Polish leader Komorowski praises Germany reconciliation

[JustJohn or JJ]

BBC News Europe

10 September 2014 Last updated at 06:00 ET

Polish leader Komorowski praises Germany reconciliation


_{The Polish president called for close co-operation with Germany in marking out Europe's future}

Polish President Bronislaw Komorowski has spoken of reconciliation, in a speech to the German Bundestag commemorating the Nazi invasion of Poland 75 years ago.

He said both countries should be proud of what they had achieved, especially since the 1989 fall of the Berlin Wall.

"What unites Europeans is the conviction that the dignity of humanity is inalienable."

German forces invaded on 1 September, sparking the outbreak of World War Two.

The president of the Bundestag, Norbert Lammert, said Poland had become the biggest graveyard of European civilisation under German occupation, and he spoke of the industrial extermination of Europe's Jews.

Mr Komorowski said it was a miracle of reconciliation that Europe had put its hatred behind it and that a younger generation of Poles and Germans were able to work and study together.

He mentioned a 1995 speech in the Bundestag by former Polish Foreign Minister Wladyslaw Bartoszewski who said that the future of a united Europe would be dependent on Polish-German relations.

Europe had to respond to the challenge of the conflict in Ukraine and the "unprecedented aggression" from Russia, he said.

But Poland and Germany in particular should work closely together.

"We need a shared German-Polish responsibility for the future of Europe," he said.

Last week, he took part in a ceremony north of Gdansk with German President Joachim Gauck, in which Mr Gauck promised German support in the face of renewed threats to Europe's stability.

[karl]

J.J.

There are occasions I am not sure how to respond, but feel needs be to do so as on this occasion. For although we as long term members know very well one to the other and with this, we carry also the burden of responsibility to one another in both equal respect and consideration, and we do.

My self, am not offended by the reminder of the that past war, some times though, it is a burden though. But then, so is over much rain/snow/sunshine, but we take it in because it is there.

It was very nice of Polish President: Mr. Bronislaw Komorowski to speak so kindly of German reconciliation. Although well understood, he {Mr. Komorowski} was in the midst of Germans on our turf, non-the-less, it was very nice of him to say so.

The German people of those years were different then those of these recent years. With different mentality, different out looks, different expectations, much different government and, much different conditions in all that is of a modern industrial state.

Understandably, perhaps my personal out look may differ from others that call them selves German, perhaps my excuse is my self not all German but of mixed Dansk by ethnics and early childhood. But, by virtue of my pass port, it is German.

For as presented by Mr. Komorowski, the rememberance of the last war is not wasted on his words. For Mr. Putin very well remembers the war and of their losses encountered. These rememberances are not lost to the Russians, for they very well know of our military forces and not to mention of Nuclear weapons that are stored on our soil that are not ours. Although these weapons are statigical in design, means not of tactical field use, and this Mr. Putin is very much aware of. For the long past combat records of the land and what was successful in tactics, has not changed, but is still currant for use in the present. And Mr. Putin is very much aware of this.

What has not changed in time from former events of the past, is, Poland is between The Russian Federation and us. What this means, most any military exchange will catch them in between like a vise and no matter the diplomatic exchange, Poland will catch the brunt of most any exchange. Although, every war is different, and to this, most military generals only know the tactics of the previous war for as they have long experiences but have learnt nothing. In this manner, it is to effective civilian authority to provide directions to their respective military Generals for inspiration and leadership.

Mr. Komorwski is very knowledgable of this in consideration of reality of events and location.

Non of us as reasonable people, wish not for any of the above to occure, and hopefully it will not. We have become too used to the times of prosperity and peace, we needs be to protect that concept and build upon the process of a better world we have begin and to continue for the betterment of us all.

Karl

[pieter]

Dear John,

A very interesting historical speach of the Polish president in the German parliament. As a Western neighbor and partner in the European Union I look (as a representative of the Netherlands) with satisfaction to the excellent Polish-German relationship. It is great that Germany and Poland cooperate in so much different fields and subjects together and various levels. Both are important members of the European Union and NATO. Less known is the fact that both nations are part of a Three state alliance, the Weimar Triangle, together with France. ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weimar_Triangle )


Political map of the "Weimar Triangle"

Next to these larger international organisations, treaties and alliances, Poland and Germany have very good direct bilateral ties between each other. The present Polish prime minister and the Bundeskanzler can get along fine, the presidents have good connections and the Polish and German ministers of foreign affairs worked together closely in the present 'Ukraine' crisis.

It is excactly like Karl says in his reply: "The German people of today are different than the Germans of the late twenties, thirties and first half of the fourties. The very good democratic and Federal German state and constitution has changed the post-war German generations in peaceful and peace loving, well educated, skilled, pragmatic, professional and prosperous people, thanks to the German Wirtschaftswunder ('economic miracle'), the German economical recovery and progress during the fifties, sixties and seventies. The Marshall Plan gave a moral boost, but very little actual financial assistance until the recovery was already in full swing."

The Marshall Plan (officially the European Recovery Program, ERP) was the American initiative to aid Europe, in which the United States gave $17 billion (approximately $160 billion in 2014 dollars) in economic support to help rebuild European economies after the end of World War II in order to prevent the spread of Soviet Communism. The plan was in operation for four years beginning in April 1948. The goals of the United States were to rebuild war-devastated regions, remove trade barriers, modernize industry, and make Europe prosperous again.

West Germany proceeded quickly after 1948 to rebuild its capital stock and thus to increase its economic output at stunning rates. The very high capital investment rate thanks to low consumption and a very small need for replacement capital investments (due to the still small capital stock) drove this recovery during the 1950s. Living standards also rose steadily, with the purchasing power of wages increasing by 73% from 1950 to 1960.

Productivity growth in West Germany enabled most workers to obtain significant improvements in their living standards and ‘security of life.’ Slowly West-Germany became an independent state again. The Western-occupation forces stayed for a long time with the French, British and American bases on German soil. But the German politicians and people regained power and developed a strong, fair and well functionating German democracy with a pluriformity, it hadn't seen since the Weimar Republic. Succesful CDU (Christian-democratic) and SPD (Social-democratic) government coaltions lead Germany to financial and economical succes, repairing and rebuilding the country after the heavy war damage and the Reparations. Due to the fact that Germans often had to develop, built and maintain new industries, their companies and factories were very modern, technological advanced and popular abroad (due to the German quality label. A product with 'made in Germany' sold well in other European countries, the USA and the rest of the world, because people knew German products were reliable, decent, solid and of fine quality.)

The 'New Germany' (Western-Germany) wasn't a militaristic, nor a totalitarian state and a well respected country amongst the other Western nations. The Nazi generation due to the fact of an advancing time slowly dissapeared due to age (the generation was dying, because they were old), and their ideas didn't appeal to the 'new German generations', Nazism became known as a barbaric, criminal, and failed ideology and system by younger Germans. Often young and older Germans joined forces during the last decades in demonstrations against violent xenophobia, racism and neo-nazism. Most of the present day Germans aren't fond of Nazism and fascism. The present day Germany has one of the strictest anti-nazi laws in the world. For outsiders it seems like the German authorities and public are allergic and pure anti-nazi. It is prohibited to wear the Swastica on your clothes, the carry nazi Swastica flags, Waffen-SS signs or other Pro-Nazi (neo- nazi) symbols. In the same time the German authorities are weary and very active in their combat against any totalitarian, authoritarian and anti-democratic movement. Germans aren't particulary fond of Nazism, Fascism, communism (Stalinism and Maoism), Scientology or Islamism (the radical political Islam in it's Jihadist form). In Germany you can vote left (Links Partei; former communists [reformed East-German communists and leftwing West-German socialists), for the Greens (Bündnis 90/Die Grünen). German Labour (die SPD), the liberals (FDP), the Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU), the libertarian 'Die Piratenpartei Deutschland' and the far right National democrats (NPD). So they have a rather pluriform political landscape and democratic system.

Yes, we European want to keep the prosperity and peace we have become used to the last decades. The European Union is supported by a small majroity of Europe, because the largest Democratic parties and movements are Pro-Europe and thus supporters of the EU.

Cheers,
Pieter

Source: Wikipedia

[karl]

Pieter has introduced previously an excellent highly detailed description of the currant and present situation. With this, the introduction of: Weimar Triangle My self am most negligent of not includant of this most important aspect between Poland/Germany and France. For we are together in a consolidated form of mutual protection for as not spoken, France belongs to the Nuclear club. In this manner, a consolidated of force of three states.

The following is a commercial presentation that high lights the thoughts and feelings of The UK. In this manner, negates to the USA as being the one to step up to the plate and play ball. Whilst the remainder of us Europeans are sloshing about in the dug out.

{It may be noted of very recent declaration, US President Obama has proclaimed US military assistance in Iraq and Syria in fighting the forces of IS.}


AUG 29, 2014
Building NATO’s “Weimar Triangle”

BERLIN – Some months ago, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen referred to Russia’s annexation of Crimea as a “wake-up call” for the West. Since then, Europeans and Americans have slowly but steadily tightened the economic screws on Russia. But, in striking contrast to the overall cohesion displayed on the sanctions front, the West’s military response to Russia’s new assertiveness in its so-called “near abroad” has been uncoordinated and reluctant. As a recent report of the Defense Committee of the United Kingdom’s House of Commons argued, “NATO is currently not well-prepared for a Russian threat against a NATO Member State.” Given that this is a source of grave concern to NATO members close to Russia, the Allies must send an unequivocal message to Russian President Vladimir Putin when they meet in Wales next week: NATO territory is inviolable.

To be sure, as Rasmussen repeatedly emphasizes, every ally contributes to the reinforcement of collective defense in one way or another. But, while some allies have markedly stepped up their commitments by sending soldiers or additional fighter jets, others have limited themselves to offering only minor capabilities. Thus, the United States is bearing the main burden of reassuring NATO’s Central and Eastern European members.Speaking in Warsaw earlier this year, President Barack Obama presented his European Reassurance Initiative, a $1 billion program aimed at supporting the defense of NATO allies close to the Russian border. While his announcement fell short of what many in Poland and the Baltic states had hoped for, Obama promised that these allies would have US “boots on the ground” – rotating units that would conduct regular exercises.

In other words, there is nothing particularly “European” about the initiative. It is not merely “led” by the US, but is essentially a US-only initiative without any Europeans, except for the host countries, participating. Although an American contribution remains indispensable for credible deterrence against Russian aggression, the absence of clear European commitments to put boots on the ground highlights the long-standing question of burden-sharing between the US and Europe.

If Europeans cannot step up to this kind of challenge on their home turf, how can Americans expect them to become reliable partners for challenges elsewhere?The upcoming NATO summit offers an opportunity to demonstrate Europe’s commitment to collective defense, to a stronger European defense posture, and to the transatlantic alliance. Instead of adding a few sparse cosmetic capabilities, NATO’s European members should at least match the US effort and provide an additional €1 billion ($1.3 billion) for reassurance measures. For perspective, this amount more or less equals what Germany alone has spent annually on its contribution to the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan in recent years.

The countries of the so-called Weimar Triangle – France, Germany, and Poland – are well suited to lead such an effort. The three big countries in the middle of Europe should thus staff a regional headquarters, which would serve as the basis for defense planning and exercises and support the rotating US troops.Poland has long called for more allied troops on its territory and would be ready to provide the headquarters for such a European contribution. This would most likely mean upgrading the headquarters of the Multinational Corps Northeast in Szczecin, which could also host a French contingent, in addition to the Danish, German, and Polish forces that currently form the kernel of the Corps. Although this would not fulfill all Polish wishes, it would constitute an important step toward more equitable burden-sharing among NATO countries.Though Germany, long accused of being a “bear hugger,” has recently become much tougher on Russia, German politicians continue to oppose new bases or permanent structures in Poland or the Baltic states for fear of adding fuel to the fire. Without its two important neighbors at its side, Germany is unlikely to take part in a mission involving the permanent deployment of rotating units.German participation, however, would send a strong signal not only to the Kremlin, but also to its allies. This visible defense commitment would also allow Germany, sometimes suspected of seeking neutrality, to pursue new diplomatic engagements with Russia.

France, finally, has been a target of harsh criticism, owing to its determination to deliver two Mistral warships built for the Russian government. By making a significant contribution to European reassurance by participating in the enhanced NATO presence in Szczecin, it would demonstrate that it remains committed to the defense of its allies in the Russian neighborhood. It would also cement its perceived European leadership on defense issues and help to forge a larger coalition to provide additional support to the Weimar Triangle. Indeed, such a European force could be an important step toward a Europe de la défense, an idea that France has been committed to for a long time.Most important, such a European initiative, which should be open to other countries as well, would clearly underline that Europe is ready to contribute its fair share to collective defense – a signal that the US would greet enthusiastically. Given a world in turmoil, with several serious crises in Europe’s neighborhood, this would be one of the few positive developments of 2014.

Karl