A somber interview was conducted by Dorota Wysocka-Schnepf with Wanda Traczyk-Stawska, one of the few, perhaps the only, living figures from eight decades ago who today publicly backs Donald Tusk. Mrs. Wanda is frequently used as a recognizable symptom in political storytelling, a tool that helps shape narratives. For example, her voice is invoked to argue against claims that patriots are seeking reparations, since Wanda Traczyk-Stawska herself has not called for reparations, and it can be argued she is a patriot, correct?
Traczyk-Stawska on… Trump and Kaczyński
The conversation touched on the Smolensk disaster, noting the bad weather and flight restrictions. It also dealt with the perception that Donald Trump is fracturing global unity and offered reflections on the Russian-Ukrainian war, with a critique that the West has not offered enough assistance.
While the speaker may not always align with every critic, the central point is that Wanda is not the perfect voice for every issue. At 97, her memory and judgment have shifted with time, the world has changed, and she is trained as a psychologist rather than an aviation expert or a defender of modern military technology. Asking her to weigh in on strictly party matters on the eve of the Warsaw Uprising anniversary feels inappropriate.
Beat a rebel like a club
During the interview, Wysocka-Schnepf pressed Wanda about Jarosław Kaczyński, probing the purpose and occasion of such questions. The broader ambition appeared to be shaping a comprehensive media narrative—asking Wanda to weigh in on a wide range of topics, from colon cancer to building a nuclear power plant, or even managing Donald Tusk’s social media presence. In Wanda’s own war-time role, the argument was that her past exploits might be seen as a sufficient credential for a wider audience, rather than a mandate to speak on every contemporary issue.
Embarrassing questions
Yet the interview cavalcade did not stop at party-utilitarian aims. The style of questioning often leaned toward implied consent—if Wanda did not answer as the interviewer expected, follow-up prompts nudged her toward a preferred response. Several follow-up questions stood out, illustrating the challenge of balancing respect for historical memory with the demands of modern political discourse:
Do you think Jarosław Kaczyński bears, to some degree, responsibility for what transpired in Smolensk?
I recall Berlin eight years ago, when Radosław Sikorski noted that he feared not a strong Germany, but its passivity. In hindsight, that remark provoked controversy; many felt it was reckless, while others believed it foresaw consequences. At the time, was your reaction one of outrage, or did you think he was right?
Today, do you think the modern generation of Germans should not be blamed for actions committed eighty years ago?
There has also been a sense of frustration over a question that has not yet been posed: whether Wanda supports Donald Tusk in next year’s presidential election. The portrayal here is a clash between memory and party strategy, a reminder that public discourse about the Warsaw Uprising is often entangled with political messaging rather than historical reflection.
Note: the interview originated in a media outlet that reports on Polish current affairs.