Franco-Polish Relations

[cegorach]

*sorry for lack of 'the' before 'title' but it didn't fit.




Because I usually start with heavy artillery shelling the other side which has some predictable results, perhaps the opposite approach will be a better idea.


So let us start with kind words about more pleasant links between Poland and France.

After all we have so spectacular examples, such as:



Fryderyk Chopin and his lady with very much lady-like firstname George Sand

Napoleon Bonaparte and Mrs Walewska


Charles de Gaulle and his little friend he met in Poland while serving in '5 Chasseurs Polonais' or perhaps after that in July or August 1920 - it is unclear, major de Gaulle never spoke about the relationship openly.


François Rochebrune

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

and his Zouaves of Death

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

*






*of course the picture shows a French Zouave who was inferior to a Polish zouave, but that is obvious.

So perhaps we could return to a friendly exchange of arguments ?



Now the subject.

A Europe of blocks maybe ?


Let us hope we will avoid any problems with communication this time.



So do you think that the EU will see regional blocks dictating its policy or more a collection of temporary alliances only in certain areas e.g. common agriculture policy ?

[Adrian II]

So do you think that the EU will see regional blocks dictating its policy or more a collection of temporary alliances only in certain areas e.g. common agriculture policy ?

As far as I can remember there have always been alliances based on common interests within the EU, but these were not necessarily regional, they were usually one-item blocks and they all proved to be temporary. The most obvious would be the Franco-German 'tandem' that dominated the original 6-member EU for quite a while. For some years now, Britain and The Netherlands have been a bit of an (unequal) tandem when it comes to monetary and fiscal policy.

As the EU expands I suppose we will see more shifting, temporary alliances regarding agriculture, foreign policy, etcetera. Such bargaining is a natural part of any political proces and I don't think it will endanger the union.

As to the specific Polish or French plans, I know too little about them to even drop my two cents.

[cegorach]

As to the specific Polish or French plans, I know too little about them to even drop my two cents.

According to our Foreign Office (the minister made a speech today about our foreign policy in next 3-4 years including our turn to lead the EU in 2012) France and Germany are seen as strategic partners whatever it means.

I believe it has much to do to our efforts to increase EU military power - a part in the efforts to double-tripple secure our safety.
Our part in the mission in Chad has much to do with it, I guess.

Personally I see a number of areas where we could ally ourself with France - temporary alliances in the inter-EU policy - most likely the common agricultural policy is the first such area.

[Adrian II]

I believe it has much to do to our efforts to increase EU military power - a part in the efforts to double-tripple secure our safety.

I fully support those efforts. We live in a time of pipeline diplomacy, proxy wars and strategic uncertainty, and unlike most western Europeans I am very much aware of Poland's specific security concerns, both military and economic. And I think Poland is having a hard time pressing for solutions and remedies without at the same time antagonising some EU or Nato members, particularly every time it appears to favour the U.S. over its European partners.

Some of Poland's problems concern us all, or so they should. I have always maintained that the Polish may sometimes act like buffoons (foor good measure, I am referring to the notorious "twins" and such, not to present company ) but that they are now our buffoons and we should act accordingly. Every arrangement that increases security on our eastern flank should be applauded, signed, supported and have money thrown at it, for better or worse.

[KrooK]

Sorry but why are you involving NATO here? Who like who but France whom almost destroyed NATO 40 years ago ... (here I would like to quote Jacques Chirac ;) ) should be quiet about it.

[Adrian II]

Sorry but why are you involving NATO here? Who like who but France whom almost destroyed NATO 40 years ago ... (here I would like to quote Jacques Chirac ;) ) should be quiet about it.

No.

But who like who have ten times smarter compatriot in thread is who must not troll and get like thread who locked again, eh?

[cegorach]

France is back in the military structures of the organisation and is too large to ignore too - so if for example Ukraine is going to join French agreement will matter too.
Besides we are also talking about non-NATO military structures built inside the EU which are NECESSARY otherwise we as european community might face another humilation somewhere... hardly a good thing I believe.
We simply cannot call for the Americans every single time to solve our problems (post-yougoslavian wars) and when it comes to Poland and other countries more sensitive about their security it is a good idea to have another system, a backup plan for sure.




Personally I believe we would need a number of security structures - formed and named like the NATO or less formal on more local level:

The NATO - obviously,

Security structures working alongside/inside the EU - might include other non-EU states,

'Special relations' with a number of states - certainly with the USA, Israel, Lithuania and Ukraine,


All might work to larger or lesser degree together, at least that would be the usual situation, but in case one cannot work we have another.
Also all of those are already in place, in various stages of organisation, planning or effectiveness - for example our military cooperation with Israel is probably more beneficial than with the USA (military industry, development of weaponry, investments in this sector).


Security obviously includes energy supplies, intelligence cooperation and to some degree more unified foreign policy.