Minister spraw zagranicznych Witold Waszczykowski udzielił 9 sierpnia wywiadu w prestiżowym programie BBC 'Hard Talk'.
Osoby , które bezmyślnie powtarzają sorosową mantrę, że Waszczykowski sobie nie radzi, jest głupi i z gęby mu śmierdzi, powinny przesłuchać oryginalny podcast BBC, po czym wejść pod stół i odszczekać.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3csty0q
Wywiadowany po angielsku, bez uprzedniej znajomości pytań, minister Waszczykowski nie pozwolił się w tym wywiadzie ani zakrzyczeć, ani wpakować się mu na głowę brytyjskiej dziennikarce Zeinab Badawi, ewidentnie ciężko pracującej by osiągnąć wynik odpowiadający treściom suflowanym przez polską opozycję totalną organom Unii Europejskiej. Misja Badawi zakończyła się spektakularną klapą.
Ale zawsze jest jakieś ale.
Na stronach MSZ RP jest tylko omówienie i streszczenie tego wywiadu, z kilkoma cytatami:
http://www.msz.gov.pl/pl/aktualnosci/wiadomosci/wywiad_ministra_witolda_waszczykowskiego_dla_telewizji_bbc
Sama BBC nie publikuje oficjalnej transkrypcji wszystkich wywiadów Hard Talk. Ale ponieważ Wiarus wie, że w internecie istnieją portale publikujące transkrypcje tego rodzaju programów na potrzeby sporządzania napisów w transmisjach telewizji kablowej – więc poszukał i znalazł pełną zawartość tego wywiadu na piśmie
https://subsaga.com/bbc/news/hardtalk/2017/08/09/witold-waszczykowski-minister-of-foreign-affairs-poland.html
Transkrypcja tam umieszczona ma swoje wady, i za jej jakość nie mogę ręczyć, więc zachęcam każdego do wysłuchania oryginału wywiadu ministra Waszczykowskiego w linkowanym wyżej podcast opublikowanym przez BBC.
Chapeau bas, monsieur le ministre – w sumie przekazał pan w tych trudnych okolicznościach to, co przekazać należało. Niemniej pańska gramatyka angielska mogłaby być lepsza, słownictwo bogatsze, język bardziej idiomatyczny, a elokucja płynniejsza.
Czy MSZ może znaleźć jakiegoś, nie śmiem wręcz sugerować, "młodego Misiewicza" czy inną Maję Rostowską, który/która będzie jednocześnie native speaker jezyka angielskiego i będzie wystarczająco obyty/a w świecie, by się nie bać agresywnych zachodnich dziennikarzy? Następnie zrobić tę osobę rzecznikiem w randze ambasadora, aby jeździł wszędzie gdzie odbywa się na temat Polski jakakolwiek dyskusja, sympozjum czy konferencja, i zasadnicze tezy pańskiego wywiadu powtarzał ile razy trzeba i gdzie tylko trzeba. Matthew Tyrmand lub ktoś podobny w sam raz by się do tego zadania nadał (jest całkowicie bez znaczenia w takiej roli, jeśli Tyrmand nie mówi po polsku).
Czy PiS musi przegrać wybory, żeby zdać sobie sprawę z potęgi PR w dzisiejszym świecie? Do Oxfordu pojechał w maju br. wyjaśnić niezmiernie wpływowemu gremium zawiłą dla cudzoziemca kwestię polskiego Trybunału Konstytucyjnego niezmiernie zasłużony śp. profesor Lech Morawski. W Oxfordzie nikogo nie interesowały zasługi profesora, tylko meritum sprawy. Profesor Morawski desperacko walczył z własną niedostateczną znajomością angielskiego i poległ lingwistycznie w nieuchronnym porównaniu z obecnym na tej samej konferencji 'młodym wilkiem' PO, prof. Marcinem Matczakiem z UW.
Pan z kolei mężnie stanął do wywiadu Hard Talk, gdzie poprzednim rozmówcą BBC na temat polskiej polityki zagranicznej był Radek Sikorski, którego angielski szlifowały studia w Oxfordzie i małżeństwo z Amerykanką.
Niech pan znajdzie i wynajmie odpowiedniego człowieka, zapłaci tyle, ile to bedzie kosztowało, ale, dlaboga, niechże pan przestanie kopać się z koniem i brać na klatę związane z tym polskie straty wizerunkowe.
=====================
ZB:
Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski, and Warsaw, welcome to Hard Talk. Your party won the elections but is now facing criticisms. What has gone wrong?
WW:
I don't think anything is wrong in Poland. We are running the country for the last 21 months. We have very strong democratic mandate from our people in Poland. And we are trying to modernise the country, develop the country, and of course to stay in the European Union and in NATO, and implement all the decisions of these institutions, also here in Poland. After the fall of the Soviet Union, Poland was seen as a bastion of liberal democracy. We had the leader of the Solidarity movement who became president and won the Nobel Peace Prize. The World Bank heaped praise on Poland for making such a successful transition from communism to democracy.
ZB:
And now look, you are getting criticisms from abroad, and also internally, for being too authoritarian.
WW:
We are still a democratic country, and we want to continue our democratic process. But we want democracy without adjectives. Some people try to create other democracies, liberal democracies, and that exclude some ideas and concepts. We just want to stay on the democratic course and to be a democratic country without adjectives. We continue the transformation of the country. It is developing at a high speed right now, about 4% growth per year. And all democratic institutions are preserved and kept by our institutions and our government and parliament. So those accusations about authoritarianism are wrong.
ZB:
In May, tens of thousands of people protested on the streets of Warsaw at what they say are curbs on democracy. Critics claim that you are introducing reforms in the judiciary which would compromise the independence of the courts, and give too much power to the Justice Minister, who is also the Prosecutor General.
WW:
Yes, you are right. Tens of thousands of protesters were
protesting on the streets. But for millions of Polish people that did not protest, and our party and how we govern, we are supported by 30% ofthe population in Poland. We have a clear mandate to transform and democratise the judicial system, which was left untouched for 28 years, since the Communist times. So I think that this is a judgement of the opposition here in Poland, who find it difficult to accept the verdict of the election which happened almost two years ago. They using this as an excuse just to judge incorrectly our judgement.
ZB:
But can I put it to you that even the President, Andrzej Duda, former member of your party, wants these proposals amended, because he says giving the Justice Minister the power to dismiss members of the judiciary is not democratic. So even the President is critical.
WW:
We accept these two vetoes, and this discussion goes back to the Parliament. We will get together with parliamentarians to find a solution for this problem. But even the President, as you mentioned, he is critical about the contemporary situation of the judiciary system. We have two continue the transmission of the system. But maybe the better way. Everything is going back to the Parliament to find a better solution for the Parliament, to the judiciary system in Poland.
ZB:
You have angered the European Union. The European Commission has announced legal action against the Polish government. It is citing acute concern about the independence of the Polish courts, which it says will be undermined. So what are you going to do about that? You have been invited for talks with the European Commission. Are you going to discuss and amended the proposals, watered down? What is going to happen?
WW:
Yes, we engage with a dialogue, with the Commission. We engaged in a dialogue. We are patient, and patiently we are trying to discuss and inform the commission about the process. The process is going on, as you mentioned, even with some legal action of the Parliament having been stopped by the President. So there is so there is absolutely no time for the Commission to interfere in this situation. I don't see any legal excuse for the Commission to be engaged right now. We will exchange letters and opinions with people like Mr Timermans, but I don't see reason for the Commission to interfere in reforms and transformation of the system in Poland.
ZB:
So the Polish government will have talks with the European Commission, but you say you will not listen to opinions or take advice at all. You will talk to me butwon't listen at all?
WW:
I think that is wrongly evaluating our situation. We talk to them. We engage in a dialogue. Just a few days go, I sent a letter to Mr Timmermans, and asked for additional clarification on his accusation against Polish reforms. I keep reminding him and others that the process is not finished. It is ongoing. It back to the Parliament. We don't see any reason why the Commission should interfere right now.
ZB:
You also being criticised on other reforms that are seen as falling short of European Union values. Last year, there was a controversial law approved to allow Poland to appoint the heads of TV and radio. Poland has been accused of threatening European values.
WW:
As you rightly mentioned, this is public radio and
television. This is owned by state owned institutions
This is situation is othern European Union countries, and we are not touching the private media, or interfering in private TV or radio or newspapers, but those media who belong to the state, of course they are ruled by the state owned institutions. This is a prerogative of the state to nominate the chiefs of these institutions. Just like in other countries, in other member states of the European Union. But they are not attracting the criticisms that you are making now.
ZB:
I mean, it is not just the European Union. The Council of
Europe, which is not part of the Union, the Human Rights Commissioner, he is critical of Poland placing is public service media under direct government control, so whatever you are doing, it is not quite the same as other European Union countries You go beyond by having this direct government control, are you?
WW:
I can only repeat what I said. I'm not the expert on this. I am the Foreign Minister. So I prefer to engage in the foreign policy of Poland, which is also important for the European Union and the future of the European Union. But I can only repeat what I heard from the experts that we are repeating and copying the solutions which exist everywhere in many countries.
ZB:
All right. One thing that you do look at is this issue of
refugees. In June, the European Commission again launched an EU law infringement procedure against Poland because you are refusing to take in refugees, as part of an EU wide quota system. Why should Poland be exempt from this?
WW:
We disagree with the commission about the mechanics of so-called relocation, because decisions are taken against the international treaties, the European treaties, against international and European law. It is euphemistic to say 'relocation', because in fact this is resettlement by force of people who do not want to be resettled to a country like Poland. So we disagree with the Commission. The second problem is that we already have a large number of migrants coming from the eastern part of Europe. Only last year, we issued more than 1,200,000 visas for the Ukrainians. The majority chose to stay in Poland. They are also migrants. I don't know why those coming from the Middle East and North Africa, why they are supposed to be better evaluated, and care of, by the institutions in Europe than migrants coming from, also touched by war, Ukraine. So we are the country which is open for migration, but we disagree with themechanics of taking decisions about migrants and refugees.
ZB:
So basically,Poland does not want to take any migrants and refugees from theMiddle East and Africa, and the criticism there is that because Poland is a very much in this country, with only 0.4% of your population made up of foreigners. Over 90% are Roman Catholic. I will give you an example of what the Deputy Prime Minister said last year. He said people would be blown up. Is that what people don't like about Poland?
WW:
These ideas exist in the Polish population. More than 75% of Poles do not want to accept this relocation by force of migrants from North Africa and the Middle East. But we try to implement the decisions of the Commission of September 2015, and many months ago, we sent our border guards to the camps in Italy and Greece, we sent also security officers. Firstly try to identify some of these people.
And of course, the majority of them it is very difficult to identify them. They do not have documents. This is a threat for the security of the country. Of course, nobody from these migrants, these refugees, we prefer to see migrants, had any inclination to emigrate to Poland. So we cannot accept the situation. Progress in the European Union is decided by relocation by force people who do not want be relocated o
country like Poland..
ZB:
This is a sentiment that underscores what you have just said that make people unhappy about the comments that are coming from official Poland, for example, the chairman of the ruling party, said in April last year why he did want refugees. These people bringing diseases, parasites, bacteria, they don't affect them, but affect us. Is that kind of comment acceptable?
WW:
Once again, I can only repeat that 75% of the Polish population is accepting the policy of the government, not to accept the decision of the EU to resettle by force people from Africa and the Middle East. We don't want to commit suicide as politicians and a government, to go against the public would do that.
ZB:
The accusation by spokesperson for the Catholic bishops, who are urging Poland to receive refugees, says that fears have been fuelled by some political parties. According to Never Again, an organisation which tracks racist attacks in Poland, they say they have increased considerably in the last year and that there is a correlation between hate speech of the political class and those assaults. So, there is a link. I put it to you one more time, are you happy with the state of affairs?
WW:
No, of course we are not happy. We have discussed this issue and the problem of migrants during the visit last year of Pope Francis. He was visiting us, he gave a speech in Krakow and he mentioned that there are many ways to support, help and assist refugees and migrants. He did not mention that Poland was supposed to accept thousands of people from Syria and the Middle East. We had the chance to visit the Vatican many times and discuss with the hierarchy that situation. We all understand that we are first supposed to start assisting people in the region of Middle East, not Africa. First we engage with the Europeto help find them peace, a peaceful solution for the war.that has been going on already for seven years in Syria. We are supposed to control the borders of the EU. How are we supposed to
help them relocate in Europe? Countries who have the ability to accept these migrants may accept them, those who want to emigrate to the country are supposed to emigrate. We cannot accept in the 21st century, resettlement by force. Once again, we are accepting millions of migrants coming from Ukraine and other areas. Poland is finding these people in Poland.
ZB:
You made that point, thank you. All these things we have been discussing have drawn a lot of criticism from the EU. Poland is that biggest recipient of EU funding. In 2015, you received 13.4 billion euros in funding. You cannot afford to fall out with the EU, can you?
WW:
This funding, these structured funds and subsidies which are part of the agreement between member states they are derived from the treaties. These funds have nothing to do with the behaviour of the country. It is compensation for the opening of the economic system, for the opening of the market, the investment, the deals with other economies, stronger economies of the Western EU. It is not a reward for us for being liberal. I reject this accusation that we are supposed togive up receiving these funds because we are not behaving correctly, according to some...
ZB:
Who do you think is making... Who is making that accusation? I'll give you an example. The German vice chancellor says, those countries that do not share a German values should not count on German financial help. Germany is the biggest contributor, by far, to the EU's funding. Are you saying that Poland is not at risk of a withdrawal of EU funding?
WW:
We cannot combine the situation of migrants or European values to the economic operation, because structural funds, this is a reward for the opening of the economy, for the weaker economy, for cooperation with a stronger economy of the Western European economy. It has to do with the population, with the economy, but not with migrants. Is not a reward for accepting migrants.
ZB:
Another thing that is creating some concern, in January of
this year, the United States deployed troops on Polish soil for the first time since the fall of the Soviet Union. Germany in particular is concerned about NATO exercises in Poland and the Baltics increasing tensions with Russia. Are you not concerned about worsening ties with Moscow?
WW:
We are concerned already, for at least three years, by the behaviour of Russia. Let me remind you that Russia initiated a rebellion and have acted in regards to Crimea. There are incidences onthe Baltic Sea and the Black Sea. Some years ago, Russia initiated aggression against Georgia. So, reacting to this Russian policing, NATO decided to build a special unit to support the security of the eastern area of NATO. Last year in Warsaw, Nato decided to deploy extra troops. TheUnited States decided to send a whole brigade. NATO is correctly reacting to the acts of Russia. NATO is defending and deterring, but also trying to keep dialogue with Russia. We support this dialogue. We sent deputy ministers to Moscow for dialogue. We then sent another deputy to Moscow. We are reacting positively, but we do not have a positive answer from the other side.
ZB:
Finally, are you enjoying being Foreign Minister of Poland at this rather difficult time when you are getting all these criticisms we have been discussing on this Hard Talk?
WW:
I can repeat what I started in the beginning, which I did not finish successfully because you prevented me to tell you, for the very first time, we have clearly defined our foreign goals and targets and policy. We have clearly defined our interest. This interest is to implement, using the membership of the EU and of NATO. Some of these interests do not coincide with the other members of this institution. We have a discussion, a live debate with this. This is a decision or an action of the Commission, it is only
a smokescreen. There are real problems of security, energy, with the common market in Europe after Brexit. Decisions about protection, which is suggested by some other Western politicians. We prefer to discuss, and I engage in discussion with my colleagues on these issues, but not directly with that conversation. This is an excuse to deprive Poland of our position and to weaken our position in the
future, and in the budget of the European Union possibly. I have to phrase the fact that this is not an easy job, but so far, successful.
ZB:
Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski in Warsaw, thank you very much for coming on Hard Talk.
WW:
Thank you.
