The European Commission is considering imposing sanctions against Poland. The reason for this step by the EU leadership is the reform of the Constitutional Court. Poland is accused of violating the principles of democracy and separation of powers. The Polish authorities, in turn, state that protecting they are protecting the country's sovereignty and are opposed to Brussels interfering in the internal affairs of Warsaw.
"Conservative" Atlanticism in Warsaw
http://katehon.com/agenda/conservative-atlanticism-warsaw
Court reform Plans to reform the Constitutional Court were adopted in Poland in late 2015. Polish authorities plan to give parliament the right to dismiss judges of the Constitutional Court from office, and give the President and the Ministry of Justice the right to complain about the judges. In addition the court will be deprived of the right to recognize the president as being unable to perform his duties. Today the European Commission published an official warning to Poland, saying that the reform shall be a "systemic risk" to the rule of law in the country.
Hide Against Brussels After coming to power in Poland, representatives of the party "Law and Justice" (President Andrzej Duda from 6th August 2015, the Prime Minister - Beata Szydlo from November 16th), in 2015, relations between Poland and the EU considerably deteriorated. The party "Law and Justice", which controls the legislative and executive branches of government, has decided to put them under the control of the judiciary. In addition, a number of reforms were undertaken in the spirit of social conservatism. In particular, the government supported the idea of a total ban of abortion. The adoption of the relevant law is expected in autumn 2016.
US Crypto-colony However, it would be wrong to interpret the current euroscepticism of the Polish authorities as an attempt to strengthen the country's sovereignty and to challenge the global hegemony of the liberals. Poland opposes Brussels, but only in order to consolidate its status as a de facto colony of Washington. Poland supports all NATO's aggressive initiatives, primarily those aimed against Russia. Poland adopted a law authorizing the stay on the territory of foreign troops, and called to increase NATO troops in the country. Poland plans to place elements of the US missile defense system on its territory, which can be used not only for protection against a nuclear attack, but also for the deployment of cruise missiles with nuclear warheads.
The Polish leadership was in favor of the signing of the transatlantic trade and investment partnership, which effectively eliminates the sovereignty of this small country in the face of multinational corporations. Opponents of this course are suppressed, which is demonstrated by the arrest of the opposition party leader Zmiana Mateusz Piskorski on ridiculous charges of espionage in favor of China.
The buffer zone In the case of Poland, we observe how the Americans are working out another scenario to consolidate their domination: through the support of right-wing pseudo-conservative regimes that exploit the same rhetoric and the ideas that are representative of anti-American sovereigntist forces. In the case of Poland, we are talking about pure geopolitics: even the liberal EU, due to geopolitical logic, needs Russia, so in order to put in its way a barrier, the US supports such a regime in Poland, which on one hand is hostile to the EU (with the conservative positions), and on the other to Russia (with the nationalist and pro-American position).
On May 18th, 2016, the well-known Polish politician Mateusz Piskorski was arrested on charg-es of spying for “third countries.” Shortly before, he wrote an article that predicted the beginning of mass political repressions against NATO opponents in Poland and Europe as a whole. He was right. Katehon presents the following exclusive translation of his article:
NATO will suppress protests in Poland
http://katehon.com/article/nato-will-suppress-protests-poland
Predictions concerning the upcoming NATO summit in July in Warsaw are beginning to clearly indicate that today the alliance’s goal is first and foremost preventing the emergence of social movements demanding the liberation of Europe from underneath the tutelage of the United States. As can be seen, the Financial Times’ inadvertent uttering of the words of one of the Polish Army’s senior commanders show just what decisions can be expected this summer. These are decisions which completely undermine not only the sovereignty of Warsaw in the field of foreign policy, but also clearly speak to the fact that from this moment on NATO is supposed to be a police force ready to participate in the pacification of eventual social protests or intervene in the affairs of domestic Polish politics.
The actual intensions of the alliance’s latest decisions were revealed honestly and in a frankly military way by Brigade General Krzysztof Krol, the commander of the Multinational Corps Northeast. The issue under consideration was the concept of the so-called NATO spearhead advocated for years by the Americans and longed for by the Polish politicians of both the for-mer and current government. Let us give the floor to the general: “The VJTF (Very High Readiness Joint Task Force) is to deal with Article 4 situations [of the North-Atlantic Treaty] and that is our intention with it.” Article 4 speaks of cooperation and consultation between member states which cannot be described as in article 5 as experiencing armed aggression against any of them, but rather subjective feelings of para-military threats. What kind of situations are we dealing with here? General Krol leaves no doubt: “The plan was developed to react to hybrid threats in our area of operation. Our plans are scaleable to the situation,” he told the Financial Times.
The concept of hybrid war or hybrid actions has blossomed as a definition of the activities of Russia following the Ukrainian revolution of 2014. But what is interesting is that to this day it has not attained any unambiguous academic interpretation and various authors and experts define its scope in different ways. In The Financial Times, however, we read that the NATO spearhead has the right to take action in the case of the destabilization of the international situation in the country triggered by, for example, public protest.
What does this mean in practice? Any internal disturbance could be treated and presented by native as well as American “spearheadologists” as part of the activities vaguely defined as hybrid war. This might lead to the case in which protests against the effects of the TTIP Agreement supported by the Polish state could be treated as “hybrid activities.” Poles’ protests against crimes committed by US Army soldiers stationed in Poland could also turn out to be “hybrid war.”
Antoni Macierewicz’s sick imagination could suggest dozens of different theories. After all, the current defense minister is so divorced from common sense that he believes that Radoslaw Sikorski, another pro-American hawk, is actually working for Moscow. Social unrests, protests, strikes, attempts to form information resources independent from the establishment, demanding transparency in the defense and foreign policies of the Polish authorities - all of these could become pretexts for one or another swing into action of advisors from NATO (mainly from the USA), who would provide “brotherly aid” to the Polish units and services subordinated to them.
In this situation, all that is left is to hope that officers and officials will not want to stay in an “oral relationship” (the colorful expression of Sikorski) with their American overlords, will remind themselves of the dignity of the Polish uniform, and send all those representatives of foreign interests “concerned about our security” far back across the Atlantic Ocean. Meanwhile, we have been left with one thing: to loudly protest and by all law-abiding means block the realization of NATO's plans which it will announce in July in Warsaw. It is also worth organizing a social movement for Poland's exit from this pact as a condition of gaining elementary state sovereignty and a real sense of security.
Commenting on the recent announcement of the Polish Defense minister that a single NATO battalion inside Poland would be enough to “deter Russian aggression,” political analyst Ivan Konovalov said that Warsaw has a certain strategy regarding NATO and is skillfully playing it out.
'Poland is Playing Its Own Game by Dragging NATO Into Its Territory'
http://sputniknews.com/europe/20160602/1040679635/poland-nato-strategy.html
Polish Defence Minister Antoni Macierewicz has claimed that a single NATO battalion inside Poland would be enough to deter the so-called “Russian aggression.”
Although NATO units in the Baltics would not be able to defeat Russia in case of an invasion, they could slow down the attack while waiting for reinforcements, Macierewicz said in the interview with Defence News website.
Meanwhile, the website quotes NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, who came on a visit to Poland ahead of the upcoming NATO Summit in Warsaw, as pledging support for putting troops on Polish soil, saying “let me be clear: There will be more NATO troops in Poland after the Warsaw summit (July 8-9).”
Commenting on these announcements, political analyst Ivan Konovalov told Radio Sputnik that Poland has a clear strategy with regards to NATO which it is playing very skillfully.
The core of this strategy is to become the US’s major ally in Eastern Europe,” Konovalov, director of the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, told Radio Sputnik.
He further explained that for Poland, it is a good foreign policy leverage to solve a number of issues. In addition, it means allocation of additional funds.
Poland insists on the deployment of a NATO base on its territory, which will bring in billions of US dollars per year, he said. And the deployment of a NATO missile defense base, which was recently announced, also brings good money. Money which Warsaw is counting on.
Meanwhile, he added, other NATO European member states are forced to increase their military budgets with the Baltic States topping the list.
In due time, they were joining NATO with the purpose of reducing their military expenses and, under coverage of the Alliance to focus more on economics rather than the development of thier own military forces,” Konovalov explained.
However NATO insisted that all its member states should allocate 2 per cent of their budget for military purposes, which they are trying to do, “with moans and groans,” he added.
Meanwhile, Moscow repeatedly said that the actions of the US and NATO in deploying a missile defense system in Europe pose a certain threat to regional security as well as Russia’s national security and could undermine the strategic stability in the region.
The Russian side noted more than once that the missile defense system in Eastern Europe is part of the US nuclear strategic potential stockpiled on the periphery.
The deployment of such systems violates the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF Treaty) and Moscow will be forced to take responsive measures to ensure its security.
“When we ask them directly, who are you going to deter, NATO representatives and western experts grin, get uneasy and say nothing,” Konovalov said.
Even they understand that their actions are provocative towards Russia, he said. And Russia is forced to respond through the deployment of additional units which heightens tensions in the relationship between Russia and the West. However, NATO continues to build up on Russia’s borders, he notes.
