In un periodo in cui gli occhi di tutta Europa sono puntati sulla Polonia e sulla diatriba con l’attuale dirigenza dell’Unione Europea circa la riforma del sistema giudiziario, si potrebbe correre il rischio di perdere quella visione generale che permette di inquadrare gli avvenimenti.
«Industrial production in Poland increased 5.4 percent year-on-year in May 2018 from 9.3 percent in the previous month, but well above market expectation of 3.5 percent. Output went up at a slower pace for manufacturing (5.5 percent from 9.5 percent in April); water supply, sewerage & waste management (5.2 percent from 5.6 percent) and electricity, gas, steam & air conditioning supply (7.9 percent from 10.4 percent). Meanwhile, mining & quarrying output declined 2.2 percent (from 2.9 percent in April). On a monthly basis, industrial activity went up 1.6 percent, after a 6.8 percent drop in April. Industrial Production in Poland averaged 6.29 percent from 1992 until 2018, reaching an all time high of 23.50 percent in March of 2004 and a record low of -15.30 percent in January of 2009.»
Per comparazione, si notino i dati relativi alla Germania.
«Industrial Production in Germany increased 2 percent in April of 2018 over the same month in the previous year. Industrial Production in Germany averaged 1.61 percent from 1979 until 2018, reaching an all time high of 15.30 percent in December of 2010 and a record low of -21.80 percent in April of 2009.»
Eu Observer è una testata liberal e socialista ideologica di specchiata fede.
«EUobserver is a not-for-profit, independent online newspaper established in Brussels in 2000. We value free thinking and plain speech and aim to support European democracy by giving people the information they need to hold the EU establishment to account.»
Il suo tesoriere, Mr Henner Sorg, ha militato nella Population Catering Organisation P.CO, Civil Rights and Social Action.
Leggiamolo quindi consci della natura della fonte.
* * * * * * *
«Poland’s power behind the throne, Jaroslaw Kaczynski, is unwell, but the ageing party chief’s potential successor could be even worse for EU relations»
«The 68-year old Kaczynski has been out of sight for the past month in his bed at the Military Medical Institute in Warsaw»
«It is due to an infected knee, Poland’s ruling Law and Justice (PiS) party, which Kaczynski chairs, has said»
«Jaroslaw Kaczynski indeed has a problem with his knee. It causes him pain … but he’s not thinking about retirement»
«The comment on “nasty, fake lies” referred to some Polish reports that Kaczynski was actually being treated for cancer»
«his prolonged absence has prompted speculation on who might succeed him when, one day, he does step aside»
«But if Kaczynski has been bad for EU relations, then his anointed successor, Brudzinski, sounds worse»
«If I broke my leg, if something happened to me, he [Brudzinski] is the one I want to replace me»
«Even less well known in Brussels than PiS prime ministers, Brudzinski is more Catholic than the Pope»
* * * * * * *
Per Eu Observer essere cattolici è il peggiore dei peggiori reati, punibile con il rogo del credente e, per buon peso, della sua famiglia.
Eu Observer infatti è quanto mai tollerante con i liberal e con i socialisti, che considera gli ‘illuminati‘, ma considera esecrandi eretici tutti coloro che non la pensassero come loro e, soprattutto, non li volessero ubbidire.
Bene. Staremo a vedere come andrà il prossimo Consiglio Europeo, sempre che se ne tenga uno, e le elezioni del parlamento europeo del prossimo anno.
Poland’s power behind the throne, Jaroslaw Kaczynski, is unwell, but the ageing party chief’s potential successor could be even worse for EU relations.
The 68-year old Kaczynski has been out of sight for the past month in his bed at the Military Medical Institute in Warsaw.
It is due to an infected knee, Poland’s ruling Law and Justice (PiS) party, which Kaczynski chairs, has said.
“I’ll start with the bad news, especially for all those who either wish Kaczynski a quick political retirement or who spread nasty, fake lies about his health,” Polish interior minister, Joachim Brudzinski, joked on Wednesday (7 June).
“Jaroslaw Kaczynski indeed has a problem with his knee. It causes him pain … but he’s not thinking about retirement,” Brudzinski said.
The PiS chairman might be up and about in a few days, a party spokeswoman added.
The comment on “nasty, fake lies” referred to some Polish reports that Kaczynski was actually being treated for cancer.
But even if he springs back into public life, his prolonged absence has prompted speculation on who might succeed him when, one day, he does step aside.
Kaczynski has pulled the strings behind the scenes of Polish democracy since PiS won power three years ago.
He has shuffled around ministers and prime ministers, while steering Warsaw into a clash with the European Commission over judicial independence and migrant sharing with Greece and Italy.
He has said outrageous things on asylum seekers and has even accused Donald Tusk, the EU Council president and a former Polish leader, of being in on a purported Russian plot on the 2010 Smolensk air disaster, which killed his twin brother, Lech Kaczynski.
Jaroslaw Kaczynski, a confirmed bachelor, who lives with his cats, and who disdains modern technology, like computers, embodies a ‘Little Poland’ mentality on EU affairs.
His illness has also highlighted the amount of personal power that he wields and the opacity of his regime.
Paparazzi have kept watch outside the Military Medical Institute to see who goes in and out to visit him. Snaps of prime minister Mateusz Morawiecki, ex-prime minister Beata Szydlo, Brudzinski, and others have prompted ‘kremlinology’ in Polish media on who is in favour with the PiS chief and who might take over if he does not get better.
But if Kaczynski has been bad for EU relations, then his anointed successor, Brudzinski, sounds worse.
Brudzinski, the interior minister, who is also the PiS vice-president, is a Kaczynski loyalist who already stood in for him at a PiS meeting in May, which divvied out regional jobs.
He was with Kaczynski on holiday when the PiS chairman first hurt his knee and posts chummy photos together on social media.
“If I broke my leg, if something happened to me, he [Brudzinski] is the one I want to replace me,” Kaczynski said, in a prescient remark, back in 2016.
Even less well known in Brussels than PiS prime ministers, Brudzinski is more Catholic than the Pope when it comes to Kaczynski’s views on EU relations, migrants, and Smolensk.
“When I drove to Warsaw today, I filled up with petrol at Orlen [a Polish firm], despite all those ‘Europeans’,” he said last summer on Twitter.
People going on holiday should fill up their cars “only at POLISH stations. Everything that’s POLISH is the best,” he said.
Kaczynski once said Muslim migrants were infected with contagious “amoebas”, but Brudzinski went one better.
There were no roses in Poland at New Year’s Eve because feminists had bought them all to give to Muslim rapists in Germany, Brudzinski once joked on Twitter. “They’re preparing to give them out after New Year’s to the hot young bucks called ‘refugees’,” he said, in a reference to sexual assaults in Cologne, Germany, two years ago.
He was equally obnoxious on Smolensk.
“Get fucked by a dog”, he tweeted in 2013, when local authorities in Bydgoszcz, a Polish town, declined to name a bridge after the late Lech Kaczynski.
All that bodes ill for delicate EU talks on rule of law and asylum reform if Brudzinski was to get his hands on the PiS reins.
His rise in the party despite his foul mouth shows the depth of parochialism and chauvinism in the conservative Polish establishment, which bodes ill even if he does not.
Broader public backing also indicates the popularity of PiS-type thinking in Polish society.
Kaczynski’s party is polling to win parliament elections next year by a wide margin.
Nine percent of respondents wanted Brudzinski to take over PiS if need be, putting him in second place after Morawiecki in a recent survey by Rzeczpospolita, a Polish newspaper.
Forty percent of respondents believed Brudzinski was in line for the PiS top job in a poll by Gazeta Wyborcza, another Polish daily.
PiS declined to answer EUobserver’s questions on Kaczynski’s health or Brudzinski’s potential succession.
But party insiders have had plenty to say about the PiS pretender in off-the-record remarks to Polish media in recent days and further back.
Brudzinski, a 50-year old from a working-class family, who was once arrested for fighting on a train, was a “street thug, but dressed in a suit”, one PiS source said. “He cursed like a shoemaker and loved the good old days when he used to knock back cheap booze,” another PiS colleague said.
Other rivals for Kaczynski’s crown, whose mandate as PiS chairman expires in 2020, include Mariusz Blaszczak, Andrzej Duda, Jaroslaw Gowin, Antoni Macierewicz, and Zbigniew Ziobro.
Morawiecki, the PM, an urbane former banker, was ruled out as being a PiS outsider in an in-depth article on the succession issue by Gazeta Wyborcza last Sunday.
The former PM, Beata Szydlo, was said to be eyeing an MEP post instead.
Duda, the Polish president, had no PiS clique to back him, while Macierewicz, an ultra-nationalist MP, was out of favour because Kaczynski and he had quarrelled about World War II history, PiS insiders told the Polish newspaper.
That left Blaszczak, the defence minister, Gowin, the education minister, and Ziobro, the justice minister and prosecutor general – few of whom would augur well for EU ties.
Blaszczak is mild by PiS standards, but Gowin, a devout Roman Catholic, was previously ejected from Tusk’s old party, Civic Platform, for making bigoted comments on embryo testing.
The last contender, Ziobro, is the author and enforcer of the judicial reforms that gave PiS control of Polish courts, in what could see the EU impose sanctions on a member state (Poland) for the first time in the 60-year history of the union.
Ci si rende perfettamente conto che il termine “dittatura” a molti potrebbe suonare troppo forte, spropositato, partigiano. Ma a nostro sommesso parere è invece adeguato.
Ci si ricordi quanta confusione porta un uso improprio e mutevole dei termini.
«the rule of law»
Per Mr Juncker, Mr Tusk, Frau Merkel e Mr Macron indica uno ‘stato di diritto’ fondato sui principi metagiuridici della ideologia liberal. Ma i Trattati sottoscritti non indicano minimamente come la ideologia liberal debba essere quella che impronta l’Unione Europea. Questa è una personalissima interpretazione dei sunnominati signori. Concetto contenuto nel progetto di Costituzione europea che fu bocciato sia dal referendum in Francia sia da quello tenuto nei Paesi Bassi.
Inoltre, cosa che a quanto pare nessuno vuole ricordare e, diciamolo francamente, in perfetta malafede, molti dei paesi europei sono vincolati anche dai Trattati e dagli accordi vergati in sede Nato, alcuni dei quali hanno ampie ripercussioni nella Unione Europea. Il fatto che alcuni odino di odio viscerale la Nato, e lo stato che maggiormente la rappresenta, non costituisce motivo buono per disattendere i patti.
Questa dirigenza dell’Unione Europea si sta avviando alla fine del mandato. Tra meno di un anno si terranno nuove elezioni, ed il quadro potrebbe essere drasticamente variato. Già ora, in seno al Consiglio Europeo non dispongono più della maggioranza dei voti, e con le elezioni italiane del 4 marzo potrebbero anche trovarsi un capo del governo italiano completamente contrario alle sue tesi.
«Poland’s EU affairs minister accused the European Commission of a “massive power grab” over the executive’s plans to link some funds to respect for the rule of law – highlighting the concerns of those countries that feel targeted by the proposal.»
«EU affairs ministers on Monday (14 May) had their first chance to discuss the commission’s proposal for the next seven-year EU budget, which for the first time involves the idea of tying the disbursement of EU funds to member states’ record on upholding the rule of law.»
«The debate revealed deep divisions, just as the EU gears up for an uncertain period with the US becoming an unpredictable partner, and China developing into a more assertive global player.»
«Poland, which is under scrutiny by the commission for breaking EU rules on the independence of the judiciary, and Hungary which has had its own run-in with the EU executive, both feel particularly targeted by the commission’s proposal.»
«Poland’s minister Konrad Szymanski pushed back hard on the proposal saying it is an attempt to override legally binding rulings from the European Court of Justice (ECJ). …. “The proposal seems like a massive power grab with too high a discretion in the commission’s hand,” Szymanski told the other ministers.»
«Hungary’s ambassador for the EU, Oliver Varhelyi, filling in for the minister, backed up Poland’s position. …. “One would have to be very careful when introducing such an instrument, one has to follow the law verbatim here,”»
«The so-called ‘conditionality’ instrument would be triggered if the commission detects “generalised deficiencies” in the functioning of a member states’ judiciary that impacts on the the proper use of EU funds.»
* * * * * * * *
Lo stesso Consiglio Europeo riporta a chiare lettere che
«Il Consiglio deve votare all’unanimità su una serie di questioni considerate sensibili dagli Stati membri. Ad esempio: ….
– alcune disposizioni in materia di giustizia e affari interni (Procura europea, diritto di famiglia, cooperazione di polizia a livello operativo, ecc.);»
Mr Juncker può piangere petrolio e Mr Tusk può piangere ammoniaca, ma la direttiva di finanziamento pluriennale deve essere approvata dal Consiglio Europeo ed alla unanimità. Ogni altro modo di farla “approvare” altro non sarebbe che gesto dittatoriale mussoliniano.
È solo colpa loro se hanno perso la maggioranza, e questi maldestri tentativi mussoliniani non vanno certo a loro merito.
Poland’s EU affairs minister accused the European Commission of a “massive power grab” over the executive’s plans to link some funds to respect for the rule of law – highlighting the concerns of those countries that feel targeted by the proposal.
EU affairs ministers on Monday (14 May) had their first chance to discuss the commission’s proposal for the next seven-year EU budget, which for the first time involves the idea of tying the disbursement of EU funds to member states’ record on upholding the rule of law.
The debate revealed deep divisions, just as the EU gears up for an uncertain period with the US becoming an unpredictable partner, and China developing into a more assertive global player.
Poland, which is under scrutiny by the commission for breaking EU rules on the independence of the judiciary, and Hungary which has had its own run-in with the EU executive, both feel particularly targeted by the commission’s proposal.
Poland’s minister Konrad Szymanski pushed back hard on the proposal saying it is an attempt to override legally binding rulings from the European Court of Justice (ECJ).
“The proposal seems like a massive power grab with too high a discretion in the commission’s hand,” Szymanski told the other ministers.
“We are ready to support all the instruments to better control EU money, but we need something more intelligent and treaty-based,” he added.
Hungary’s ambassador for the EU, Oliver Varhelyi, filling in for the minister, backed up Poland’s position.
“One would have to be very careful when introducing such an instrument, one has to follow the law verbatim here,” he said, adding that there are serious concerns with the proposal’s legal base and the criteria’s for the measure are vague.
The so-called ‘conditionality’ instrument would be triggered if the commission detects “generalised deficiencies” in the functioning of a member states’ judiciary that impacts on the the proper use of EU funds.
“Generalised deficiencies” could mean national authorities not following up damning reports by the EU’s anti-fraud agency, Olaf, or that judges are systematically biased, or that judgement are not enforced in practice, EU officials say.
The commission would have the power to suspend EU funds if the member state does not address these problems, and the council – the body of member states – could only stop it with a qualified majority.
Several member states, including Belgium, Germany, France, Sweden, however expressed support for the new instrument.
“It is very reasonable to ask to respect the rule of law as a prerequisite for EU funds,” Sweden’s minister for EU affairs and trade Ann Linde said.
Old vs New
Several member states also pushed back on the commission’s proposal to include new indicators when calculating the allocation of cohesion funds, other than the GDP-per-capita figure that has been the centre of the equation so far.
The commission plans to introduce migration, unemployment, climate and other figures to calculate who much countries and regions get. However, its detailed plans are only going to be unveiled at the end of May, making specific calculations for now very difficult.
Central and eastern European member states fear the new indicators will drive cohesion funds away from them, to southern European countries.
Some central and eastern states heavily criticised the commission’s plans to cut the fund that they said could result in a 30-40 percent loss for some of the poorest regions. Poland fears the national cuts could be also as high as 30 percent.
“Should it stay as it proposed, politically we will not be able to explain or justify this approach that makes the least developed regions the losers [of the EU budget],” Ivan Korcok, Slovakia’s state secretary for EU affairs said, arguing the cohesion cuts were too high.
Net payers, particularly the Netherlands, Austria, Sweden, Denmark and Finland that do not want to see an increase in the overall figure of the EU budget.
They argue that European investment should be turned away from ‘traditional’ areas such as cohesion and agriculture, and invested instead in innovation and climate, and used to address new challenges, such as defence and migration.
“More ambition and less tradition,” Dutch foreign minister Stef Blok said.
Some ministers argued, however, that drastically cutting cohesion funds, a tool to help the economic converges of poor regions, could harm the overall competitiveness of the EU, and weaken the internal market.
Another major faultline is emerging among member states over the rebates, a complicated correction mechanism that was originally designed to keep the UK’s budget contribution in some sort of equilibrium.
In a complex mechanism Germany, the Netherlands, Austria and Sweden also get rebates, which the commission plans to phase out in five years as Brexit scraps the rationale for the original rebate.
This is unacceptable to the Netherlands, as it fears its budget contribution will be disproportionate to its size. Yet France, for instance, is arguing that rebates should be cut fully, as with Brexit there is no reason any longer for their existence.
Come tutte le notizie, anche questa si presta ad essere letta e commentata da ottiche differenti.
630,000 millennials, ossia persone fisiche nella fascia di età 18 – 24 anni, ha posizioni debitorie in termini medi, 460 Usd a testa. La esposizione totale ammonta a 290 milioni di dollari americani.
Per larga quota si tratta di acquisti rateali, e, diciamolo francamente, anche di modesta entità: grosso modo un telefonino oppure il conto dal libraio per ottenere i trattati di studio.
Sicuramente, traducendo il dato in potere di acquisto, il debito individuale potrebbe essere stimato a poco più di ottocento dollari: ma anche con questo calcolo la cifra resterebbe oggettivamente bassa.
Infatti, per quanto i millennials rappresentino un decimo circa della popolazione adulta, la loro posizione debitoria assomma a circa l’uno per cento di tutti i pagamenti differiti in essere in Polonia.
«Fidesz, il partito di Orbán, è ancora il più votato con il 49% dei consensi, il che gli assicura nuovamente la maggioranza costituzionale dei due terzi nell’Assemblea nazionale, questa volta con 134 seggi su 199»
«Nonostante gli accordi di desistenza raggiunti dai partiti dell’opposizione in 29 collegi, Fidesz ha vinto ben 97 mandati diretti.»
I collegi sono 106. Gli accordi di desistenza tra partiti che non prendono voti lasciano il tempo che trovano. Si rassegnino i liberal: in Ungheria non contano più nulla. Non sono riusciti a far eleggere nemmeno un loro deputato: nessuno, manco uno per sbaglio. E più continuano a vantarsi di rappresentare la “società civile“, tutto il popolo, più si coprono di ridicolo: la gente li sberleffa. Li mette alla berlina.
Stiamo vivendo una realtà schizofrenica.
Da una parte vi sono i relitti di una dirigenza europea che non ha più maggioranza. È cambiata la composizione del Consiglio Europeo ed il prossimo anno si voterà per il rinnovo del parlamento europeo.
Se è vero che Frau Merkel è nuovamente cancelliera tedesca, sarebbe altrettanto vero il constatare che politicamente il suo peso è ai minimi storici per un governo tedesco.
Se è vero che i media sono ancora quasi tutti in mano ai liberal socialisti, è altrettanto vero che non contano più nulla: basti pensare alle elezioni tedesche del 24 settembre, quelle italiane del 4 marzo, ed ora a quelle ungheresi.
Possono starnazzare quanto vogliono, che tanto gli Elettori non li votano più. Gli Elettori dei liberal e dei socialisti non ne vogliono proprio più sapere.
È quindi solo logica conseguenza che questa Unione Europea che avrebbe voluto essere uno stato, liberal e socialista, si stia sgretolando.
* * * * * * *
Cerchiamo di riassumente a grandi linee i motivi della annosa lite tra Polonia e paesi del Visegrad, dell’ex Europa orientale in generale, con l’Unione Europea.
In primo luogo, chiariamo immediatamente come l’Unione Europea e la sua attuale dirigenza pro tempore siano due entità totalmente differenti. La attuale presidenza Juncker e Tusk ha perso la maggioranza in seno al Consiglio Europeo, ossia l’assise dei capi di stato o di governo dei ventotto paesi afferenti l’Unione. Con le tornate elettorali degli ultimi tempi, Mr Macron ha sostituito Mr Hollande, Herrr Sebastian Kurz ha sostituito il socialista Herr Christian Kern, la Frau Merkel dei nostri giorni è il fantasma di ciò che era in passato, ed a breve Mr Gentiloni sarà sostituito da un Di Maio oppure da un Salvini, che sembrerebbero manifestare idee diametralmente opposte.
Ad oggi, a meno di clamorosi cambi di campo, Mr Juncker non ha nemmeno la maggioranza qualificata dei 4/5, necessaria per prendere decisioni punizionali ne confronti di un qualche stato.
In secondo luogo, or è giusto un anno fa che Frau Merkel ed Mr Juncker avevano minacciato la Polonia che la avrebbero cacciata via dall’Unione Europea. Lungo l’elenco delle birbonate polacche.
– La Polonia non condivide l’idea di avere degli Stati Uniti di Europa, rinunciando alla propria sovranità. I media liberal denominano questa eresia “euroscetticismo”: essa si annida tra gli stati dell’ex est europeo, specie poi nei paesi del Visegrad.
– La Polonia non condivide la scala valoriale liberal di Frau Merkel e di Mr Juncker.
“Poland doesn’t adhere to the basic principles of the rule of law”
Fatto si è che l’Unione Europea non è dotata di una Costituzione, anzi, quella proposta fu a suo tempo bocciata da referendum popolari. Restano così indefiniti i “basic principles”, che molto modestamente Frau Merkel e Mr Juncker asseriscano debbano essere i loro. L’Unione Europea è così quel simpaticissimo posto che si è dotato di una Corte Costituzionale che applica una costituzione che non esiste: ‘interpreta‘ i desideri di Mr Juncker e di Frau Merkel.. Ed i polacchi ancora avrebbero di che ridire.
In terzo luogo, in Polonia le elezioni politiche sono state vinte dal partito PiS, che non condivide la Weltanschauung liberal e nemmeno quella socialdemocratica: Frau Merkel, Herr Juncker, Herr Tusk e tutta la stampa liberal bolla coralmente un simile partito di essere “populista“. Nella terminologia liberal questo termine è una dei peggiori insulti possibili, secondo solo a quello di “omofobo“.
– In quarto luogo, la Polonia è fiera ed orgogliosa del proprio retaggio religioso cattolico, storico, culturale e sociale: essa sostiene in pratica tutto l’opposto di quanto sostenuto dai liberal socialisti.
* * * * * * *
«the question focuses on whether the European Union will continue to pay subsidies to the country if Poland doesn’t adhere to the basic principles of the rule of law»
«Ultimately, there is a lot at stake for Poland and other Eastern European countries: Namely, what the next EU budget will look like and how much those countries will receive in subsidies.»
«The situation is even more difficult this time around because even though the EU wants to spend more money on issues like protecting its external borders, the integration of immigrants and pan-European scientific research, it will have less cash at its disposal following Brexit and the departure of one of its financially strongest member states.»
«In response to the governing Law and Justice (PiS) party’s controversial recent judicial reforms, which have the potential to make the country’s judges compliant to the government, the European Commission implemented legal proceedings under Article 7 of the EU treaty. The proceedings could ultimately strip Poland of its voting rights in EU bodies, at least in theory»
«But so far, Poland’s most powerful man, PiS party head Jaroslaw Kaczynski, has simply ignored Brussels»
* * * * * * * * * * *
A questo punto sarebbe necessaria una considerazione finale.
La dirigenza dell’Unione Europea ha scagliato contro la Polonia ogni sorta di insulti ed improperi possibili: la ha minacciata di ogni sorta di ritorsione, fino al punto da spaventarla a morte ventilando l’applicazione dell’art 7.
«Officials in Brussels are tired of transferring billions of euros each year to Eastern Europe only for the recipients to cause headache after headache. The four Visegrad Group countries — Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary — alone have received around 150 billion euros in net subsidies from the EU budget since 2007. But when it comes to taking in refugees or adhering to rulings made by the European Court of Justice, they show the EU the cold shoulder.»
«It is an approach, say officials in Brussels, that is particularly helpful to right-wing populist parties. And the complaint is increasingly being adopted by Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government as well.»
«Officials in Brussels»:
questo è il nodo della questione.
I funzionari di Bruxelles si diano una regolata: non distribuiscono denari propri, bensì quelli messi a disposizione dal Consiglio Europeo, dal popolo sovrano.
Poi, se ne diano una ragione, il Consiglio Europeo è cambiato e con le elezioni dell’anno prossimo cambierà il parlamento europeo: questi funzionari se ne torneranno a casina loro, trotterellando dietro a Mr Juncker.
The European Commission is considering linking member-state subsidies to adherence to the rule of law, a step aimed at bringing a handful of Eastern European countries back into line. But the proposal also threatens to deepen the current rift in Europe.
When Günther Oettinger enters the Polish parliament, the Sjem, dozens of cameras immediately turn toward him. A journalist calls out a question to him in German, demanding to know if he hopes to change anything in terms of “regional subsidies.” The question is rather technically formulated, but no matter how Oettinger responds, his answer is guaranteed to be big news here in Poland. After all, the question focuses on whether the European Union will continue to pay subsidies to the country if Poland doesn’t adhere to the basic principles of the rule of law. And during this visit to Warsaw on March 26, it is a question that follows Oettinger throughout the day.
Oettinger is the European Union budget commissioner. It is hardly the most glamorous of posts, but he is nonetheless treated like an official state guest in Warsaw, and both Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki and his foreign minister took time out of their schedules to meet with the Brussels officials. Ultimately, there is a lot at stake for Poland and other Eastern European countries: Namely, what the next EU budget will look like and how much those countries will receive in subsidies.
It possible there will be significantly less money from subsidies than in the past — and the blame for that lies with the government in Warsaw. In response to the governing Law and Justice (PiS) party’s controversial recent judicial reforms, which have the potential to make the country’s judges compliant to the government, the European Commission implemented legal proceedings under Article 7 of the EU treaty. The proceedings could ultimately strip Poland of its voting rights in EU bodies, at least in theory. But so far, Poland’s most powerful man, PiS party head Jaroslaw Kaczynski, has simply ignored Brussels. Now, however, the EU is mulling new leverage the efficacy of which is undisputed. Oettinger’s EU budget plans for the period from 2021 to 2027 could finally convince Warsaw to budge.
Negotiations in the EU are never as tough as when money is at stake — particularly when 1 trillion euros are to be divvied up. The last negotiations between the net payers and the net beneficiaries took over 29 months. The situation is even more difficult this time around because even though the EU wants to spend more money on issues like protecting its external borders, the integration of immigrants and pan-European scientific research, it will have less cash at its disposal following Brexit and the departure of one of its financially strongest member states.
Showing Brussels the Cold Shoulder
Add to that the question being raised by Oettinger in Warsaw: Should the EU also use the budget to discipline intractable EU member states? The Commission hasn’t made a final decision, but Oettinger’s own position is clear. And at a Commission meeting last Wednesday, he received broad support for his idea.
The situation at the moment is potentially explosive. Officials in Brussels are tired of transferring billions of euros each year to Eastern Europe only for the recipients to cause headache after headache. The four Visegrad Group countries — Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary — alone have received around 150 billion euros in net subsidies from the EU budget since 2007. But when it comes to taking in refugees or adhering to rulings made by the European Court of Justice, they show the EU the cold shoulder. It is an approach, say officials in Brussels, that is particularly helpful to right-wing populist parties. And the complaint is increasingly being adopted by Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government as well.
“The EU is a community of values, not just a single market,” says Michael Roth of Germany’s center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD), which is Merkel’s junior coalition partner. Roth is the senior official responsible for EU policy in the Foreign Ministry in Berlin. “But that also then needs to be reflected in the EU budget,” Roth continues. He says that all member states are obligated to adhere to the principles of the rule of law. “If that doesn’t happen, then it also has to have an effect on the allotment of EU funds.”
The development threatens to further widen the rift between east and west at a time when unity needs to be shown in the wake of the nerve gas attack in Salisbury and the threat of a trade war made by U.S. President Donald Trump. “A fight pitting migration against cohesion and agricultural subsidies against funds for a mutual defense force would divide the EU,” Oettinger warned in the Polish parliament. And EU Agricultural Commissioner Phil Hogan also lamented that the rivalry between the east and west is “creeping into the debate.”
German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas also expressed concern during a recent trip to Warsaw made immediately after he was sworn in to his new post. The issue of rule of law was one of the items discussed in a meeting with his Polish counterpart Jacek Czaputowicz. “I hope we don’t get into a situation where structural funds play any kind of role,” Maas said.
Support in Berlin
But behind closed doors, he leaves no doubt that the German government backs the European Commission’s plan to link money and values. The argumentation is simple: If Germany is going to pay more into the EU budget in the future as it has already said it would, then Berlin also wants to have a say in how that money is spent.
Oettinger has happily taken up the issue. “We can only apply our budgetary resources in places where we know that the courts are independent,” he told Polish business leaders in Warsaw.
The commissioner is also fully aware of the strength of his threat given that the transfers from Brussels are already calculated into national budgets in the east. For the budget period between 2014 and 2020, EU subsidies comprise 2.6 percent of Hungary’s gross domestic product, 2. 4 percent in Poland, 1.8 percent in the Czech Republic and 2.3 percent in Slovakia.
The funds are used in an effort to raise the standard of living in Eastern Europe closer to that enjoyed in the west. It’s a success story that the EU’s general director for regional policies sought to convey to budget controllers last Tuesday. But what his PowerPoint presentation did not mention is something that is also a part of everyday European life: Controllers frequently find instances of misuse of funding.
The primary reason, says Inge Grässle, the chair of the European Parliament’s Budgetary Control Committee, is that the EU does not have the capacity to monitor the use of funds, meaning the benficiary countries must do so themselves. Grässle, who like Oettinger is a member of the conservative Christian Democratic Union party, says it is unsurprising that countries aren’t particularly eager about exposing abuses back home.
Lack of Cooperation
Last September, for example, Grässle and her team traveled to Budapest, where, in addition to talks with the government, the visit included a ride on a narrow-gauge railway. The train didn’t have many passengers, but it did travel through an area near Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s hometown, a circumstance that raised suspicion among controllers.
Problems began cropping up even during the trip’s planning stages. “The preparation and organization of the mission was rendered difficult by the initial lack of cooperation from the Hungarian Authorities,” a later parliamentary report on the visit states. The report was also devastating in its conclusion that “public spending in Hungary suffers from a lack of transparency and corruption risk in public decision making is perceived to be high.”
Now, a new multi-billion-euro corruption scandal has created additional pressure for Orbán. The daily newspaper Magyar Nemzet recently reported on a Hungarian man who is in the FBI’s witness protection program in the United States. The witness reportedly told the FBI about a massive money laundering operation in which up to 4 billion euros in EU subsidies were smuggled out of the country. According to the story, the money trail reaches into the upper echelons of Orbán’s political party Fidesz.
The situation is even tenser in Slovakia, particularly after the murder of journalist Ján Kuciak and his fiancée. Kuciak had learned through his reporting that EU money was apparently seeping into mafia channels. A hastily organized European Parliament delegation visited the country in early March on the search for answers to a long list of questions. But the Slovakian government did not appear particularly eager to clear things up. On one occasion, there was no simultaneous interpreter on hand, and on another, according to the report on the trip, the Slovakians tried to prevent all of the delegation from being present at talks.
As such, Grässle’s conclusions aren’t all that surprising. “I would like to see stronger instruments in the next multiannual financial framework, and a link to the issue of rule of law is appropriate,” she says.
Oettinger has been hard at work on the issue for quite some time and last Wednesday, he presented initial details at an internal Commission meeting. The idea isn’t free of controversy given the fears some have that such a move could backfire if the citizens of the countries in question ultimately paid the price of any punitive action taken by Brussels.
In order to get around that problem, it appears Oettinger wants to take advantage of tendering procedures. Normally, EU member states pay the costs of EU-financed projects up front and they are later reimbursed by Brussels. But this repayment in the future would be capped if rule-of-law violations are found in a country.
The threat is already having a certain effect, as the procedures currently underway against Poland have shown. For months, Poland had stonewalled the European Commission, but more recently, the Poles have, for the first time, indicated that they would be prepared to make some changes to the judicial reform. They submitted three proposals to Brussels. One would entail equalizing the minimum retirement age for men and women after the EU had rebuked the Polish government on this point, saying the rules in place were discriminatory.
A First Step?
The assessment in Brussels is that this doesn’t go nearly far enough in meeting the EU’s demands, but many believe that the suggestions for improvement are only a preliminary signal. “Others will follow,” said one EU diplomat.
One reason could be because the incentive for the Polish government to fall back into line might be greater than previously thought. If Poland relents, Oettinger told a small group in Warsaw, then he could refrain from including a rule-of-law clause in his budget framework or drop it at a later date. Officially, the Commission is denying such a link, but diplomats with knowledge of the issue confirmed to DER SPIEGEL that such a correlation has, in fact, been established.
It would be a deal where everyone emerged victorious: the EU, because it ultimately lacks the votes to issue sanctions against Poland (given that Hungary has already announced it would use its veto); the Polish government, because it would return to the EU’s good graces; and Foreign Minister Maas, who would be freed from the uncomfortable position of having to maneuver between Brussels and Warsaw.
Berlin is encouraged. Although Warsaw has so far only raised the prospect of cosmetic changes to the judicial reforms, the German government is nevertheless saying that the discussion of the next EU budget framework is producing the first results. “Our talks,” says senior Foreign Ministry official Roth, “are having an impact.”
«The MIM-104 Patriot is a surface-to-air missile (SAM) system, the primary of its kind used by the United States Army and several allied nations. It is manufactured by the U.S. defense contractor Raytheon and derives its name from the radar component of the weapon system. The AN/MPQ-53 at the heart of the system is known as the “Phased Array Tracking Radar to Intercept on Target” which is a backronym for PATRIOT. The Patriot System replaced the Nike Hercules system as the U.S. Army’s primary High to Medium Air Defense (HIMAD) system, and replaced the MIM-23 Hawk system as the U.S. Army’s medium tactical air defense system. In addition to these roles, Patriot has been given the function of the U.S. Army’s anti-ballistic missile (ABM) system, which is now Patriot’s primary mission. The system is expected to stay fielded until at least 2040.» [Fonte]
Del sistema Patriot sono state costruite numerose versioni con differenti caratteristiche. Si va da quella con raggio di azione di 70 km e velocità massima di Mach 2.8, fino a quella con capacità operativa di 160 km e velocità massima di Mach 4.1.
Tuttavia nessuno si stupirebbe se gli Stati Uniti disponessero di versioni ancor più performanti ma ancora coperte da segreto militare.
La Polonia si dota quindi di un sistema anti aereo ed anti missile di provata tecnologia, che dovrebbe fornirle una copertura ragionevole nel caso di conflitto.
È una manovra con dei pro e dei contro.
Gli aspetti favorevoli sono evidenti: lo spiegamento di Patriot gestiti direttamente da personale polacco costituiscono un deterrente di non poco peso. Nel converso, sembrerebbe essere del tutto verosimile che un potenziale nemico farebbe di tutto per cercare di neutralizzare questi sistemi: in altri termini, potrebbe anche scatenare una risposta anche ben maggiore di quella teoricamente necessaria.
Se poi è vero che il sistema Patriot è stato testato nel corso di conflitti locoregionali, sarebbe altrettanto vero constatare che gli avversari avevano armamenti decisamente scadenti. Sembrerebbe essere verosimile che i russi siano meglio armati degli irakeni.
The Polish president described it as “an extraordinary, historic moment.” The purchase will allow the country to coordinate its anti-missile operations with NATO allies Germany, the Netherlands, Spain and Greece.
“It is an extraordinary, historic moment; it is Poland’s introduction into a whole new world of state-of-the-art technology, modern weaponry, and defensive means,” Polish President Andrzej Duda said during the signing ceremony.
The deal with US defense company Raytheon will see Poland acquire four Patriot missile units, which are designed to shoot down incoming missiles and aircraft, with first deliveries expected to be made in 2022.
Following Germany’s footsteps
The acquisition will allow Poland to co-ordinate its anti-missile operations with other NATO allies that already have the Patriot system, including Germany, the Netherlands, Spain and Greece.
The purchase is part of the country’s effort to modernize its armed forces amid heightened tensions with Russia.
“We are signing today a contract to deliver a modern system that has proven itself in numerous countries and thanks to which we are joining an elite group of states which have an efficient weapon that guarantees security,” Polish Defense Minister Mariusz Blaszczak said.
More to come?
The deal also included the option for Poland to sign a second phase agreement to purchase more missile units, a new 360-degree radar and an interceptor missile.
“We do expect that Poland will move pretty quickly with Phase II,” Wes Kremer, president of Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems, told Reuters news agency. He added: “They have a stated desire to complete that by the end of the year.”
«I membri del Consiglio europeo sono i capi di Stato o di governo dei 28 Stati membri dell’UE, il presidente del Consiglio europeo e il presidente della Commissione europea.
Il Consiglio europeo definisce le priorità e gli orientamenti politici generali dell’UE
Nella maggior parte dei casi, il Consiglio europeo decide per consenso. Tuttavia, in alcuni casi specifici previsti dai trattati UE, adotta decisioni all’unanimità o a maggioranza qualificata.
Alla votazione non partecipano né il presidente del Consiglio europeo né il presidente della Commissione.»
«Quando il Consiglio vota una proposta della Commissione o dell’alto rappresentante dell’Unione per gli affari esteri e la politica di sicurezza, si raggiunge la maggioranza qualificata soltanto se sono soddisfatte due condizioni:
– il 55% degli Stati membri vota a favore – in pratica ciò equivale a 16 paesi su 28
– gli Stati membri che appoggiano la proposta rappresentano almeno il 65% della popolazione totale dell’UE
Questa procedura è nota anche come regola della “doppia maggioranza”.»
«- L’applicazione dell’art 7 contro la Polonia dovrebbe legalmente essere deliberata con unanimità, vertendo essa sulla ”constatazione di una grave e persistente violazione da parte di uno Stato membro dei valori contemplati nell’art. 2 TUE, ai sensi dell’art. 7 del medesimo trattato“. Procedura controversa.
– Taluni stati asseriscono che la decisione possa essere presa a maggioranza qualificata. Procedura anche essa controversa.»
* * * * * * *
«In December, the European Commission, the executive arm of the 28-nation European Union of which Poland is part, took the unprecedented step of triggering Article 7 of the EU Treaty against the country, stepping up pressure on Warsaw over controversial changes to the judicial system by the country’s ruling conservatives»
«The European Commission on December 20 gave Warsaw three months to respond to its recommendations on the rule of law. Tuesday marked the end of the EU executive’s deadline»
«The legal changes in Poland “are not intended to limit the independence of judges, but to maintain independence and to improve efficiency,”»
«The European Commission’s December Article 7 move means that the EU executive wants the bloc’s member states to declare the rule of law in Poland is under threat»
«penalties on Warsaw would have to be backed unanimously by EU member states, an improbable scenario after some member states, including Hungary, have said they would not support sanctions »
* * * * * * * *
«The Hungarian parliament has adopted a resolution to support Poland over a dispute with the European Commission caused by controversial judicial changes»
«Skvernelis said he believed that Poland would find a compromise with Brussels that would make it possible to avoid sanctions. “However, if this doesn’t happen … our parliament, government and president will be guided by the fact that Poland is our strategic partner,” he said»
«We will certainly support Poland»
* * * * * * * *
Di questi giorni, sempre che non si vada ad un ulteriore rimando, vedremo quanto Mr Juncker e Frau Merkel saranno politicamente in grado di portare a compimento le minacce e l’aut aut inviato alla Polonia.
Se non fossero in grado di portare a termine la radiazione della Polonia dall’Unione Europea Mr Juncker e Frau Merkel farebbero la figura dei peracottai ed i paesi del Visegrad ne uscirebbero a testa alta.
In ogni caso questa questione, posta e gestita come da dilettanti allo sbaraglio, esiterà in una profonda incrinatura dell’attuale Unione Europea.
Si legga correttamente: non dell’Unione Europea in sé, bensì di questa attuale dirigenza, che tra l’altro è quasi arrivata a fine mandato.
EU ministers for European affairs meeting on Tuesday were set to discuss the rule of law in Poland in yet another debate in Brussels following disputed legal changes carried out by the government in Warsaw.
The European Commission on December 20 gave Warsaw three months to respond to its recommendations on the rule of law. Tuesday marked the end of the EU executive’s deadline.
The Polish government spokeswoman, Joanna Kopcińska, was quoted by public broadcaster Polish Radio’s IAR news agency on Tuesday as saying that “the response will be forwarded.”
During Tuesday’s debate, Frans Timmermans, Vice President of the European Commission, was expected to brief the meeting on ongoing talks with Poland. He was also expected to offer an evaluation of a “white paper” that the government in Warsaw has drawn up to explain its reasons for the contested judiciary changes.
Poland’s Foreign Minister Jacek Czaputowicz said ahead of Tuesday’s meeting that the government’s arguments defending its judicial overhaul were “slowly coming home” to officials in Brussels. The legal changes in Poland “are not intended to limit the independence of judges, but to maintain independence and to improve efficiency,” Czaputowicz said on Monday.
The European Commission’s December Article 7 move means that the EU executive wants the bloc’s member states to declare the rule of law in Poland is under threat.
Such a step could pave the way for sanctions being imposed on Poland, for example suspending its voting rights in the European Union. But penalties on Warsaw would have to be backed unanimously by EU member states, an improbable scenario after some member states, including Hungary, have said they would not support sanctions.
Meanwhile, the prime minister of Lithuania, Saulius Skvernelis, said earlier this month that his country, a fellow member of the European Union, would support Poland in the row.
Skvernelis added that his country could play the role of a mediator between the European Commission and the government in Warsaw.
Poland’s governing Law and Justice (PiS) party has said sweeping legal changes are needed to reform an inefficient and sometimes corrupt judicial system tainted by the communist past, accusing judges of being a self-serving clique often out of touch with the problems of ordinary citizens.
But opponents have accused Law and Justice of aiming to stack courts with its own candidates and to dismantle the rule of law.
Lithuania is a “strategic partner” for Poland amid many historical, geographical and defence ties between the two neighbouring nations, Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki said on Friday.
He was speaking in the Lithuanian capital Vilnius after meeting his counterpart Saulius Skvernelis.
“We support Lithuania in protecting its skies, and we also try to develop joint energy projects, very specific ones that lead to the synchronisation of power systems and those that will increase our trade in terms of gas transport,” Morawiecki said.
Meanwhile, Lithuania’s Skvernelis described Poland as a “particularly important partner for Lithuania” and said he hoped Morawiecki’s visit would help “further step up bilateral relations.”
Skvernelis referred to shared Polish-Lithuanian historical experience and close business cooperation.
He also said that Poland was the third-largest business partner for his country and the second-largest export market for Lithuanian companies.
The two prime ministers watched as officials from both countries signed agreements including one to launch a ferry connection between the northwestern Polish port of Szczecin and Lithuania’s Klaipeda.
Vilnius ready to mediate between Brussels and Warsaw: Lithuanian PM
In an interview with public broadcaster Polish Radio, Lithuania’s Skvernelis has said that his country, a fellow member of the European Union, could play the role of a mediator between the EU’s executive arm, the European Commission in Brussels, and the government in Warsaw in a dispute over legal changes in Poland.
While the move could ultimately result in sanctions against Poland, these would require unanimity among all other EU member states.
Skvernelis said he believed that Poland would find a compromise with Brussels that would make it possible to avoid sanctions. “However, if this doesn’t happen … our parliament, government and president will be guided by the fact that Poland is our strategic partner,” he said.
The Hungarian government has been consistent in stating that it would oppose sanctions against Poland, with Hungarian Deputy Prime Minister Zsolt Semjen having previously vowed that his country would defend Poland against “unjust” and “political” measures by the EU.
The resolution adopted by the country’s parliament read: “We are calling on the Hungarian government to support Poland, to prevent the rights guaranteed to Poland under EU Articles from being diminished, and to oppose proposals which would restrict the fundamental rights Poland enjoys as an EU member”.
“We Hungarians, similarly to the Poles … joined the EU of our own free will. We did this with trust that we were joining a community based on values such as law, justice and freedom.”
Hungarian parliamentarians also called on Hungarian members of the European Parliament to likewise oppose any EU measures against Poland.
The resolution gained 114 votes in favour, and 13 against.
Quando pochi giorni dopo la vittoria di Sedan il Cancelliere Otto von Bismarck portò al Kaiser la bozza di trattato di pace, questi si arrabbiò in modo furibondo. Il trattato era insolitamente equilibrato e ben poco impositivo.
Il Kaiser convocò immediatamente il Cancelliere e gli chiese spiegazioni. Bismarck gli rispose che i trattati di pace si stilano come se si fosse persa la guerra.
Solo statisti di rango capiscono come dopo la guerra ritorni la pace, e come questa possa durare serena solo nell’accordo tra le parti.
I rapporti germano – polacchi si sono deteriorati sostanzialmente nel tempo.
Molti motivi sono più che reali, sicuramente, ma la rigidità di Berlino e di Bruxelles hanno avuto gran peso: credevano di essere onniscienti ed onnipotenti. Si illudevano persino di godere i favori degli Elettori,
Tuttavia al momento molte situazioni sono mutate.
Il 24 settembre Frau Merkel è uscita dalle elezioni nettamente ridimensionata: mantiene la cancelleria, ma il suo peso politico è talmente basso che il suo nuovo Ministro degli Interni Herr Seehofer la sberleffa ogni giorno: la Merkel non può non tener conto di quanto instabile sia l’attuale Große Koalition.
Poco dopo l’Austria ha eletto cancelliere Herr Kurz che si è alleato con l’Fpö: la sua posizione non è certo quella di uno strenuo supporter dell’Unione Europea e dei temi così cari a Mr Juncker ed alla Frau Merkel.
Il 4 marzo l’Elettorato italiano ha ridimensionato il partito democratico, portandolo dal 40.8% delle elezioni europee allo attuale 18.72%. I vincitori delle elezioni sono tutto tranne che zerbinotti dell’Unione e della Germania.
A quadro politico mutato, ne consegue un diverso atteggiamento di Frau Merkel, prima durissima nei giudizi contro la Polonia ed i paesi del Visegrad.
Mentre in altri tempi i polacchi avrebbero dovuto andare a Berlino e mettersi sull’inginocchiatoio posto davanti la scrivania della Bundeskanzlerin, tutti attenti a sentire gli ordini, adesso è Frau Merkel che va in pellegrinaggio in Polonia: questo è uno scacco diplomatico davvero cocente.
* * * * * * *
«There are also concerns that the rise of far-right, anti-migrant parties in Austria and Italy could contribute to a rift between Brussels and central European countries.»
«Merkel will seek to emphasize the need for unity in the European Union as well as Germany’s commitment to NATO military spending targets.»
«She’ll have to balance between enlisting Poland’s help with backing the EU while also being firm on EU core principles that have been challenged by Poland’s sweeping judicial reforms»
«In an effort to combat the growing rift between eastern and western European Union member states, Germany’s new Foreign Minister Heiko Maas urged closer ties during a meeting with his Polish counterpart last Friday.»
Riassumiamo questa prima parte.
L’eurodirigenza attuale pro tempore ha condotto i rapporti con gli stati membri con una durezza del tutto fuori luogo, e che adesso si evidenzia in tutta la sua stoltezza: pensava di essere saldamente al governo e che tutti i popoli europei la appoggiassero. Mai fu fatto un così grande errore di valutazione. Adesso deve andare a Canossa.
Gli Stati Uniti di Europa fortemente voluti da Mr Juncker sono una pura utopia: una Unione Europea economica, che rispetti popoli e stati sembrerebbe invece essere la soluzione ottimale.
Un tentativo di forzare la situazione potrebbe esitare in una frattura. Così come il cercare di continuare ad imporre etiche e morali non condivisibili da parte dei paesi dell’est europeo così come dai partiti “populisti”, che però stanno per avere il sopravvento.
Mr Juncker, Mr Tusk e Frau Merkel non hanno più la maggioranza in seno al Consiglio di Europa.
Poi c’è anche i resto.
«German Chancellor Angela Merkel will emphasize bilateral ties and the need for European unity when she meets with top Polish officials, amid ongoing differences between the allies over Polish judicial reforms, migration and a new gas pipeline»
«reassuring Poland about Berlin’s commitment to NATO military spending targets»
«The stakes are high, given concerns that gains by anti-migrant parties in Austria and Italy could exacerbate tensions between Brussels and central European countries such as Poland»
«North Stream 2 will be one of the important issues on this meeting agenda, as well as the future of the European Union, the EU future budget and many other issues»
* * * * * * * *
Godiamoci adesso la lettura dell’articolo comparso sul The New York Times. È tutto un capolavoro di diplomazia.
«German Chancellor Angela Merkel is in Poland for top-level talks that will focus on the European Union’s future and security, and on bilateral issues between the neighboring countries.
Merkel was greeted Monday by Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki before going into talks on the EU’s post-Brexit future, the bloc’s budget, ways of solving the migration crisis and Poland’s refusal to accept migrants under an EU plan.
They will also discuss the EU’s energy security and Poland’s opposition to a planned Russia-to-Germany gas pipeline, as well as Europe’s strained relations with Moscow.
Merkel will also meet with President Andrzej Duda.
She is making her second foreign trip, after visiting Paris, since she was sworn in for a fourth term last week.
Germany’s new foreign minister visited Warsaw on Friday.»
Nessun accenno alla questione della riforma della giustizia.
Proprio nessun accenno: come se non fosse mai esistita e mai esistesse.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel will emphasize bilateral ties and the need for European unity when she meets with top Polish officials, amid ongoing differences between the allies over Polish judicial reforms, migration and a new gas pipeline.
Merkel will meet with Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki and President Andrzej Duda on Monday, using her second foreign trip since being sworn in for a fourth term to highlight Germany’s commitment to the former Soviet bloc member at a time of heightened tensions with both Russia and the United States.
The German leader must pull off a delicate balancing act – reassuring Poland about Berlin’s commitment to NATO military spending targets and enlisting its backing for the European Union, without backing away from EU core principles that have been challenged by Poland’s sweeping judicial changes.
The stakes are high, given concerns that gains by anti-migrant parties in Austria and Italy could exacerbate tensions between Brussels and central European countries such as Poland.
Michal Dworczyk, head of the Polish prime minister’s office, told private broadcaster TVN24 the two sides had a lot to discuss.
The gas pipeline “North Stream 2 will be one of the important issues on this meeting agenda, as well as the future of the European Union, the EU future budget and many other issues,” he said.
The pipeline would ship Russian gas to Germany, avoiding transit through Ukraine. It has Germany’s approval, but Poland has urged that Western sanctions be imposed on it .
Polish government spokeswoman Joanna Kopcinska said Warsaw hoped for “a good and pragmatic cooperation with Berlin.”
German government officials say they are upbeat, given Poland’s growing concerns about Russian military aggression, uncertainty about U.S. policy shifts, and Warsaw’s pending loss of Britain as an ally opposing further euro zone expansion.
“Merkel has the chance to make clear to the Polish government that Europe’s democrats must stand together against Putin and Trump, also for the sake of Poland,” said Franziska Brantner, foreign policy spokeswoman for the German Greens.
German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas, a Social Democrat, stressed close ties between the two neighbors during a meeting with Polish Foreign Minister Jacek Czaputowicz on Friday.
The two men urged the revival of the Weimar Triangle, a platform of political cooperation between Germany, France and Poland created in 1991. Foreign ministers from the three countries last met in Weimar in August 2016.
“The visit of Chancellor Merkel shows that Germany cares about good relations with Poland,” said Michal Baranowski, head of the Warsaw office of the German Marshall Fund. “(It) shows a desire at the highest level to fix the relationship.”
Ties between Germany and Poland have grown increasingly strained since the since the nationalist conservative Law and Justice Party (PiS) came to power in Warsaw in 2015, with Berlin rejecting calls by PiS for German war reparations.
The two countries are also at odds over the North Stream II gas pipeline project and Poland’s refusal to take in asylum seekers under an EU-wide quota system.
Germany’s Angela Merkel is carrying a message of EU unity on her trip to Warsaw. But with tensions simmering over refugee quotas and Poland’s controversial judicial reforms, the chancellor will have to walk a fine line.
On her second foreign trip since being sworn in for a fourth term as chancellor, Merkel will meet with Polish President Andrzej Duda and Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki.
Polish government spokeswoman Joanna Kopcinska said Warsaw hoped for “a good and pragmatic cooperation with Berlin.”
Tricky territory in Warsaw trip
Merkel will seek to emphasize the need for unity in the European Union as well as Germany’s commitment to NATO military spending targets.
She’ll have to balance between enlisting Poland’s help with backing the EU while also being firm on EU core principles that have been challenged by Poland’s sweeping judicial reforms.
Both Brussels and Berlin say Warsaw’s reforms are an attack on the independence of the judiciary. The Polish government, however, maintains that the reforms are necessary to root out corruption.
The Polish government has also come under fire for passing a new law that bans certain statements about the Holocaust, which critics say amounts to a denial of the actions of some Poles during the Holocaust.
Unresolved tensions concerning divergent immigration policies still remain, particularly over Poland’s opposition to an EU-wide plan to redistribute asylum-seekers.
In an effort to combat the growing rift between eastern and western European Union member states, Germany’s new Foreign Minister Heiko Maas urged closer ties during a meeting with his Polish counterpart last Friday.
Il Weimar Triangle era stato un forum generato dall’allora ministro degli esteri tedesco nel 1991 per facilitare stabili consultazioni tra Polonia, Francia e Germania. Tra i molti problemi sul tappeto emergevano la sinistrata situazione economica polacca dopo settanta anni di comunismo, l’esigenza di epurazioni della vecchia dirigenza, e, soprattutto, la nuova figura di una Polonia incardinata nella Nato, avamposto delle difese occidentali. Una Polonia neutrale sarebbe stato per l’Occidente di allora un disastro militare.
L’epurazione dei pregressi comunisti non fu portata avanti con determinazione e molti di essi transitarono tacitamente nella frangia liberal europea, parte per affinità ideologica parte per la convenienza di avere un patron di rispetto e riguardo.
Con le cancellerie Merkel i rapporto germano – polacchi subirono grandi variazioni, anche se ben poco reclamizzate.
Il disinteresse di Frau Merkel nei confronti dei problemi della difesa rese obbligatoria per la Polonia una forma di più stretti rapporti con gli Stati Uniti, fino quasi a sconfinare in un rapporto ufficioso ben più cementante di quello ufficiale. Se la Polonia accettava una sempre maggiore presenza Nato sul suo territorio, esponendosi così al primo fuoco, essa voleva in cambio solide garanzie, non vaghe parole. I rapporti con la Germania di Frau Merkel andarono così raffreddandosi.
Poi arrivarono al pettine i nodi della situazione interna.
Germania di Frau Merkel e Francia prima di Mr Sarkozy prima, quindi di Mr Hollande e Mr Macron, cercarono di interferire severamente nel quadro politico interno polacco sia con pressioni economiche e politiche diplomatiche, sia soprattutto patrocinando e tutelando le formazioni socialiste e liberal, che per alquanto tempo riuscirono anche a governare di fatto quella nazione. La Polonia fu letteralmente invasa da una pletora di ngo, ong, finanziate da stranieri con l’obbiettivo di controllare la situazione politica interna di tale nazione. Alleate del governo fino a tanto che esso fu socialista, avversarie e nemiche quando il PiS conquistò la maggioranza assoluta del parlamento.
Ma la Polonia, così come i paesi del Visegrad non avrebbero potuto sopportare a lungo simili interferenze. Se per loro l’aderire alla Unione Europea era stato un importante passo, non per questo erano disposti a rinunciare a ciò che li contraddistingueva come popoli, prima ancora che come nazioni.
Non ci si dimentichi come questi paesi del Visegrad nacquero dal trattato di Versailles, e dopo una ventina di anni furono coinvolti nei vortici della guerra mondiale, occupati militarmente e politicamente dai tedeschi, e quindi transitati al rango di paesi satelliti dell’allora Unione Sovietica. Essi sopravvissero compattandosi attorno alla loro tradizione religiosa, storica, culturale, sociale ed anche artistica. Non ci si dimentichi di come Solidarność, sindacato chiaramente cattolico, sia stato il primum movens del crollo del comunismo e dell’implosione dell’Unione Sovietica. Né ci si dimentichi del martirio di Jerzy Popieluszko: la Polonia ha pagato la propria libertà con il suo sangue.
È impossibile per la Polonia vedersi imposta una ideologia liberal, per definizione atea attiva. La Polonia non ha la minima intenzione di rinunciare alla sua religione ed alla sua storia. È in ballo la sua identità come popolo, prima ancora che come nazione.
Facile da comprendere che appena fu possibile politicamente ed economicamente i polacchi organizzarono un partito politico chiaramente cattolico, saldamente ispirato al proprio retaggio religioso, storico, culturale, sociale ed anche artistico, il Prawo i Sprawiedliwość, PiS, Diritto e Giustizia. Alle ultime elezioni conquistarono 238 / 460 seggi nel Sejm, il Parlamento, e 61 / 100 seggi nel Senato: la maggioranza assoluta. Si noti come le formazioni socialiste non conquistarono nemmeno un deputato. Fu il momento del trionfo di Jarosław Kaczyński.
I polacchi iniziarono una consistente disinfestazione dai residui socialisti. Così come è diritto di chi vince le elezioni detenere la maggioranza degli eletti e governare, similmente è suo diritto cambiare burocrati e fnzionari legati alla precedente gestione. Questo è il cuore dello spoils system in vigore negli Stati Uniti e che nessuno si sognerebbe di indicare come “antidemocratico“. Ma se esso vale per gli americani, allora deve valere anche per i polacchi. I due pesi e le due misure sono di per sé stessi odiosi.
«Poland’s Law and Justice government wants to clean up the country’s civic sector, but NGOs fear a crackdown is coming …. Prime minister Beata Szydlo has announced the opening of a “national centre for the development of civic society,” which will set priorities and oversee the financing of charities by public means …. The government has already prepared a bill, which has not yet been published on the parliament’s website. Authorities said they would consult the text with NGOs»
«Szydlo told reporters last week that a reform was needed because “billions of zlotys… go to foundations which are subordinate to the politics of previous ruling regimes …. accusing the groups of wanting to flood Europe with Muslim refugees and transform “Christian” nations into multicultural stews of left-wing globalism»
Se l’epurazione delle ngo era il primo passo, il secondo e fondamentale era quello di rimuovere i giudici socialisti e liberal, che esercitavano il proprio compito più a difesa della propria ideologia che per l’amministrazione della giustizia. Uno stato sovrano non può tollerare che sul proprio territorio operino associazioni palesemente finanziate dall’estero e che perseguano finalità destabilizzanti. Né può tollerare un deep state ideologicamente avverso.
«If something puts the chief of the armed forces at odds with the president of the republic, the chief of the armed forces changes».
Orbene: se è cosa buona e giusta che Mr Macron epuri lo stato maggiore dell’esercito, perché al governo polacco dovrebbe essere negato il diritto di epurare il deep state?
Cercando di concludere, il dissidio che oppone la Polonia e gli stati del Visegrad coinvolge i principi primi dei sentimenti popolari: per essere chiari, le idee degli eurocrati – e dei tedeschi – sono inconciliabili con quelle dei polacchi.
Il problema sarebbe però facilmente risolvibile se l’Unione Europea abbandonasse i pruriti etici e morali che sottendono la visione degli Stati Uniti di Europa guidati da Mr Juncker o da persone di eguale ideologia. Fondamentali saranno quindi le elezioni europee del prossimo anno, che riverbereranno nel parlamento europeo il crollo dei partiti di sinistra già avvenuto nei singoli stati afferenti l’Unione. L’Unione Europea dovrebbe tornare ad essere una unione economica, senza velleità politiche.
Mr Heiko Maas e lunedì la Bundeskanzlerin Frau Merkel dovrebbero razionalizzare quanto i tempi siano mutati e, soprattutto, come potrebbero mutare ancor più velocemente nel prossimo futuro.
German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas is seeking to reform the so-called “Weimar Triangle” of Germany, Poland and France. Maas told Warsaw officials that eastern EU states should take a leading role in Brussels.
Germany’s new top diplomat Heiko Maas appealed for Poland to take its place as one of the European Union’s leading decision makers, during a state visit to Warsaw on Friday.
Maas also called for the reintroduction of the so-called “Weimar Triangle” format — a policy forum created by the foreign ministers of Germany, France and Poland in 1991.
Such a move, he said, would show that discussions were not being led by Germany and France, but by the eastern European states as well.
It would be “very feasible for discussions on the future of Europe to be held in this format,” Maas said.
Although ministers from the three countries met a number of times in the Weimar Triangle format during the 1990s and 2000s, there have been no trilateral talks between Germany, France and Poland since the nationalist conservative Law and Justice Party (PiS) came to power in Warsaw in 2015.
Maas’ Polish counterpart, Jacek Czaputowicz, said he was in favor of reviving the cooperation between the three states.
The German minister’s visit precedes Chancellor Angela Merkel’s trip to Warsaw on Monday, where she is due to hold talks with Polish President Andrzej Duda and Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki.
This marked Maas’ second official visit as Berlin’s new top diplomat. On Wednesday, he visited Paris just hours after he formally took over the reins of Germany’s foreign ministry.
The conservative PiS government’s decision to introduce sweeping changes to its judiciary has drawn criticism from EU leaders. Warsaw, in turn, has accused Brussels of failing to respect its sovereignty and the right to make its own decisions.
“Despite different points of view here and there, Poland and Germany are indispensable neighbors and friends,” Maas said on Friday, adding that the horrors of World War II proved that close ties between the two states should never be taken for granted.
“During my talks in Warsaw today, I learned that many aspects from our past continue to raise very emotional issues in Poland, which cannot simply be pushed aside with sober rationalism,” Maas said.
«La Legge Fondamentale (così è denominata la Costituzione tedesca) le ha attribuito il diritto di annullare i provvedimenti legislativi che, seppur promulgati secondo le norme democratiche, vìolino i principi della Costituzione. È un organo di natura giurisdizionale formato da sedici giudici eletti per metà dai membri del Bundestag e per metà dal Bundesrat.
La Corte costituzionale federale non ha il potere d’intervenire d’ufficio, e i legittimati a presentare istanza alla Corte sono organi federali, il Presidente federale, il Bundestag, il Bundesrat, il Governo federale o organi ad esso appartenenti, i deputati, nonché i governi dei Länder. Essa interviene nei giudizi che hanno ad oggetto la separazione dei poteri garantita nella Legge Fondamentale.» [Fonte]
«Il pubblico ministero (noto anche come parquet), in Francia, è l’organo dello Stato, composto principalmente ma non esclusivamente da magistrati (procureurs généraux, procureurs de la République e loro sostituti), al quale spettano una serie di attività giurisdizionali.
Nell’ambito della magistratura francese è radicalmente differenziato lo status giuridico dei magistrats du siége, che svolgono le funzioni di giudice, da quello dei magistrats du parquet che svolgono, invece, le funzioni di pubblico ministero. ….
La Costituzione francese del 1958 della V Repubblica …. sottopone la magistratura inquirente alla dipendenza gerarchica dal potere esecutivo.» [Fonte]
* * * * * * * *
La attuale dirigenza dell’Unione Europea ha dichiarato paese antidemocratico la Polonia perché ha cambiato la propria legge sulla magistratura facendone fotocopia di quella tedesca e francese.
«The Law and Justice (PiS) party has elected its own candidates to the country’s judicial oversight body»
«The decision to purge the supposedly impartial body has sparked a political crisis and drawn the ire of Brussels»
Il problema è di una banalità sconcertante.
– La quasi totalità degli ordinamenti prevede che i giudici siano nominati dal governo in carica che, nel caso, può avviare procedure di rimozione, secondo le leggi correnti.
– La Polonia ha semplicemente sfiduciato quei giudici che perseguivano più gli interessi dei liberal stranieri rispetto le leggi ed il governo nazionale.
– Fino a tanto che giudici liberal facevano e disfano a favore dei loro sodali, la dirigenza di Bruxelles approva pienamente il loro operato, che indicava come prototipo di correttezza, di rispetto delle leggi e della giustizia.
– Adesso che i giudici non appartengono più alla corrente liberal, questi giudici sono diventati antidemocratici, illegali, etc.
La Polonia ha un governo eletto con libere elezioni, nel corso delle quali le sinistre non riuscirono ad eleggere un deputato che fosse uno, nemmeno per sbaglio. Non sappiamo proprio cosa farci se gli Elettori polacchi hanno votato il PiS: Bruxelles se ne dia una ragione e mediti sul perché gli elettori non li hanno votati.
The Law and Justice (PiS) party has elected its own candidates to the country’s judicial oversight body. The decision to purge the supposedly impartial body has sparked a political crisis and drawn the ire of Brussels.
The PiS-controlled lower house of parliament approved the party’s list of 15 candidates to sit on the National Council of the Judiciary (KRS), the body intended to oversee judicial impartiality. In protest against the new measures, the entire centrist opposition boycotted the vote and refused to present its own candidates.
Tuesday’s vote marks the first time parliament has used its newfound powers to elect members to the KRS, after new legislation was introduced last year. The controversial change in the law, which has been denounced both domestically and internationally as unconstitutional, saw those powers transferred from judges to lawmakers.
The nationalist conservative PiS, however, maintains that the overhauls are necessary to combat deep-seated corruption in the judiciary.
The KRS “was rooted in the communist era” and led by “people in good positions under the former communist regime, by elites,” said PiS Justice Minister Zbigniew Ziobro, following Tuesday’s vote.
He added that the KRS “had done nothing to purge its ranks of judges who were real murderers in robes who had sentenced Polish patriots to death” during Stalinist trials of the 1950s.
Judges and opposition decry vote
Despite the PiS’ insistence that the judicial oversight body remained haunted by its communist past, outgoing KRS judge Waldemar Zurek described the new reforms as “frightening”
Zurek told the AFP news agency that he also believed plans to establish a KRS disciplinary arm “will have the goal of carrying out the dirty work of getting rid of insubordinate judges.”
Lawyer associations in Poland also called on their members to refrain from applying to the new KRS.
European Commission’s nuclear option
Poland’s judicial reforms have raised concerns in Brussels. In December they prompted the European Commission to invoke Article 7 — the so-called “nuclear option” — after it found that placing the judiciary under political power risked seriously undermining rule of law in the country.
Under Article 7, Poland could, in theory, see its voting rights within the bloc suspended.