ver the past several months, the geopolitical role of Poland in relation to the war in Ukraine and Eurasian and European integration projects has once again become an increasingly frequently visited topic. On the one hand, recent presidential and parliamentary elections in Poland have reshuffled the posts of the ruling Atlanticist oligarchy, thereby compelling prominent political issues to be revisited by representatives of the political elite in public debates, PR campaigns, policy deliberations, etc. This has once again brought the acute problems facing Polish statehood and the Atlanticist domination of Poland’s political, economic, cultural, and information spheres into the spotlight.
On the other hand, in addition to a mere rehashing and repetitive exposure of Atlanticism in Poland, recent political developments including the final electoral defeat of the post-socialist Left, the ascent of the Law and Justice party to power, the rise and entanglement of new oppositional forces, the reemergence of nationalism, and the steady but sure growth of anti-Atlanticist initiatives in various spheres, have threatened to transform the framework of Polish political and geopolitical discourse. In short, the crucial questions of Polish statehood, geopolitics, and civilizational identity are once again up for debate, and their reemergence within the context of the heightened confrontation between the Eurasian and Atlanticist projects present various new opportunities, paradigms, paradoxes, and questions which deserve analysis.
By: Paul Alexander Haegeman, for the Center for Syncretic Studies – edited by Joaquin Flores
Humanitarian Intervention and The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) as an Instrument, Extension and Continuation of Neo-Colonialism and Post-Modern Imperialism:
The Libyan Case (2011). Considerations: The Kaleidoscope of International Legal Strategies and the Enabling of Wars of Aggression.
“Until the Day of Judgment, the Augustinian teaching on the two kingdoms will have to face the twofold open question: Quis judicabit? Quis interpretabitur? [‘Who will decide? Who will interpret?] Who answers in concreto, on behalf of the concrete, autonomously acting human being, the question of what is spiritual, what is worldly and what is the case with the res mixtae.”
– Carl Schmitt, Political Theology II: The Myth of the Closure of Any Political Theology, Michael Hoelzl and Graham Ward trans. (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2008) (first published 1970)
“Quod non fecerunt barbari, fecerunct barbarini”
(The peace of the police is not the calm of the temple but the silence of the tomb)
The Birth of Zmiana and the Syncretic Struggle in Poland
n February 21, 2015, anti-globalization activists from across the Polish political spectrum gathered in the building of the Polish Teachers’ Union in Warsaw for the founding congress of the new political party, Zmiana (Change). Despite derision by the Polish corporate media as the “Russian Fifth Column in Poland,” “Putin’s little green trolls,” and “little red idiots,” and notwithstanding political harassment by the Young Greens who strove to ban the congress from the All-Polish Alliance of Trade Unions building, and also in defiance of the presence of the Ukrainian SBU outside, more than a hundred activists proudly assembled to launch a new party of tremendous importance to the Polish political scene. Despite his being denied entry into Poland, the triumphant gathering of Zmiana was still pleasingly greeted by a video message from the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Donetsk People’s Republic. Continue reading →