The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered [12]  |  Archives [1] 
 
User: Guest

News  100% width142

Sikorski doctrine - Eastern Europe under threat. Poland's foreign policy.


Nathan 18 | 1,366    
  8 Dec 2010  #1
Wikileaks unveiled Polish foreign policy in regards to its defense against potential agression from Russia as became clear after occupation of Georgian lands in 2008. It states how NATO and US are toothless dealers in the international relations when something is not profitable for their pockets - democracy is usually defended only when there is oil or opium involved. But back to the topic: Polish foreign minister Sikorski considers important to increase EU economic relation with Bielorus' and Ukraine as it will ensure democratic development in those countries and secure Polish eastern border which cannot be safe with Russian aggressor policies as seen in Georgia. Polish prime minister Tusk said in 2008 "Now do you see why we wanted the Patriot missiles and further security guarantees?" in his dialogue with US representatives. In nutshell, Poland is interested in having a buffer in-between with Russia, which is completely understandable. I wish Ukraine had a buffer on its eastern border, but it is unlikely :(

So, what is your opinion on Sikorski doctrine?
thenews.pl/international/artykul145030_wikileaks-reveals-the-sikorski-doctrine.html
Torq 25 | 2,362    
8 Dec 2010  #2
A buffer zone would be nice, but there's still Kaliningrad, so we will always border Russia
and we have to deal with it (meaning: strengthen the army and get our own atomic weapons
at last.)

Russians are unpredictable, and the only thing they respect in the long run is power. Knowing
this about them, we have to act accordingly.
convex 20 | 3,984    
8 Dec 2010  #3
Russians are unpredictable, and the only thing they respect in the long run is power.

Heh, judging by the last 1000 years, couldn't the same be said for any country?

Regarding nukes, Poland has to weigh if it will be worth the short term ostracization and long term shift in relationships with current partners will be worth it.
OP Nathan 18 | 1,366    
  8 Dec 2010  #4
we have to deal with it

Yes, we do.

get our own atomic weapons at last

How? It seems that neither of the present agreements or aspirations will permit us to get them. NATO-Russia alliance will prevent that from happening.

strengthen the army

Yes, this is very important. I think it is essential also to increase military trainings on Polish-Bielorus'-Ukraine axis to insure that the armies are properly coordinated in case of war. A system of defense and strategical preparations need to be set in place to prevent unexpected attack outcomes. It is tough with the political atmosphere in Ukraine and Bielorus' right now to talk about this, but there are lots of supporters of what I am saying and it is important to gradually implement these changes.
Bratwurst Boy 5 | 9,660    
  8 Dec 2010  #5
More Wikileaks cables about Poland and the East (Baltics)

guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/06/wikileaks-cables-nato-russia-baltics

The plan entails grouping the Baltic states with Poland in a new regional defence scheme that has been worked on in recent months and is codenamed Eagle Guardian.

"Ambassador Daalder acknowledged in these meetings that Germany had initiated the proposal," says another secret cable .The east Europeans were delighted. Paul Teesalu, a senior Estonian diplomat, described the policy shift as "an early Christmas present" when told last December in Tallinn, according to a cable.

/wiki/Eagle_Guardian
joepilsudski 26 | 1,391    
8 Dec 2010  #6
secure Polish eastern border which cannot be safe with Russian aggressor policies as seen in Georgia

All bullsh**...Russia will be invading no one...Wikileaks is bullshit, too.
Torq 25 | 2,362    
  8 Dec 2010  #7
Poland has to weigh if it will be worth the short term ostracization and long term shift
in relationships with current partners will be worth it.

It IS worth it. Only atomic weapons have enough deterrent power to prevent Russia or Germany
from invading one day (it looks very unlikely to happen today, but Poland should learn from its
history and never assume to be "safe".)

Feck the relationships with partners - Poland is as entitled to have her own atomic weapons
as France, Great Britain or Pakistan are.

Besides, Poland is self sufficient: our farming can feed 120 million people, if need be; we can
rebuild our industry and use coal and shale gas as energy sources. Worst case scenario:
we get atomic weapons, build a big fecken wall along borders, tell everyone to kiss our a**
and we'd still be OK. Best case scenario: we get the atomic weapons, our partners are a little
bit sulky with us for some time, but then they accept the reality and life goes on as usual
(the latter scenario is much more likely imo.)
Bratwurst Boy 5 | 9,660    
  8 Dec 2010  #8
Worst case scenario:

No, you wouldn't! You would need a wall to alone for keeping people from running away...

I doubt they would even sulk as it does absolutely not matter if you have any or not! They won't be used in any case. Even in the case of a conventional war.
OP Nathan 18 | 1,366    
8 Dec 2010  #9
"Ambassador Daalder acknowledged in these meetings that Germany had initiated the proposal," says another secret cable .

Nice to hear that Germany sees importance in this policy - maybe, not as important for its own immediate benefit as it is for the Baltic states, but still - very important for the future of Europe and I don't think I am overestimating here.
Bratwurst Boy 5 | 9,660    
8 Dec 2010  #10
I agree!
People weren't delighted for nothing! :)
Torq 25 | 2,362    
8 Dec 2010  #11
You would need a wall to alone for keeping people from running away...

Why would Polish people run away from a safe, wealthy, traditional, Catholic
nuclear superpower? We'd need the wall to keep all the plastics from coming back! ;)
Bratwurst Boy 5 | 9,660    
  8 Dec 2010  #12
You joker you! :)

You need an industrial economy and trade for becoming wealthy...you don't get that from peasants exchanging grain and livestock.
You need research and inventions for development so you need to keep up with foreign bright heads. You need contacts and agreements with your neighbours for your safety..etc.etc.etc.

An isolationist Poland would impoverish very quickly and people would try to leave for better shores.
But to keep things working you need their labor, you need a wall to stop them from leaving!
Your nukes would be so useless...
Torq 25 | 2,362    
  8 Dec 2010  #13
I doubt they would even sulk as it does absolutely not matter if you have any or not! They won't be used in any case. Even in the case of a conventional war.

OK - so, we'll get them just in case. Good that we agreed on that! :)

You need an industrial economy and trade for becoming wealthy...you don't get that from peasants exchanging grain and livestock.
You need research and inventions for development. You need contacts and agreements with your neighbours for your safety..etc.etc.etc.

OK - so we don't build a wall. Good that we agreed on that!

The final outcome of negotiations with our partners: we get the atomic weapons, don't build
the wall along borders and everyone's happy.
*they really should give me a job in diplomacy :-)*
Bratwurst Boy 5 | 9,660    
  8 Dec 2010  #14
OK - so, we'll get them just in case. Good that we agreed on that! :)

It isn't the defense potiential that might get people (Russians in that case) nervous.
Who is to say Poles won't use them as a tool if they see it fit?

:)

OK - so we don't build a wall. Good that we agreed on that!

The isolationist will have to in the end, to keep the people in the country...it's not your decision.
Torq 25 | 2,362    
  8 Dec 2010  #15
Who is to say Poles won't use them as a tool if they see it fit?

But of course we will use them as a tool if we see fit. That's the whole point of having them! :)

*like - you better stop stealing our centre forwards or it's bye, bye Hamburg... for a start ;)*

The isolationist will have to in the end, to keep the people in the country...it's not your decision.

Erm... not really. France has atomic weapons and is not conducting isolationist policies.
If the French can have AW (and they don't border Russia) then we can have them too.
Bratwurst Boy 5 | 9,660    
  8 Dec 2010  #16
France has atomic weapons and is not conducting isolationist policies.

HEY! It was YOU dreaming of an isolationist Poland!!!

Nukes won't help you in either way...they are useless. France needs them only as an Ersatz-dick as their real dick got lost somewhere in the fourties.

But we are still real men with helmets! Right?

*like - you better stop stealing our centre forwards or it's bye, bye Hamburg... for a start ;)*

Oh you are sooo mean! *pouts*
Torq 25 | 2,362    
  8 Dec 2010  #17
HEY! It was YOU dreaming of an isolationist Poland!!!

NO - I wasn't. I only considered it as a worst case scenario, but we agreed, couple of posts
ago, that we will get the AW without isolating ourselves from our freunde and neighbours! :)

their real dick got lost somewhere in the fourties

Got lost? More like - was cut off by a certain neighbour of theirs :)

But we are still real men with helmets! Right?

Yip! Civilization ended when cavalry disappeared from battlefields, that's what
I always say.
delphiandomine 85 | 17,265    
8 Dec 2010  #18
Who is to say Poles won't use them as a tool if they see it fit?

I have images of Jaroslaw Kaczynski with a nuclear briefcase.

Frightening.

(still, I suspect Poland armed with nukes would be a much saner place : no need for all the paranoia about Russians and Germans)
Bratwurst Boy 5 | 9,660    
  8 Dec 2010  #19
Got lost? More like - was cut off by a certain neighbour of theirs :)

Nah...Poland still have theirs. ;)
It's more a spiritual thingie...

Yip! Civilization ended when cavalry disappeared from battlefields, that's what
I always say.

*nods heartily*
Torqi my friend...we live in the wrong age...without horses and helmets...:(
Seanus 15 | 19,741    
8 Dec 2010  #20
That doctrine was called 'paranoia' a long time ago
Marek11111 9 | 826    
8 Dec 2010  #21
Poland worrying about Russia is short sighted, Poland needs to worry about Germany as it might need more breading room after Germans will pull out of Euro union as the canceler threaten do so. I do not often agree with Torq but Poland needs to get nukes as soon as possible, just in case anyone gets any ideas.
Bratwurst Boy 5 | 9,660    
8 Dec 2010  #22
breading room

canceler

???

Get your facts in order alongside your typos...
jwojcie 2 | 763    
  8 Dec 2010  #23
Poland worrying about Russia is short sighted, Poland needs to worry about Germany as it might need more breading room after Germans will pull out of Euro union as the canceler threaten do so. I do not often agree with Torq but Poland needs to get nukes as soon as possible, just in case anyone gets any ideas.

Have you by any chance been in Goerlitz recently? It is beautiful city empty like a shell at the same time... If any Pole feels that Germany is a threat and Poland should counteract there is no easiest way currently to do it than make some children and colonize Eastern Germany. They would even invite you with an open hands, because they renovated all this beautifull tenemant houses, and half of it is empty... Sadly there is not much to do there in the evenings, more sadly Polish demography is not booming either. It doesn't look like lack of space is CEE problem.
Marek11111 9 | 826    
8 Dec 2010  #24
it never was about space it was about resources and slave labor and now Poland is in possession of so called German land this time it will be about revenge and yes she made a statement about leaving euro during bail out hearing

BB that all you got my typos but I have the facts
Des Essientes 7 | 1,296    
8 Dec 2010  #25
potential agression from Russia as became clear after occupation of Georgian lands in 2008.

South Ossetia declared independence in 1990. The Ossets were attacked by the Georgians. It is shameful on a Polish discussion forum for people to side with the Georgians rather than the Ossets when the Ossets are the direct descendants of the Sarmatians.
Bratwurst Boy 5 | 9,660    
8 Dec 2010  #26
You are a plastic Pole, aren't you Marek?

You really sound far removed from european reality! ;)
Ironside 47 | 9,287    
9 Dec 2010  #27
to increase military trainings on Polish-Bielorus'-Ukraine axis

What axis ?> Poland isn't gonna pay for Ukrainian generals leisure!
OP Nathan 18 | 1,366    
9 Dec 2010  #28
South Ossetia declared independence in 1990. The Ossets were attacked by the Georgians. It is shameful on a Polish discussion forum for people to side with the Georgians rather than the Ossets when the Ossets are the direct descendants of the Sarmatians.

Since 19th century Russian empire occupied the Caucusus, Georgia with its Ossetia region, Chechnia, Dagestan,... South Ossetia is not business whatsoever of Russians and it is a part of Georgia. That part is not recognized by any civilized country as an independant state. What Russia is doing there? This is a state as it existed during the Soviet Union and after up to 2008 until the Russian invasion. Here is some info about how Russia conducts its business in relations to other countries (from Wikileaks):

So, Medvedev threatens other states with their country's territory just because they recognize Holodomor a genocide! Imagine now Georgia and then Russia's unsatiable need to destabilize all the regions around it by its implanted minorities and decades of occupation in the Caucasus and not only - Russia is the main culprit in pandemic instability in the whole post-Soviet space: it uses all the possible pretexts to mess, to cause conflicts and wars. Many don't see it and many (like NATO) try to look at those things through fingers because Georgia has no oil, heroine or lithium deposits like Afghanistan and Iraq - they build "democracy" in countries where no one asked them to be.

As in regards to Poland - Polish foreign ministry clearly sees the issue and does necessary steps to protect its country - with Russia on the side one can't and shouldn't ever feel completely safe.
Chicago Pollock 7 | 505    
9 Dec 2010  #29
Marek and Torq miss the point. All Poland needs is a Switzerland type reserve army and air force armed with ground support aircraft and helicopters. Don't make the mistake of the 1930's trying to have the latest and greatest military equipment and in the meantime leaving Polish borders undefended.
Mr Grunwald 19 | 1,525    
9 Dec 2010  #30
Marek and Torq miss the point. All Poland needs is a Switzerland type reserve army and air force armed with ground support

I think good Diplomacy and nukes is the best weapons. As some general once said, winning without own casutlies is far greater then having the enemy oblitirated! Or something along those lines :)


Home / News / Sikorski doctrine - Eastern Europe under threat. Poland's foreign policy.
Bold Italic [quote]

 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary and unique username or login and post as a member.