I am a Croatian journalist who has been following politics in Poland for more than twelve years, and intensively for three years since I moved here.
However, I must admit: I will never fully understand how someone like Radosław Sikorski could reach such responsible positions in his career as Defense Minister, Foreign Minister of the Republic of Poland or the Chairman of the Sejm.
I’ll be more precise.
ALSO READ Western media writing about the Sikorski case! “Suitcases of Money and Fun Resort Trips”; “What a Corrupt Gang”
ALSO READ Black clouds over Sikorski! Tarczyński: Officially he was at the Arab “conference” in the US, but he also met with Lavrov
In a way, I understand that this man once looked like a person who could represent the future of Polish politics. Well-educated, with strong connections in international politics, most of which he probably owes to his wife, the influential publicist Anne Applebaum. However, I do not understand how, after all we have heard about Sikorski in recent years, there are still people who believe that he can hold a position of responsibility in this country.
For all its blunders, the Third Polish Republic is simply not ready to give up Sikorski. Even now, when the Western media started writing about how a Polish member of the European Parliament receives money for consultations from abroad and political systems with elements of dictatorship.
Tomasz Siemoniak still talks about him as an “advantage” of the PO. Borys Budka claims that anyone who criticizes him is “jealous of his success” (does Budka think there is also jealousy behind what the Dutch and Belgian media write about Sikorski?). In short, the Neumann doctrine that the PO will defend “their own” no matter what corrupt atrocities they have committed still applies.
It is one thing to see politicians defending their fellow party at all costs out of interest, or perhaps out of fear. It is quite another thing if a publicist does the same thing.
I will not make myself an exaggerated advocate of Radosław Sikorski
– Bogusław Chrabota, the editor-in-chief of Rzeczpospolita, begins today’s commentary. Meanwhile, a little later, he becomes his ardent defender, i.e. the one who, in a situation where there are serious indications that Sikorski has done something that discredits him as a politician, defends him. And in a really over the top way.
Chrabota writes in his text that although Sikorski is a bit of a specific politician, public opinion must forgive him for all that. Why?
Because according to the editor, Sikorski is a giant of Polish geopolitics.
I hear from many quarters that he is one of the few Poles with real competence in geostrategy or geopolitics. His activity is usually highly rated.
Not just this.
Sikorski – if he represents the Polish raison d’état apart from his own views – he is doing a good job for our country. May there be more of these.
And now some questions that Chrabota, if he was honest, should answer.
When exactly did Sikorski “do a good job” for Poland?
Maybe when he tweeted thanking the US for taking down Nord Stream? Or when he recently stated that the Polish government was “reluctant” to take over parts of Ukraine with the Russians, which Moscow obviously used for its propaganda?
Let’s go back in time. Did Sikorski represent “the Polish raison d’état” when in Poland, together with Tusk, he implemented the German energy policy to subordinate Europe to Russia? Policies that enabled the horror scenes we see in Ukraine today. We also remember the situation when the same Sikorski threatened the Ukrainians from Maidan that they must “sign” a deal with the pro-Russian regime, otherwise they will die. Does he also serve Poland then?
Or maybe when he allowed his wife to regularly defame the Polish government abroad, presenting it as a fight for democracy, but in fact serving the interests of her husband’s party?
Chrobota, of course, makes no mention of this. It is important to him that someone somewhere in the international arena, who knows who, has a good opinion of Sikorski. Even when it comes to Arab authoritarian regimes willing to pay him for his advice. Chrabota believes paying a Polish politician is “permissible, but risky”. Does this discredit him as a politician? Of course not.
Incredible.
Of course, if someone from PiS had been in Sikorski’s place, Chrabota would have already written a comment condemning him. But Sikorski is “ours”.
And as we know from Sławomir Neuman, if you are “ours”, we will “defend you as independence”. It doesn’t matter what you’ve done.
Source: wPolityce