 2009 /  #7
These days no country in Europe can get a good economical development without cooperating with other European countries.

Europe is completely different today than 25 years ago. It's not a very long time, but it's like two different worlds.
OP George8600 10 | 636  
20 Oct 2009 /  #8
I meant no outside help by direct allied ships from countries, unions, or nations. So being that we rule the third contention out. Would you agree with the second or first?
1jola 14 | 1,879  
20 Oct 2009 /  #9
My contention for the East speaks for itself. Poland in modern times cannot be denied that it has been helped much by its Russian neighbors.

Are you posting from the moon and have missed the last century?
Borrka 37 | 594  
20 Oct 2009 /  #10
Good you have already posted your comment.
I would probably have written the same only in some less civil way.

He is not only posting from the moon.
His "facts" and figures are from the moon as well.
jwojcie 2 | 763  
20 Oct 2009 /  #11
Well, George8600, to put it mildly, you seem to be misinformed :-)

Some details (just for example):

Also with Russian mass industries providing to the east (e.g. Gazprom), you have the majority of Poland?s resources like gas, coal, steel, and so forth coming from Russia.

Poland has enough own coal for about 200 years... Power industry in Poland is based on coal (not oil or gas) so Poland is quite safe from that poing of view. There is some import from Russia, but also from RPA for example. Russia isn't in monopolistic position here.

Yes, Poland imports about half of needed steel, but more from EU countries (70% - at least in 2007). Russia isn't in monopolistic position here either...

Yes, Poland imports a lot of oil from Russia, but mostly because it is cheaper. Because of Naftoport Russia isn't in monopolistic position here either...

The only resource where Russia has monopol in Poland is gas but:
- as I wrote it is not main energetic resource in Poland
- in a few years there will be new LNG terminal in Swinoujscie = Russia will lose monopolistic position...
-

countries such as Ukraine are currently situated, that are paying nearly double for their gas/resources than the Poles

=> NOT TRUE, Ukraine is/was paing lower prices. Poland is paing market prices and is significant customer for Gasprom...

Poland in modern times cannot be denied that it has been helped much by its Russian neighbors. Masses within the military arsenals contain Russian made vehicles, tanks, and aircraft.

It is quite controversial to assume, that 50 years of building USSR led army was such beneficial for Polish economy. It was rather waste of resources.

Such as forcing the Euro or forcing all Polish central banks to merge with EU central banks.

Do you know that in Soviets times there was something called "transfer ruble" ? It was para currency used in internal RWPG settlements. There are many differences, overall if I can pick one from the two I would rather have Euro (which doesn't mean I'm entirely for changing PLN for Euro) :-)

Overall, you should rethink your points. My knowledge and experience says:
1. First option - every time in history Poles tried it, voluntarily or not, Russia exploited Poland. Besides, what are you talking about ? Just look what are achivements of CIS or URB. Is that in your opinion alternative for Poland? I have nothing against cooperation with Russia, but alliance as an alternative for the West is not an option.

2. Second option - number of positives vastly exceeds negatives. Besides, historically and culturally is much more natural.

3.

All this has been done by Poland alone

Yes, Poland did well recently but not entirelly alone :-) Try to imagine our position without:
- EU market (for products and jobs)
- image of safe state (because of NATO and EU)
- EU funds for poorer regions...
It would be nice to be like Switzerland, but unfortunately history and geography matters.
Crow 150 | 9,557  
20 Oct 2009 /  #12
Does Poland benefit from an Eastern, Western, or individualistic alliedship?

we shall see

Medvedev is these days in Belgrade
MareGaea 29 | 2,752  
20 Oct 2009 /  #13
Google, Dell, IBM, Ikea

Google, Dell and IBM are only there because of the Eastern European (Slavic) markets. IBM is moving ahead anyway to India or Bulgaria, as these are more favourable at any time. Dell and Google will do so in the not too far distance.

Halleluyah talk aside, we've heard that 15 years ago in Ireland too. And look what happened once the benefits are gone: IBM left, Xerox left, Oracle left, MS left partially, UPS left. More to follow. When the benefits are gone, so are the call centres, quicker than you can say benefits.

It is not wise to build your economy on call centre services alone. I've worked for over a decade in the field and I know that there is not an industry that evaporates as quick as call centres do. This is because they are cheap to create, the only thing expensive might be the building.

Ikea is not a really good example as they are in just about every country, and are a shop, so don't have anything to do with government support.

In short, I would count my chickens before they're hatched and see where the circus stands in 5 to 10 years from now.

But I do think that Poland has benefitted more from the West and the EU than from anything else, emphasizing "Slavic Brotherhood", which has done nothing for PL, economy wise.

>^..^<

M-G (tiens)
Crow 150 | 9,557  
20 Oct 2009 /  #14
IBM

i had expiriance with Polish, Kwidzin`s IBM paper. Very good. Polish products are good

Dell and IBM are only there because of the Eastern European (Slavic) markets

true
MareGaea 29 | 2,752  
20 Oct 2009 /  #15
Polish products are good

Polish products are no better or worse than any other European products. IBM paper is all made in Asia and the US, btw. I worked for IBM once on a blue monday.

They will move their Slavic operations to Sofia soon, believe you me!

>^..^<

M-G (it's all nonsense anyway)
Lodz_The_Boat 32 | 1,535  
20 Oct 2009 /  #16
Slavic operations

Actually Poland or any slavic country have lesser people...and our populations are visibly decreasing....therefore less consumers.

All the people of entire Europe together is 731,000,000. Its including the growing immigrant populations, who are now European aswell. Even this diversified European population is no match for the population of one single countries in e.g. Asia. China is far ahead, so is India... plus, if you join the population of a few Asian countries (and i mean a few) you might end up having a figure far stronger than 731,000,000.

Plus, the fact that our populations are on the decline (apart from some communities whose populations are doing REMARKABLY well, such as the indian or other easter background communities in Europe). E.g. look at Russia... its in such a position that after some decades, or at best a 100 yrs... its not hard to think that we will see a Russian once-in-a-blue-moon...INSIDE RUSSIA! (though Russian are not exactly European... but still I pulled in this example....Poland is going through similar pattern...so is Estonia and Latvia).

ASIA POPULATION: 4,050,404,000
EUROPE POPULATION: 731,000,000
DIFFERENCE (IN FAV. OF ASIA) : 3,319,404,000

Plus, Asia have CONSIDERABLY more young than old. While Europe have CONSIDERABLY more old than young.

Asia: Population dramaticaly increasing
Europe: Population dramaticaly decreasing

(Source: Wikipedia)
Crow 150 | 9,557  
20 Oct 2009 /  #17
IBM paper is all made in Asia and the US, btw. I worked for IBM once on a blue monday.

Mare listen, i don`t know for all IBM paper in the world but, part of it they definitely produce in Polish town of Kwidzin. Please, let me inform you about that.

Polish products are no better or worse than any other European products.

do favour to Poland and don`t interfere in Polish bussines. With such a statements (as that one above) you can ruin it.

They will move their Slavic operations to Sofia soon, believe you me!

i don`t believe it
MareGaea 29 | 2,752  
20 Oct 2009 /  #18
interfere in Polish bussines

Well, since my boys and girls cover anything West of the line NorthCape-Warsaw-Athens hence part of Poland is covered as well for the products they support, I have to deal with Polish business every now and then. Not often, I admit, but every once in a while. Polish customers are like any other customers, some are *ssholes, some are nice. We recently had quite a lot of dealings with PL-customers, as there was a patch released that caused some trouble elsewhere and one of our products was literally killed by it. We had a big company in the Poznan/Wroclaw area coming in with as much as 1500 terminals*) affected :( the lady was very rude to the girl that spoke with her and demanded to speak to the manager. Enter me. Only problem was, I don't speak Polish and she spoke a little English, however, we managed to sort it out in German and although she was a big, BIG biatch when she came in, she left happily and I even got invited by her for a "hot night" as she called it. Probably she meant a wild night or a night out, but that doesn't matter :D I'm kinda good in taking off the heat of angry customers and turn them into nice puppies (true!). And I have gotten them transferred through to me from all countries we cover. What I'm trying to say is that ppl are ppl and customers are all the same, no matter from which country they are. They all respond to some basic tricks. True, you have to know them, but if you do, you can turn even the most angry person happy! It's not even hard to do...I will give some tips if there is an interest on how to deal with angry ppl on the phone? Just let me know :)

Edit: *) and this is not even our biggest client: the biggest has about 300.000 terminals worldwide. Don't wanna think when they do a central distribution of the patch to all their terminals :S

i don`t believe it

Actually I know that this is going to happen within the timeframe of 5 years from now. Xerox has already moved there. Why? Because Bulgaria is pulling the same stunt as Ireland did some 15 odd years ago.

>^..^<

M-G (hates this KillBit patch - causes a lot of extra work I don't need as I have already so much work)
jwojcie 2 | 763  
20 Oct 2009 /  #19
Halleluyah talk aside, we've heard that 15 years ago in Ireland too.

But simple question for you MareGaea is:
would you rather have this 15 years of foreign investements and flourishing Irish economy or 15 years of stagnation? Yes, now Ireland is paing the price of success, but isn't it rather due to speculation bubble in construction? Personally I would rather take a chance and take Irish path and in the same time try to avoid mistakes wich Ireland made. Could Poland be any better I don't know, but it is worth a shot...

PS. Besides IBM, Google, Dell those are just recent names which are famous. In fact foreign investments in Poland are far more diversified, which is exactly why Poland as a whole so far is doing relatively well during this crisis.

PS2. Someone said that sonner or later all production will go to the east. Funny thing is, that in recent years many investments in Poland came from the east (LG, Sharp, yes I know simple assembly job, but still or Mittal Steel). I think that anybody who think that soon entire globe would became duty-free area is just dreaming. I won't gonna happen. Whatever some officials says, true is that EU is veeery effective guardian of internal EU market (to George8600 and that is the main reason why Poland has no other option but join EU).
Crow 150 | 9,557  
23 Oct 2009 /  #20
Does Poland benefit from an Eastern, Western, or individualistic alliedship?

let us see trends

Europe's Dirty Secret, by Rick Rozoff (3-27-00)

Anti-Slavic prejudice - more properly, racism - is a dirty secret in European history.

It reached its most monstrous level of refinement with Hitler, who both 'scientifically' codified and savagely implemented this prevailing view of Slavs as Untermenschen - subhumans. Fifty million human beings lost their lives in World War Two, the majority of them Slavs. Estimates of Soviet dead, which include Jews, Roma and other non-Slav minorities, but which were overwhelmingly Slavic, range as high as thirty million. Additionally, millions of Serbs, Poles and other Slavs were killed in battle or along with Jews and others in death camps.

A resumption, an hysterical revival, of this racism has been dredged up since the beginning of the break up of Yugoslavia in 1991. Often the pronouncements of Western government and media spokespeople are a barely disguised recycling of Nazi race propaganda from the 1930s and 40s. As one British journalist put it a few months ago, this campaign of collective dehumanization (another trick infamously practiced by Hitler, Rosenberg, Goebbels and company) has led to the word Slav being synonymous with criminal. Or subhuman. Or inherently (read: racially) inferior, lazy, dishonest, violent people who deserve all the misery, disease, bombing and eventual physical elimination NATO and IMF/World Bank policies have brought on them.

southern 75 | 7,096  
23 Oct 2009 /  #21
ASIA POPULATION: 4,050,404,000
EUROPE POPULATION: 731,000,000
DIFFERENCE (IN FAV. OF ASIA) : 3,319,404,000

I am lucky.
Crow 150 | 9,557  
23 Oct 2009 /  #22
ASIA POPULATION: 4,050,404,000
EUROPE POPULATION: 731,000,000

this categorization isn`t realistic.

it shoud be >>> [if we speak of Europe, Eurasia and Asia]

CHINESE AND MONGOLIAN POPULATION
INDIAN POPULATION
[optionaly] REST OF ASIAN POPULATION
SLAVIC EUROPEAN-EURASIAN POPULATION
NON-SLAVIC EUROPEAN POPULATION

i believe that no. of total Slavic (Europe and Eurasia) population must be at arround of 350 mil.
Lodz_The_Boat 32 | 1,535  
24 Oct 2009 /  #23
But thats the numbers you can get everywhere. And I didnt bring the numbers from the two American Continents, and Africa ...

Anyways... Asia is a continent...why do you keep wanting to divide people by race. Dont do that Crow my brate... it will not help anything... rather you will be pushed out of the ocean of love, mercy and unity...just as a dead fish from a living Ocean!
Crow 150 | 9,557  
24 Oct 2009 /  #24
why do you keep wanting to divide people by race. Dont do that Crow my brate... it will not help anything... rather you will be pushed out of the ocean of love, mercy and unity...just as a dead fish from a living Ocean!

i don`t divide people by race. What i presented are civilizations

take NON-SLAVIC EUROPEAN POPULATION that i mentioned above, just for example. God knows that those aren`t exclusively whites
southern 75 | 7,096  
24 Oct 2009 /  #25
i believe that no. of total Slavic (Europe and Eurasia) population must be at arround of 350 mil.

142 million Russians+38 million Poles+46 million Ukrainians+10 million Belarus+10 million Czechs+5 million Slovaks+10 million Serbs+4.5 million Croats+2 million Slovenians+8 million Bulgarians=285.5 millions.If we add the slavic populations of Hungary,Romania,Moldova,Latvia we get close to 300 millions.

Non-slavic european population includes albos as well and it is a confusing term.I would devide into
1.Germanic population
2.Slavic population
3.Mediteranean population
4.Albos
Lodz_The_Boat 32 | 1,535  
24 Oct 2009 /  #26
Non-slavic european population includes albos as well and it is a confusing term.I would devide into
1.Germanic population
2.Slavic population
3.Mediteranean population
4.Albos

What about the various migrants who has been in Europe for cnsiderable generations...and who have determined to be European in their own generations. I know a good number of such good people.

And what about Gypsies and Romani ppl... and what about the Tara ppl... what about the Scandinavieans....

Southern... you are biased.
Bratwurst Boy 12 | 11,359  
24 Oct 2009 /  #27
Non-slavic european population includes albos as well and it is a confusing term.I would devide into
1.Germanic population
2.Slavic population
3.Mediteranean population
4.Albos

You forgot the Celts!

Scandinavieans

Erm...last time I looked Scandinavian belong to the Germanics...*rolls eyes*

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanic_Europe

Population Approximately 200 million

Countries Official language: 7
Co-Official: 7
Total: 14

Most populous country Germany

Largest GDP by Country Germany

Largest country Sweden

Languages German, English, Dutch, Swedish, Norwegian, Danish, Icelandic, Faroese, Frisian and Luxembourgish

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavic_Europe
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_Europe
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediterranean
Lodz_The_Boat 32 | 1,535  
24 Oct 2009 /  #28
Erm...last time I looked Scandinavian belong to the Germanics...*rolls eyes*

I dont believe you.... 'roll eye too'
Bratwurst Boy 12 | 11,359  
24 Oct 2009 /  #29
I dont believe you

You don't have to...just check the facts!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandinavia

Scandinavia[1] is a geographical region in northern Europe that includes, and is named after, the Scanian Province. Its extension is matter of some debate, with some authorities limiting it to Norway, Sweden, and Denmark.[2] and other authorities including Finland and Iceland,[3][4].

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandinavians

Scandinavians are a group of Germanic peoples, inhabiting Scandinavia: Denmark, Norway and Sweden, as well as Iceland and the Faroe Islands, as well as Finland Swedes in Finland, as well as descendants in many other countries, especially in the United Kingdom and the United States. The Scandinavians were known as norsemen in the middle ages.

southern 75 | 7,096  
24 Oct 2009 /  #30
It is obvious that Scandinavians are germanic.They have so much in common.Swedish and norwegian SS fought for the Reich till the last minute.I have a small doubt about the Finns since there is also this hungarian-turko-finnish heritage.

In wikipedia there are the following categories of european people
1.Germanics
2.Slavs
3.Celts
4.Latin origin
5.Turkics

Archives - 2005-2009 / News / Does Poland benefit from an Eastern, Western, or individualistic alliedship?Archived