Polish attitudes towards ex-Soviet republics joining NATO

I spend a lot of time following the discourse inside Ukraine and Georgia regarding potential future NATO membership. There's a definite plurality in favor of membership in both countries (something like 50%+ in Ukraine, 70%+ in Georgia).

The United States, the three Baltic countries, and Poland have been the champions of Ukrainian/Georgian membership, while Germany and France are resolutely opposed.

To what extent is Poland's support for Ukrainian membership a product of PiS's hawkish foreign policy on Russia? Is this, in fact, a bipartisan position that won't change regardless of who is in office? Is there actual across-the-board support among the population?

If Ukraine joins the alliance, and is then later attacked by Russia - how do average Poles feel about the prospect of sending Polish soldiers to protect Ukrainian sovereignty?

Probably heroic and, later, dead. Just like during that stupid Warsaw Uprising in 44.

Ukraine is already under attack (and occupation) by Russia, which is as belligerent as it has always been.

Obviously, Ukraine is not in NATO at the moment, and thus Poland is under no legal obligation to defend it. That would not be the case if Ukraine were to be admitted.

As far as I know, previous governments didn`t object to Ukrainian access to NATO.


If tragedy happens and Poland is ruled by a radical nationalist government, they will certainly withdraw Poland`s support as they still consider Ukrainians as enemies while Russians are OK to them.

tvn24.pl/wiadomosci-z-kraju,3/korwin-mikke-w-tvn24-ukraina-jest-naszym-wrogiem-nie-rosja,585383.html


Certainly there is no general objection to it.

As for your last question how average Poles would feel about the prospect of sending Polish soldiers to protect Ukrainian sovereignty it is impossible to answer it today. Ukrainian membership won`t take place within decades, or at least as long as they have issues with Russia and that is going to last for a long time. Hardly anybody in Poland is thinking about such distant future now, only political experts and visionary politicians, I suppose.

BS. Russia is "belligerent" as the US was during the Cuban crisis in the sixties and it would be today if Russia installed their nukes in Canada or Mexico. Then, you would see what "belligerent" really is.

My best advice to Poland: f*** off Russia. You would lose because the US army is a social club and a politically correct experiment to promote gays, trannies, and the feminazis, not to defend the US or anyone else.

Did you know that the US army is now doing babysitting duty for the illegal Latino human waste at the US border instead of deploying snipers with the orders to shoot to kill the invaders?

Why blame Russia for crisis that was created by EU and US? If Polish leadership have a nerve to say truth, we would now talk of Poland leaving NATO and EU to their own problem that they created to themselves.

Why? Because to the simpletons, Russia - evil. EU and US - good. 99% out there operate at this level of sophistication. It makes life simple to live and to enjoy watching football. Or soccer.

I`m not sure of this.

If you enter heads of Poles you would actually find that they think how are today`s Poland`s allied countries and peoples- speaking of leading NATO countries, evil and even utterly evil, much much more evil then Russia. Sure, Poles believe, due to historical reasons, how is Russian elite very capable to be evil but again that same feeling Poles have on elites of leading NATO countries.

So no. Evil isn`t crucial word. Feeling that Poles have on Russia is backwardness. Poles comprehend Russia as backward. That feeling Russia must fight to regain trust of Poles and become partner to Poland. Russia must be world power not only by its arms but also by its standard of living. And, yes, to regain trust of Poles, Russia must continue to be trustworthy friend of Hungary and Serbia.

What I never understood is how growing up in California and being around Armenians and msotly non Polish, thus people fromr epublics, how they all spoke Russian even the ones growing up in CA and how they embraced being russians. Ever Armenians in jails and in the ice facilities where theya re all over in California and where I have spent a significant ammount of my adukthood in California, they always claim russian. Polish on the other hand never claim russian anywhere and they look more similar to Russians than Armanians. Crow, can you explain it? even serbs I knew there were russifie dor friends with Russians? what is the deal with this Polonia there?

You can`t understand because you look from your angle. But what is their, Armenian, world? Their world is between China and Russia, as closest big powers. Russia is even closer. Armenians look more like Russians, Europoid. Religion heritage of Russia is closer and, again, you have at work element such is `backwardness`. Just this time that element works in favor of Russia because China is seen as more backward then Russia. Plus, you have one element that is often underestimated but always present. That is element of meta-ethnicity. While Armenians now aren`t Slavs, in their meta-ethnicity, they were Slavs (ie Sarmatians).


Most prevailing force that control emotions of Poles on Russia is element of `backwardness`. Russians are seen as backward and Poles easily eliminate option of taking Russia seriously. Then, you have additional elements and that is `religious` and `meta-ethnicity`. Neither of these two factors, among Poles, works in favor of Russia. Actually, meta-ethnicity works only partially. Why is this so?

Religious element is under control of outside factor and that is Vatican. Its power opposed to anything Slavic and rather allied with Germanics, Anglos and even with Islam. With its network of influence Vatican always keep safe that element of `backwardness` on its side, always reminding Poles how are Russians more backward then Poles, then western Europeans. Now, Vatican is right, there. Russia is more backward but, what Vatican hide is key truth and that is- Russia isn`t key problem to Poland. Vatican itself, as outside ruler, with outside interests, is key problem to Poles. That is the force that erasing difference between Poles and western Europeans making Poles prepared to be easily subjugated and assimilated by anyone who coming from west of Europe.

Now what is with `meta-ethnicity` element? Poles are Slavs. Its true. They share it with Russians. But, problem is that in their meta-ethnicity Poles rather see themselves as Sarmatians (ie Serbians), what is same as Slavs but actually represent older original. See, Russians are Sarmats (ie Serbs) themselves but they were far from old center when cataclysm induced by Romans occurred and Russians made profit from switching to use of term `Slavs` (younger, alternative ethnic name to all Sarmats) and they invested effort to make name of `Slavjani` glorious. Polish elite, on the contrary, didn`t make business of switching to `Slavic` name. Poles were closer (even part of very center), to the old center and they suffered fate of old center most directly- in full. The glory of Sarmatian time, when Polish warlords controlled The Amber trade route, was never repeated. Since Romans disrupted Amber routes, Poles live in humiliation.

So, one and only Russian way to play on `meta-ethnicity` element among Poles is to support Serbs- last Sarmats that still using Sarmatian ethnic name as their own ethnic name. And Russians doing so. That way Russians shows how they themselves obey to the significance of old center and therefore giving up from their own selfish dictate and dominance, opening doors to talks of `Sharing the power with Poles.` And that is why behave of Russian politics suggests that Russia do support formation of Intermarium, ie Central-European Union. Sharing power with Poles is minimal price that are Russians ready to pay. They will pay it and they would see how western Europe losing its grip over the Eastern Europe and then would Central-European Union become `tampon zone` between western Europe and Russia.

Ouch! Don't tell any Ukrainians this. The outgoing president, Petro Poroshenko, had been promising NATO and EU membership by 2024. (pravda.com.ua/news/2019/02/3/7205633/)

I agree with you, Pawian, that membership is a very distant prospect. First and foremost, because of the unresolved territorial conflicts in both countries (Donbas, Crimea; Abkhazia, South Ossetia). Admitting these countries while the conflicts remain unresolved means putting NATO on a collision course with Russia. This is totally unpalatable for the French and Germans. However, there may be some appetite for this in the States, the Baltics, and Poland.

I didn't want to premeditate the result of the thread by opening with the above, disqualifying facts. This is because, you and I could be completely wrong. In 1985, very few would have predicted the collapse of the Iron Curtain and the disintegration of the USSR into 15 countries just 5 years into the future. Similar things can happen in the not so distant future. We live in an interesting world.

He genuinely wanted it, however it was only an illusion. Russia would regard it as an act of agression unfortunately.


There will be bad things and good things. Evil things too.

Petro is very controversial man, you know. He promote EU, while have factory that produce delicious and high quality chocolate in Russia. So, one have to presume that Petro don`t fear EU economic blockade of Russia or, in other words, one have to presume that Petro very well knows how is one thing to speak of EU and quite different thing for Ukraine to become member. This situation quite well work in favor of Petro`s chocolate production. Obviously, didn`t work well for his status of president, for which he, also obviously, don`t care.

I won`t, of course. :) But they need to be realistic, too.


I am afraid you overestimate the US engagement in aiding Ukraine now and mistake it for real support for Ukrainian membership. I would prefer to be cautious here. As for Poland and the Baltics, let`s be realistic again - they are not heavy weight players in NATO.


Do you suggest a disintegration of Russia might take place? :) That would be the only situation allowing Ukraine join NATO. Or not? Disintegrated or not, Russia will still have issues with Crimea and Donbas. The case is closed for decades, again.

I doubt that will happen, but none of us forsaw the collapse of Russian controled Eastern Europe either.

But you know that the disintegration of Russia will be preceded or followed by the civil war there. Who will control the nukes? Winners. What will be their agenda? :)

I said that I doubt it will happen, but implied that we cannot foretell the future.
Why are you asking me random questions that I did not address in my post?

Prime Minister Morawiecki described the current sad state of the EU perfectly:

EU must return to its roots: Polish PM

Morawiecki argued that "the answer to...crises in Brussels has been to centralize power, forget about democracy, transparency and accountability, and disregard national sovereignty."

thenews.pl/1/10/Artykul/418118,EU-must-return-to-its-roots-Polish-PM

His words would certainly not have been misplaced had he been describing the PRL regime.

History shows over and over again that leftists should be given no quarter when it comes to having a say in national policies or matters affecting people's education, welfare, well-being and livelihood.

If you view them as random and complain in result, then our discussion is in fact useless. :) and we can close it.
Or, I will give you one more chance - think hard and try to arrive at a conclusion: why did I ask them and why aren`t they random? Now you have an opportunity to use some intelligence. :)

Sorry, no, but I see how what I wrote is confusing (mind you, a lot of Ukrainians do think Russia will fall apart any day now). I just wanted to use the collapse of the Iron Curtain, and the disintegration of the USSR as spectacular illustrations from recent history of how it's dangerous to dismiss certain hypotheticals as totally unlikely. Ukraine and Georgia joining NATO is just such a hypothetical - seemingly impossible, but given past volatility not improbable.

To Ukrainian minds it's pretty preposterous to say that they have to wait decades more before being allowed into the club. Poland joined NATO in 1999, and the EU in 2004. Being 20 years behind Poland is a fair enough number to Ukrainians, I think, though they would have liked things to happen even faster of course. If they were told they were going to be 50 years behind Poland, that would certainly be very hard for them to swallow. One of the tropes you hear most often from politicians and laymen that lament the current state of affairs on UKR tv is - "in 1991 Ukraine had 50 million people, a territory larger than France, and an economy larger than Poland's". That is, it's immensely embarrassing to Ukrainians how Poland has leapfrogged them in development and now plays a much weightier role in Europe. If they need to wait 50 years, they just might do an Erdogan and go back to Russia/China.

Ukrainian politicians talk every single day about how they are the "Shield on Europe's Eastern Frontier", "the only thing between Europe and the Horde", and all sorts of other points about how the Euro-Atlantic community basically owes Ukraine a big one for doing all the heavy lifting in combating Russian malign influence. They definitely expect to be let into NATO soon, not decades from now. When and if the realization that that is not happening sinks in, there'll be a nasty, nasty backlash.

Yes, they migh feel like that. But you mentioned 1991. Don`t forget that for many years since then most Ukrainians were against joining NATO and undecided about EU. Their attitude has changed only recently, after Russian aggression.

Unfortunately, Ukraine missed an important moment in history when Russia was weak. Poland didn`t - all political forces, including post communists, worked hard for Polish membership both in NATO and EU. And the society was unanimous too.

Ukraine wasn`t so lucky and now will have to wait ad infinitum, I am afraid. Pity, indeed. .

Sadly they have never been able to decide who's side they are on, their history is that of sucking up to whomever they think will be the victor.

WWII for instance, on minute they are commies next minute they are Nazis, then back again to being commies.

And now they want to be in the EU and NATO, but they will be in for a shock when they are not allowed in, only to run back and hide under Putins petticoat.

Ukraine = Joke.

Dolno, now you are talking like a true obsessed nationalist who is blind to simple facts.

It is obvious for all rationally thinking observers that Poles should support Ukrainian aspirations towards West.

A more pro-Western Ukraine leads to a more secure Poland by moving East-West borderline further to the East. Just like Germans secured their Eastern frontier by backing Polish access into the EU and NATO.

How? If Russia gains full control of Ukraine, it will lead to Poland becoming a border country directly involved in new Cold War because the subjugation of whole Ukraine will only provoke the Kremlin to desire further enlargement of their empire. Brainwashed Russians will live in utter poverty but will enjoy the imperial successes of their country - that is the Kremlin`s traditional strategy that seems to be working well, as usual. It will be exploited over and over again.

If you don`t like Ukrainians, it is your own right and business. But try to be pragmatic for a while. Are you able to or will you remain in your nationalist shell for ever?

If you read sth about history of Ukraine, you would know their territory was divided into Polish and Russian spheres of influence for nearly 300 years. Is it surprising Ukrainians have always been torn between various options? Poland was partitioned "only" for 123 years and it ended 100 years ago but the legacy of it is still present in Poland.

I didn't bother reading your post past this point.

You truly appear to be obsessed with what you consider to be a nationalist, and to be honest I don't have a clue about what you mean or what is your definition, to me it sounds like some student speak for shutting down someones right to have a point of view.

If you cease with your obsession to begin a reply with accusations of nationalist I might be inclined to read what you have to say.

What do you think to me replying to you with the opener Soviet lefty commie boy who is probably covering for his families past sins.

Now the above probably sounds as offensive to you as your incessant untrue cries of nationalist are to me, stop being childish and rude.

Exactly, not least because they're traveling a longer road than Poles had to. The Orange revolution was something like 1989 for Poland (or 1980...).

One of the reasons I've been in Poland so long as that witnessing the transformation (from country still reeling from communism to the emerging civil society found now) at ground level is so interesting. It's not recommended for those with weak nerves and it's hardly a story of linear progress, it's very much two steps back for every three steps forward and the whole process shuts down for long periods of time before lumbering back into motion.

The election of Zelenskyj is probably a step backward but setbacks are an inevitable part of the process. The election of PiS was partially a setback (we'll see how bad at the end of the month) but the process, once started, takes more than a few setbacks to halt.

Those who see the world in terms of decades (or centuries) old political, religious or ethnic grudges are like people who go to the Louvre in sunglasses...

Why are you lying here and in other recent threads that you aren`t an obsessed nationalist? Shall I quote your own words from 2 years ago when you openly admitted you were one and supported nationalism as the best ideology?

If you renounce nationalistic stance now, I will believe you and stop calling you one.


Haha, all maniacal rightists and nationalists resort to this abuse, it has become sort of cliche, change your melody, please. :)

If it weren't for obsessed nationalists there would be no Poland. There is nothing wrong with nationalism and the recent campaign to turn it into a slur is degradation of language.

Yes, there is and I am really amazed you are writing such things. If it weren`t for non-nationalist Poles, Poland wouldn`t be in the EU today. Those who voiced their clearest and toughest objection during the referendum were all nationalists. The further development of events you can easily imagine.

Again, because it has been mentioned many times here, you mistake true patriotism with obsessed aka radical nationalism.