History / For what the Germans owe Poland one trillion U.S. dollars? [299]

Polish government moves to quell demands for German reparations

lmtonline.com/news/article/Polish-government-moves-to-quell-demands-for-11859187.php

To be honest, I am surprised that the treaties of 1990 and 1991 between Germany and Poland don't get more attention, probably because they are damning for the Polish case. To clarify, back the Polish government intented a final recognition of the Oder-Neisse-line by the German government, which the German government granted, with the addition that the issues of reparations also had to be permanently settled (this was discussed between Helmut Kohl and Tadeusz Mazowieck). Germany agreed that it would pay several bns in reparation via funds, and the Polish government readily accepted, knowing that there was no way Bonn could be expected to pay more than that, and also having received the pledge by Kohl that he would offer Poland cheap credits and do everything he could in helping Poland enter the EU as soon as possible. It was in total a very good deal for Poland back then under the circumstances (if Warsaw had not been so paranoid about the Oder-Neisse-line and focused more on other issues, they might even have received more, but that is on them).

News / Roman Polanski accused of unlawful sex with a minor [403]

The whole case is just a mess. I feel sorry for the victim, who was raped as a child and is constantly reminded of that by people who want an interview with her.

If it is true what I have read, that the plea bargain was initially made to spare the victim the media circus of a public trial (which is sensible and often done in other countries as well, although the USA might be more generous regarding the terms they offer the culprit), then the current situation is not without some sort of bitter irony.

History / For what the Germans owe Poland one trillion U.S. dollars? [299]


It only pops up because politicians like JK want to use it to distract their voters from the real issues at hand. Nothing Germany could do would prevent him and his ilk to use this in the future. Germany and Poland had a good relationship in the years before 2015, with Poland enjoying an increasing amount of influence in European matters. Unfortunately PiS has managed to curb this progress.


Germany has great interest in having a stable, democratic Poland as neighbour and trading partner. It will do all it can to assure this. What the EU currently does is not on behalf of Germany, but on behalf of the rest of the EU. If you are a member of the EU, having a functioning democracy with judicial independence is not merely a domestic issue but concerns the rest of the EU as well.


Yes going downhill. One of the lowest unemployment rates in history, highest tax revenues et al.

I have noticed that after the refugee crisis a lot of foreign newspapers have painted a very bizarre picture of Germany, as if we were still in the middle of the refugee crisis. The situation is under control now and as things are standing, Germany will probably benefit long term from the new workers.

History / For what the Germans owe Poland one trillion U.S. dollars? [299]


Why, the whole issue couldn't be clearer from a legal point of view? There is nothing to clarify here, Germany has no legal obligation to pay any further reparations to Poland. If this goes to a court, the inevitable ruling against Poland would only be used by JK to claim that there is a conspiracy against Poland.


There is another article that deals with the aftermath of the Sejm's declaration:

dw.com/en/for-berlin-the-question-of-polish-reparations-was-settled-long-ago/a-39972576



I am not disputing this. Germany has brought terrible suffering among Poland, but it is also worth mentioning that as an reaction Germany has tried to be as accomodating to Poland as possible during the last few decades. It was Germany who e.g. insisted that Poland could join the EU as soon as possible, with Poland receiving a lot of money via the structural funds over the years. Germany and Poland have reconciled and have signed treaties that solved the issue legally and politically. It is time to leave the past behind and not open this issue again that will only serve to poison German-Polish relations without any benefit to either side, since Poland will definitely get no further reparations from Germany and it will only add validty to the claims of the Germans expelled from Poland.

Personally I would not object e.g. if as an reaction Germany would be creating a new fund that e.g. allows young people from both countries to visit each other, to get a better understanding. But it is just ridiculous to expect that Germans could be guilt-tripped to pay e.g. 100bn€ for the crimes of (in my case) great-grandfathers when the issue has long been solved.

History / For what the Germans owe Poland one trillion U.S. dollars? [299]


This is legally speaking of no consequence as explained. From what I have read, there are still treaties in effect that were signed by said government.


As if such a thing matters in international relations. Like it or not, the government in Poland was eventually recognized by the whole world, as evidenced by the fact that every country had full diplomatic missions in Poland.

Bit even if you decide against any basis that the treaty of 1954 (and 1970) somehow doesnt count, there is still the matter of fact that a democratic Polish government sogned a treaty with Germany in 1991 that confirmed among other things that apart of some reparation for Polish individuals no further reparations would be claimed.

History / For what the Germans owe Poland one trillion U.S. dollars? [299]

Regarding Merkel, the video starts by showing a passage of her speech printed by a newspaper:

"Wir haben unendliches Leid über die Welt gebracht!" We have brought endless suffering upon the world.

Totally downplaying German responsiblity here.... .


I am neither of those, but I will end up voting for Merkel because for all her faults, she is the best Germany has to offer right now.

I just don't like if people (or in this case politicians like JK) make blatantly untrue statements.

History / For what the Germans owe Poland one trillion U.S. dollars? [299]


I am simply stating the facts here. Merkel has in the past hold several speeches in which she apologized for German atrocities and German responsibility for WWII. Here is a longer speech of her in Gdansk from 2009 (unfortuntaly only in German, but there are probably English translations as well). You could find other examples if you have the time. How anyone can claim that German politicians have not apologized enough is beyond me.

youtube.com/watch?v=aRBRN5maifU

@dolnoslask


The term was apparantly used in a promotion, not in the documentation itself. There is apparantly nothing to criticize the documentation for.

It is very strange that Poland is so defensive on this issue against a media outlet that shows many documentations about the crimes comitted by Germans and which is situated in a country where Holocaust denial is a criminal offence. There is simply no need to distinguish in Germany about this. Germans know more about this part of their history than any other. Visiting a KZ in school is basically mandatory. If nothing else it is just bizarre to feel the need to sue for this.


No it is not. ZDF is owned by the state, but independent in its' programe.

There are simply stricter laws regarding hate speech in Germany, because of our memories of the Weimar Republic where hatred could be incited unopposed.

History / For what the Germans owe Poland one trillion U.S. dollars? [299]

@dolnoslask


None of what you wrote here has any basis in reality. German are politicians regulary very open about what happened and are not shy from stating it on public occasions. Which makes JK's statement that German politicians have not apologized enough all the more baffling.

Secondly, the term "Polish death camps" is inherently misleading and hardly used in the English media, let alone in German (I have never read the German translation "Polnische Konzentrationslager" before).

Thirdly, Germany has not meddled into Polish affairs. The EU is currently investigating because the Polish government might have violated EU treaties, which makes it an European affair by default. If a country joins an organization, it has to adhere to its' rules or it will get into trouble. Poland agreed to uphold certain democratic and judicial standards, breaking them will have consequences.

History / For what the Germans owe Poland one trillion U.S. dollars? [299]


Simple, he wanted to keep Poland dependent on the SU, because Poland would need the SU to defend them against German attempts to revise the border.


The areas especially in Silesia had still vastly more economic potential than the areas in the East. That the areas in now Western Poland were far more valuable both in terms of ressources and industrial capabilities (far from everything was destroyed) than those lost in the East is not up to any debate, it is a fact.


All of that is covered in the existing treaties. There were in total 5 times when the issue of reparations was adressed for Poland: 1. Potsdam Agreement 2. The treaty with the GDR 3. Warsaw treaty 4. 4+2 treaty 1990 and 5. the border treaty with Germany in 1991.

The point is that Poland has time and time again refirmed its' position to not seek further reparations against Germany, and signed treaties confirming this. There is hardly any modern conflict in which the reparation issue has been dealt with as conclusively as between Poland and Germany.


It doesn't matter, those claims would still have to be made by the Polish state, who has signed off any claims for future reparations.

History / For what the Germans owe Poland one trillion U.S. dollars? [299]


Several treaties in which Germany agreed to pay reparations to them.

Poland has in 1954 signed a treaty in which it waved off its' claims to further reparations, regarding Germany as a whole (not only the GDR, because the GDR was for them the legitimate German government).

Poland decided to stick to this decision during the negotiations for the treaty of Warsaw (1970) and later during negotiations for German reunifications. Germany in return agreed to pay bns voluntarily to the victims and gave Poland cheap loans which Poland craved.

In short, there is no legal basis for any further claims on Polish sides.

History / For what the Germans owe Poland one trillion U.S. dollars? [299]


That would be an issue e.g. between Poland and the Ukraine/Russia, which would have nothing to do withe claims against Germany, or claims Germans would have against Poland.


This is not true, the people who ended up in charge thanks to Stalin very much supported those. But admittedly in the end it was Stalin who decided what was done


Pointing out that the current Polish government is harming Polish long-term interests. As your language indicates, those who favour the current approach are not guided by logic and have seemingly no understanding for the implications of those decisions. Poland has nothing to gain from those claims, because as pointed out they are legally non-existing.

History / For what the Germans owe Poland one trillion U.S. dollars? [299]

@Ziemowit


I have recently written a university paper about the Oder-Neisse-line and from what I have remembered, the issue of reparations is legally closed. The arguments are as such:

1. Article IV. of the Potsdam Protocol deals with the issue of reparations, there is a passage regarding Poland:

"The U. S. S. R. undertakes to settle the reparation claims of Poland from its own share of reparations."

The SU took huge parts of the German industry, money and natural ressources as reparations. I don't know how much ended up in Poland, but that would be up to the SU. It is worth pointing out that until the border treaty between Germany and Poland in 1991, Poland insisted that the Potsdam Protocol was absolute (because it wanted the Oder-Neisse-line to be final).

2. Poland agreed to wave its' rights to reparations with the GDR. The fact that neither country was a democracy is from a legal point of view completely inconsequential, otherwise it would be impossible to get legal agreements with non-democracy. It is also completely inconsequential if those treaties were signed under outside pressure, because then peace treaties would of course also become in general not binding. So JK's argument is completely ridiculous.

3. Germany and Poland agreed to solve the issue permanently during the negotiations for the border-treaty in 1991. Germany created a foundation that paid out several bns to Polish victims of the war.

Besides, it is not really in Poland's interest to open this can of worms. Because then those Germans who were expelled could demand reparations for their lost property (the Potsdam agreement that legally allowed those expulsions would become non-binding due to Poland's insistence) and there is also the issue of looted art (the Berlinka collection for example) which Berlin has so far not pressed because of respect to Polish sensitives, but would also become open to discussion.


That would be an issue you would have to discuss with Russia. However regarding Germany, the intent of the Potsdam Agreement was very clear. Poland would receive German land and property and additionally whatever the SU would deem suitable from their part of the reparations. There is no additional claim here. And strictly speaking, the German territory was far more valuable (in terms of ressources and industry) than the part lost in the East.

News / EU confirms it will take action against Poland over court reforms [554]


You know we aren't living in the 1940s anymore right?


As if there was any need for this. It is not the EU that still clings to the conspiracy theory against all evidence that Russia murdered the Polish president. Kaczynski does not need any encouragement for his enmity against Russia.

News / Was Kaczyński behind the presidential veto? [65]


Having a functioning rule of law is more than "status quo". And PiS didn't pledge to destroy the Judicial independence in Poland in the election campaign. And even if they did and had been elected regardless, it would be the duty of any citizen to oppose them.

News / EU confirms it will take action against Poland over court reforms [554]

To those who believe that Poland could do easily without EU money, it is worth remembering that Warsaw receives in structural funds more money than it actually spends on defence. Poland would lose a vital factor for its' current economic growth.


Is this really how you envision Poland's future? Completely isolated in Europe, whose only allies are either increasingly desinterested in European affairs, or more occupied with their own unstable neighbourhood in the ME?

News / EU confirms it will take action against Poland over court reforms [554]

Good. Europe has abonded Poland too often in the past. It is reassuring to know that the EU has the back of the Poles who understand the truly dangerous implications of the proposed law.

News / Was Kaczyński behind the presidential veto? [65]

The situation in Poland is really bizarre. I mean are there any other examples in functioning democracies where a politician without official position seems to be pulling the strings off both the president and the prime minister?

News / Officials in Poland are hailing an upcoming visit by Donald Trump [720]


Trade partnerships can be destroyed easily, bbutit takes time to develop them, especially if you want a particulary close partnership. Germany is an ideal trading partner, because it is geographically close, has large and wealthy population that seek Polish services and thanks to its' higher wage structure, has trouble with competing with Polish competition. No other country fullfills all those criterias. It would be utterly foolish to throw this away.

News / Officials in Poland are hailing an upcoming visit by Donald Trump [720]


I don't forget them, but they are simply not relevant for the discussion at hand. We are talking about Nato here, and whether or not Europe has recently failed up to its' commitment.

The current argument by Trump is that Europe has been "freeloading" on American support. As pointed out however, there has been only one instance so far when Nato had to defend one of its' member states and in which the European allies fully lived up to their commitment. The war in question is btw. far from over, and will likely be a drain on ressources and lifes for quite some time. That the president of the USA dares to belittle European contribution while there are still Europeans stationed in Afghanistan is nothing short of insulting.

It also absurd that Trump claims that European countries "owe" money to the USA. Firstly, even if member states agree to spend more on defence, this money won't go to the USA, but will be spent on each country's own military. Secondly, even if Europeans spend more on defence, would this necessarily mean that American tax payers would have to pay less overall? Trump has after all announced to increase American defence budget, despite the fact that other Nato have also started to increase spending. Even if Nato allies would met the 2% aim already in 2017, the USA would still be paying more than before.

News / Officials in Poland are hailing an upcoming visit by Donald Trump [720]


So no problems here. We have to reach the target until 2024, not before. Why is it so difficult for some Americans to understand this? We have to reach the target by 2024, nor 2017!


Such demands were even more ridiculous back then. I mean would anyone suggest today that there were not enough soldiers in Europe during the Cold War?

Those European soldiers died in Afghanistan for the defense of the USA after 9/11. How many Americans have died on behalf of Europe?

News / Officials in Poland are hailing an upcoming visit by Donald Trump [720]


And it will continue to do so probably until 2023. And as everyone could tell Trump, Germany and other countries are thus fully living up to their commitment. The agreement was that Nato members should reach the 2% in 2024 not 2017.

Besides, I find it incredibly arrogant of the USA to accuse other NATO allies of freeloading. Nato has so far been involved in one war. When it came to the defence of the USA. Hundreds of Europeans died in Afghanistan. Dont their sacrifice count for anything?

News / Officials in Poland are hailing an upcoming visit by Donald Trump [720]


The better question, who doesn't support Germany regularly in Europe? In most crucial matters, e.g. regarding Greece, sanctions against Russia et al. most countries agree with Germany.

And which of those countries do you sincerely expect to side with Poland against the EU when in question? No one was willing to support Warsaw against the reelection of Tusk. And since both the EU and Germany offer all countries of the Seven sea initiave better economic incencitive, you can be sure that they won't side with Warsaw against Brussels or Berlin.

The USA won't be of much help either in most matters because they are shifting their attention to Asia.

News / Officials in Poland are hailing an upcoming visit by Donald Trump [720]


Strictly speaking, a lot more Syrians have died so far that Ukrainians. And unlike the Ukraine, there are not many places that are relatively safe.


Let's just hope that Poland won't have to rely on the support of the countries that are affected by the refugee crisis in the foreseeable future. Things might get ugly though.

telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/12/italy-calls-for-eu-funding-to-be-cut-to-eastern-european-countri

Imagine for example, that no agreement is reached with London about EU foreigner because some countries like Italy want a hard Brexit. 100.000s of Poles would be directly affected, partly of the Polish refusal to take in a few thousand refugees. Is this a proportional equation?

News / Officials in Poland are hailing an upcoming visit by Donald Trump [720]


We have too many people here, mostly left-wing anarchists who take advantage of the restrain of the German police. But honestly, violence around G20 summits is nothing new and happens in very country where the police is not allowed to shoot people.

News / Officials in Poland are hailing an upcoming visit by Donald Trump [720]


Well, not like there are real alternatives left there. They can choose between the butcher Assad, Al-Quaida and the IS. I would not want to risk my life for any of those guys. And shouldn't you also by the same logic have contempt for the Ukrainians who left their country, instead of fighting for it. Not to mention that there are large areas in the country that are safe?


Poland has agreed like the other EU member states to share some of its sovereignity and accept decisions that are based upon majority votes.

All I am saying is that the current Polish government is using an issue that would realistically speaking have only a slight impact on Poland - we are talking about a few thousand refugees here - in order to gain domestic approval by alienating its' allies in Europe. You can be sure that none of the affected countries will forget this any time soon. Even disregarding the potential financial damage to Poland caused by a potential reduction of the structural funds. Is Poland really in a position where it can afford this? I have no doubt that if the Ukraine crisis had happened today, Merkel would have never been able to get countries like Italy to support sanctions (something that Warsaw very much wants) against Russia. Warsaw might also find it difficult to get its' voice heard during the negotiations with the UK, where Poland wants to limit the fallout of Brexit, while other countries want to have a tough strategy towards London. It might also harm Polish interests in other ways. I recently attented a lecture about European-Russian relations, and one former German ambassador to Russia attented. He spoke about the North Stream project, and supposedly the German government was considering to remove its' support for the project for some time, because it believed that most European governments would voice its' opposition out of consideration. But apparantly several Southern European countries have reconsidered its' opposition, which is why it is not clear that the EU will veto this, which seemed very clear two years ago. Even Italy, who was noticeable angry with Berlin because it had to cancel a promising project with Moscow due to the sanctions has softened its' criticism. So if it was Poland's aim to prevent North Stream, it has not helped its' cause at all. I am saying this as someone who disapproves of the project mind you.

In short, I don't think that Warsaw has followed a productive strategy in its' foreign policy and it might end up in trouble over time.

News / Officials in Poland are hailing an upcoming visit by Donald Trump [720]

Strange, that such a supposedly religious and christian country is so insecure about its' ability to deal with a few thousand refugees.

News / Officials in Poland are hailing an upcoming visit by Donald Trump [720]


The simple truth is, that Poland is increasingly isolated in Europe. It doesn't have 12 allies it can rely on when push comes to shove. It doesn't have 4. Hell, it might not even have one, not even Hungary backed them against Tusk. There is no need for any strong German reaction towards Poland. If Warsaw maintains its' current course, it will be increasingly sidelined on European affairs, which I'd find regrettable.

News / Officials in Poland are hailing an upcoming visit by Donald Trump [720]


Saudi-Arabia is hardly an example for human rights, certainly none Poland would want to be compared to.


There is hardly a better example for European solidarity than the Ukraine and the aftermath of the Russian annexion of Crimea. The EU condemned the violation of the Ukraine by Russia, imposed costly sanctions and there are now European troops under Nato leadership stationed in Poland and the Baltic states.

News / Officials in Poland are hailing an upcoming visit by Donald Trump [720]

As if a few thousand more would make any noticeable difference. But again, this is simply a matter of solidarity. Poland has decided that it doesn't want those refugees and I doubt that they'll be forced to take them down the line. I just don't believe it to be smart to sacrifice potentially bns of Euro each year just for that which will most likely become a consequence of Warsaw's refusal.

News / Officials in Poland are hailing an upcoming visit by Donald Trump [720]


Yet, when in doubt, they'll always side with Germany instead of Poland. How many countries have sided with Warsaw against Tusk again? The secret behind Merkel's succees is that she knows how to build European alliances, and how to get the smaller countries on board. For example, many smaller countries were very concerned that Greece would be treated to leniently, and Merkel helped to convince them otherwise.

Regarding refugees, this is a matter of European solidarity. Eastern Europe and particulary Poland has received a lot of European support in form of structural funds over the years. It also has lobbied for European support since Russia became more active in Eastern Europe and Germany in particular has sacrificed a lot of its formerly good economic relation with Russia to stop Putin via sanctions (the Western country that is even more afflicted, Italy, is currently suffering the most along with Greece under the refugee crisis). Is it really too much to ask that Poland for once makes a small concession on the refugee issue?


At this point, I wouldn't be against such a solution, yet I am pretty sure that Poland hasn't offered any financial assistance to either Italy, Greece or Germany for dealing with the refugees. On the long run, I expect however this to be the solution. There are already talks about how the EU budget will be organized after Brexit, and it looks like the structural funds will be slashed, probably by more than 50%. Additionally some money might go to the countries who are taking in most of the refugees.