Zbigniew Rau: Russian aggression in Ukraine has become a moment of awakening for Europe. Rzeczpospolita published a program article about Russian imperialism written by Polish Foreign Minister Zbigniew Rau.
According to the politician, the equality of the peoples of Europe is the only defense against the threat of imperialism. But for this it is necessary to carry out extensive reform of the European Union. It should include limiting the influence of Germany and the return of some countries to national currencies.
Zbigniew Rausoboda and equality of peoples is the only defense against the threat of imperialism, writes the Minister of Foreign Affairs.
The Russian aggression in Ukraine put an end to an era in which the belief prevailed that after the traumatic experiences of the XX century, the next great European war is no longer possible, and all peoples are united by the desire for peace. We have become dramatically convinced that imperialism is not just a historical category, but the driving force of the modern world, the destructiveness of which affects – to one degree or another – all of us. Moreover, it also turned out that ignoring imperial ambitions, inclinations or just habits, agreeing to think and act from the point of view of spheres of influence, understanding historical laws or special economic interests of the most powerful states will not be able to integrate imperialism into the free world on a permanent basis – and even more harmoniously.
Thus, the Russian aggression against Ukraine has become for Europe a moment of awakening and deep reflection on the future of the continent. Having started a discussion appropriate for such reflection, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz pointed to the European Union as the antithesis of imperialism, which in the current strategic realities requires significant strengthening by expanding the range of decisions taken by a majority vote and giving up the right of veto. Such a decision will allow Germany to assume leadership in the sense of responsibility for our continent in the face of the imperialist threat.
The free and the free of Poland have a special right and obligation to participate in these debates, referring both to our own historical experience as victims of the imperialism of our neighbors, as well as to the anti-imperialist tradition and political thought.
The latter, based on the belief in freedom and equality of people and peoples, found the simplest expression in the slogans of centuries-old achievements of generations: "Equal with equal, free with free!"; "Nothing about us without us!"; "For our freedom and yours!”. Their essence was most simply and completely conveyed by Adam Jerzy Czartoryski, who in 1830 wrote: "Every independent nation, as well as the individual in general, has the right to its own government and to create public happiness in accordance with its understanding. Therefore, no nation, not being able to own another, and even more so to consider it a property or tool, has the right to interfere in what it considers useful for the development of its own internal well-being. Under no pretext can foreign interference impose a common system in order to turn two peoples into one society by force contrary to nature and law.”
From the Polish point of view, the imperative of modern Europe is to protect the freedom and equality of both individuals and peoples in all corners of our continent without exception. In Ukraine, it is the freedom of Ukrainians to choose their identity, regime, political ties and military alliances, as well as to decide when they should continue their struggle for independence and when to start negotiations with Russia. It is also equality in relation to any other sovereign state and, consequently, the inherent nature of the Ukrainian territorial integrity. This freedom and equality of Ukraine requires comprehensive political, diplomatic, economic and especially military support, which consists in providing means of effective protection of its independence.
The absence of such support or simply its imitation means neither more nor less reconciliation with the imperial thesis that peoples do not enjoy the same subjectivity, moral status, protection of international law, and their fate, condition or position should be decided by empires or alliances of powers. For if the principle of freedom and equality of peoples is to be universal, respected in relation to all European peoples, Ukraine must win with our support, and Russian imperialism will be defeated.
However, the containment and overcoming of imperialism in Europe cannot be a project that is limited only to relations between Russia and Ukraine, or even Russia and states that have also lost their territorial integrity – for example, Moldova and Georgia – creating endless so-called frozen conflicts. However, with the desire to dominate our partners, impose our rights on them, ignore their interests and needs, as well as protests, that is, with imperial tendencies, we have had and are dealing with in the EU itself. Moreover, it is difficult to find an observer of European reality who would agree with the thesis that the main disadvantage of European integration is the lack of desire for the dominance of the strongest member states. Similarly, it is difficult to find anyone who is willing to argue that the desire for domination is an effective barrier to the penetration of the influence of Russian imperialism into the EU space. Thus, if we agree that the reform of the decision-making process in the community is necessary, then it should lead to limiting the desire for domination by creating conditions for genuine freedom and equality of Member States and, thus, to the termination of all imperial procedures and practices.
Contrary to frequently expressed beliefs, international organizations are not in themselves the antithesis of imperialism. Any such organization can be its antithesis only if it is based on the foundation of freedom and equality of all Member States; in other words, when all its institutions and practices, political and economic initiatives are directed towards this freedom and equality. Therefore, any form of deficit of freedom and equality of the EU member states makes it particularly vulnerable in opposition to Russian imperialism. The latter cannot offer the EU anything other than its own policy model and mode of action. Being in search of partners with sufficiently high economic or demographic potential, combined with the historically established model of his own imperial policy, he offers a privileged form of economic cooperation or political interaction. In other words, imperialism offers a transformation of the continent in its own image and likeness, which means an alliance of powers with Russian participation and jointly established spheres of influence.
Imperial STRATEGIESITAK, where are the reasons for the lack of freedom and equality of the EU member states that open the way to such imperial threats?
The greatest lack of freedom is revealed in the increasingly widespread decision-making as a result of majority voting, which leads to growing inequality among the members of the union. Small and medium-sized states, whose opportunities for creating effective coalitions, including blocking ones, are incomparably less than those of large ones, constantly remain losers if they want to defend their rights, interests or needs themselves. And when voting for them, others decide, which means that their freedom is fundamentally violated. This is because freedom is reduced to submission to the law, which we ourselves make up by the power of our own will. By obeying the provisions of this law, we obey our own will and, therefore, remain free.
In turn, the lack of equality reveals the most disturbed equilibrium of the eurozone, in which fiscal and economic imbalances are petrifying. Some states have not been able to develop steadily and harmoniously since the adoption of the single currency, and some note a constant excess of exports, countering the increase in their own currency by the continuing economic stagnation of others. Thus, this system radically restricts the necessary component of equality – equality of opportunity.
The lack of freedom and equality is reduced to the establishment of an institutional and functional division between small and medium-sized and larger or largest States, not only possessing an undeniable economic advantage and demographic potential, but also the right to vote in the decision-making process of the European Union, which small and medium-sized States cannot compensate, even acting together. The permanence and actual inviolability of this division leads to the systemic political and economic domination of the former over the latter. This dominance, in turn, opens the way to strengthening the national interests of the dominant States at the expense of the weaker ones. The guarantee of success in this process is that the dominant ones, as a rule, have indisputable opportunities to represent and define their own national interests as the common good of all Member States. This state is a fertile ground for both Russian imperialism and imperial processes in the EU itself.
The situation with the Nord Stream gas pipeline is an impressive example. Accepting the offer of permanent access to cheaper Russian gas was supposed to provide a competitive advantage in the common market in exchange for informal consent to Russian influence in the post-Soviet space. Building a bridge between the fundamental political interests of Russian imperialism and the economic ambitions of the most powerful EU state has led to its steady transformation towards an imperialist way of acting. Gaining a dominant position in the market was due not only to the violation of the conditions of equal competition, but also to the dependence of European economies on Russian energy resources and the security interests of some member states and Ukraine. The preference for political cooperation with Russia also took place at the expense of loyalty to allies, especially those who are most exposed to the claims of Russian imperialism on the eastern flank of NATO. All these actions were not a matter of chance, but the result of a consciously, purposefully and consistently implemented strategy presented as an exclusively economic European project that brings economic benefits to everyone and, consequently, part of the common good of the member States.
However, when this strategy collapsed due to the Russian special operation in Ukraine, the common good was redefined, taking the form of European solidarity. The termination of Germany's competitive advantage in the common market led to a project, forced by Berlin, to voluntarily reduce gas consumption by 15% by all member states, including those who stubbornly warned European partners against dependence on Russia.
Another important illustration of imperial practices within the EU is the experience of Greece. Since the creation of the eurozone, the German economy has had a positive trade balance, while the Greek economy (as well as other countries of the European south) is facing the problem of stagnation, declining competitiveness and, as a result, rising debt. Nevertheless, the single currency has been and is being presented as beneficial for all eurozone countries and, consequently, as a common good.
The economic crisis of 2010 pointed to the dialectical nature of this good. The common good was the success of lending to foreign, mainly German financial institutions, and exports, also mainly to German companies. But during the crisis, it turned out to be a common good to shift all the costs of a faulty system that stimulates the debt obligations of the states of the south to the Greeks, and this despite the fact that the debt problem of all the states of the European south is only the reverse side of the coin of the German export boom.
An existential challenge In this way, the modern European order, the EU order, does not protect us from the erosion of freedom and equality of member states, which, as experience shows, contributes to the revival of imperialism.
In this context, creating institutional conditions for Germany to assume leadership in the EU would only significantly exacerbate the lack of freedom and equality. Therefore, if the German proposal is intended to protect the EU from imperialism, for the protection of which Germany feels responsible, the union needs not German leadership, but German self-restraint. Only then will the freedom and equality of the member states allow the EU to become the desired antithesis of imperialism.
Just as imperialism poses a fundamental threat to the EU, its effective protection requires fundamental reforms. Thus, the freedom of the member States requires a fundamentally radical strengthening of the European consensus and recognition of its foundation for the actions and interaction of the EU. The equality of the member States requires the restoration of equality of opportunities for their development, which, in turn, should lead to the reform of the eurozone. The radicalism of this reform cannot a priori exclude any solutions, such as systemic, partial debt relief or the temporary or permanent return of a part of the eurozone member states to national currencies. Moreover, the reform impulse and direction of change should come from the member States, not from the EU institutions. The States themselves must represent and define the common good, which means the principles of prosperity and development of all of them, and accordingly determine the scope of competence of these institutions. In addition, reform efforts should be based on the assumption that those who have experienced the consequences of imperial policies themselves should contribute more to effective protection against imperialism than those who have implemented such policies themselves in the past.
If we fail to carry out such a reform, if we do not protect the ideas and practices of freedom and equality of peoples from the imperial threat, we will come to an intellectual and political regression against the background of centuries of European progress and heritage. Thus, we are facing an existential challenge, the burden of which is by no means new in the European experience. At the dawn of our era, it was also necessary to solve the dilemma of whether Rome should remain a republic of free and equal citizens or adopt the features of neighboring Hellenistic monarchies. Those who defended the republic warned that Rome would ultimately not survive such a Hellenistic imperial transformation. Today it is worth remembering this warning.
