It all started with Association Agreement with EU - Polish politician Sikorski

Mr Sikorski, we are celebrating the 31st anniversary of Ukraine's independence. Poland, as a state, was the first to recognize Ukrainian independence, which we remember with gratitude. And I would like to ask you what Ukrainian independence means to you personally and what it means to Poland as a whole?

I am proud that free Poland was the first country to recognize Ukrainian independence. It should be remembered that Donbas and Crimea also voted "for" in the referendum that decided Ukraine's independence. In light of the current Russian lies, this seems very important. For us Poles, Ukraine's independence corrects the mistakes of the 17th century, when it was not possible to create a Polish-Lithuanian-Ukrainian union. If this initiative had succeeded, it is likely that our countries’ history would have taken a completely different path, we would have created a powerful state in Central Europe, and would have been able to repel Russian imperialism even then. I hope that what failed in the 17th century will succeed now in a European context, that is, that Ukraine will become a member of the same federation as Poland, this time the EU, and I am very happy that you are now, at least formally, candidates for EU membership.

We are also happy about this. We still have a long way to go, but we think we will overcome it and will join this European family. Even before the Russian invasion on February 24, you said something that I would like to quote: “We were not orphaned by you because you were not our daddy. More of a serial rapist. Which is why you are not missed. And if you try it again, you'll get a kick in the balls.” Those were your words, which sounded radical and undiplomatic for some people, but, in the end, it was your response to Lavrov's words that NATO wants to occupy the countries that were liberated after the USSR’s collapse. However, now it seems that countries in Eastern Europe, such as Poland or the Baltic countries, have a better understanding of what Russia and Russians are and, in fact, how Ukraine, with help from Poland and the Baltic countries, should explain to Western Europe that it is necessary to speak with Russia in its language, that is, not in Russian, but in the language of power, because that is all it understands. 

First of all, I did not say this in the sense that the countries were "orphaned" after the fall of the USSR, I believe just the opposite, that they were liberated then. I would also like to say that you, the Ukrainians, are not only giving them a good kick in the balls, you’re doing it from your territory to the great surprise and admiration of the entire world. It seems that those words were prophetic, and as for diplomacy, there has always been a view that one should express one’s opinion in a way that is adapted to the cognitive capabilities of the audience to whom the statements are addressed, and it seems that only these kinds of statements ‘land’ in Russia. I think that the Baltic countries, also new NATO members, do not need to be convinced of what Russia is. Ukraine started building its statehood a hundred years ago, which was destroyed by the Bolsheviks, so you don't need this explained to you either. Instead, the West is physically more distant, and feels safe, because Putin will not reach Berlin, Paris, or Madrid. But it seems now everyone sees Putin’s intentions, as he wages Europe’s last colonial war, and the reason for Ukraine joining NATO was just an impetus. He wants to restore the empire. This has already diverged from European trends and directly violates a fundamental taboo after two world wars, namely outlawing changing European borders by force. If you have problems with national minorities, you turn to the Council of Europe, which is governed by the convention on the protection of the rights of minorities, and you can achieve the implementation of that convention instead of bombing civilian targets, cities, raping, and looting. This cannot be acceptable. Russia is already considered a bandit country, a terrorist country. And as long as Putin is in power, this will not change.

Is this war only Putin's war, as some European leaders claim, or is it a war of both Putin and most Russians?

A very good question that does not have an easy answer. The man who resurrected Poland in the 20th century, Marshal Jozef Pilsudski, together with Ataman Petliura, tried to keep independent Ukraine in union with Poland. He said that in Russia even anarchists are imperialists. There is something in that. Russian culture is deeply imperial. It is enough to reread Dostoevsky or most Russian literature, which is outstanding, but still imperial. And it seems that most Russians, for the sake of peace, agree with the imperial propaganda that is disseminated everywhere, by all public and private media. But even according to official Russian statistics, a large part of Russians are against the war. It seems that there are no more than half and half. There are more political prisoners in Russia now than in the USSR under Brezhnev. Not only Navalny, but also Kara-Murza and several thousand brave Russians who resist Putin. I heard President Zelenskyy's proposal to refuse visas for Russians, and I take it quite seriously. Maybe it will come to that.

"As a transitional option, it would be possible, in my opinion, to try the option that was practiced by the US in relation to immigrants from the communist world".

This involved an extremely detailed questionnaire with a list of workplaces and a self-declaration of whether he supported repression or whether he supported Russian military preparations. If a lie is discovered, they will get a 10-year visa ban. Then we would build a database of Russians, the idea would spread in Russia that supporting Putin or the war is something that you pay for personally, and anti-Putin Russians could continue to come to the West and compare. You know, we, the Poles, turned away, or rather, strengthened our attitude to communism, because with each decade the difference in living standards in the West and in the Polish People's Republic (a Polish satellite state of the USSR) expanded. Everyone saw this with their own eyes. So we have to do something, but we have to do this in an elegant way. I have my own method: when I hear the Russian language on the streets of Western cities, the last time I was in Rome, therefore, I hear the Russian language and God knows whether these people are Russians, or pro-Putin Russians, or opposition, or maybe Ukrainian patriots who speak Russian  ...  I approach those people and say: "Glory to Ukraine!". And then I wait for a reaction.

And what was the reaction?

Mostly they say "Glory to the heroes!". So, these were some Russians who support Ukraine, or some Russian-speaking Ukrainians, or Belarusians who also support Ukraine... or Russians who do not support Ukraine, but see that it is their turn to respond appropriately.

Or they are afraid that the law in Europe is properly protected and the police know how to handle criminals. You mentioned communism. My next question will be about communism and what Poland and Ukraine experienced under that regime. The Germans apologized to the world for what they did during World War II. When the Soviet Union defeated the Nazis, the world turned a blind eye to what communism was doing. The leaders of some countries say that there should be a true assessment of what was done by communism, because this war that Russia started against Ukraine is a continuation of that regime and the fact that that regime was not punished. In your opinion, is there a possibility that someday Russia, as the successor of the USSR, will apologize for what the Soviet Union did and apologize to Ukraine for what Russia has already done in independent Ukraine?

Let's remember that independent Ukraine also made mistakes. In the 1990s, Poland rootled around in the ground just to get into European structures, and some of your leaders imagined that they were playing some kind of big game with the West and Russia, but in reality they were just wasting time. Now you are catching up with all that at an incredible price. But, returning to the essence of your question, I agree that that war is, I hope, the last chord in the fall of the USSR. Great empires rarely fall as bloodlessly as the Soviet Union. And it seemed to the Russians that, in fact, out of kindness, gave away both the external and the internal empire, that is, Belarus, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan. And in fact, we are aware that the internal collapse of the system has taken place from within. Something like the Kaiser's Germany at the end of the First World War. And only when Russia loses this war, Russians will understand that the "empire" project harms Russia itself. And that is why the dialogue with the Russian opposition, those who are against the system, as well as the brighter people inside the Russian administration is so important. Some are beginning to understand that it is time to throw the imperial project into the trash, to extinguish conflicts with neighbors, as well as frozen conflicts. Russia has the largest territory in the world, so it should focus on developing its own lands and people. We must support this type of anti-imperial Russian patriots. And that is why, in my opinion, it is so important that the Russians, as well as the Belarusians who are fighting in their units in Ukraine, should receive the support of the Ukrainian authorities and the West, because it is quite possible that this is the seed of the future leadership of Russia itself.

Now there are fewer of them. How much time must pass after the end of the war, when Ukraine obviously wins this war, for the Russians to experience remorse?

First of all, part of the funds will simply be collected from the Russians. I was in the National Security Service, in the White House, in Congress, and in the Department of Finance, where the analysis of the possibility of transferring the frozen funds of Russian assets is ongoing. That's hundreds of billions of dollars. These funds should go toward the reconstruction of Ukraine. Therefore, Russia must pay the price, pay reparations. And atonement for sin…  you know, atonement is one thing, but there you need a real fight with your own past. Rethinking Russianness. You know, this is the tragedy of Russia, that after the fall of the USSR, people like Sakharov or those who protested against the occupation of Czechoslovakia in 1968, dissidents, did not become its heroes. There was only a return to the Russian imperial historical canon. Russia must reinvent itself and only then will it become safe for its neighbors. We cannot do this for them, they must want this themselves.

Unfortunately, Russians, the majority of them, consider Stalin, the murderer of millions of people, a hero. Let's return to the war that Russia has started in Ukraine. At the beginning of February, you said that it would be enough to destroy three hundred Russian tanks and Russia would stop the attack. But the number of Russian tanks destroyed by the Ukrainian army has already exceeded one thousand eight hundred tanks, and Russia will continue to fight and take the lives of both military and civilians. Where did you go wrong?

Please remember that it was at the Munich Security Conference, when most analysts and politicians, including your president, believed that there would be no war, and I told the Ukrainian members of parliament that there would be a war, moreover, next week. And that if you don't fight, like you didn't fight for Crimea, no one will help you. And if you destroy three hundred tanks, shoot down at least a hundred planes and helicopters and neutralize at least ten thousand Russians, then their offensive will decrease and the West will start helping you. So, I consider this phrase to be one of my most accurate predictions. Because the Russian offensive on Kyiv started, as did their offensive on Kharkiv. And the world has obviously begun to help you, and now your military is very intelligently using the defense systems received from the West. So, I believe that the war is currently in the phase when Russia is sending its reserves into battle and Ukraine can gain an advantage.

Yes, we receive help from Europe and the US, which is very important to us and we are seeing results, that is, we are not losing our soldiers, each of whom we highly value. In Russia, soldiers are not considered human, and their lives are not considered valuable. But Putin constantly keeps the world in fear of using nuclear weapons. He previously said that when something happens in Crimea, if Ukraine tries to push it back, he will push the button and nuclear weapons will be used. But there have already been several detonations in Crimea, and Putin still hasn't pressed the red button.  Will he really use it, or is it just Putin's bluff? In your opinion, should we be so afraid of Putin and believe that nuclear weapons will be used?

First, what you have already said is important, namely the difference in the behavior of Ukraine and Russia towards their own soldiers, because this is part of how Ukraine and Russia treat their citizens. War tests systems. And the Russian system, in which a citizen or a soldier is not considered human, turns out to be ineffective. And the system, in which a smart and aware soldier who is supported by hundreds of sympathizers, as well as non-governmental organizations and democratic allies from abroad, turns out to be effective. Putin is leading to the degradation of Russia in many areas, and this also applies to the reputation of the Russian army. It seems that we are less afraid of Putin now than before the attack on Ukraine. Because we also believed that he had an army comparable to that of the US. I think that he himself thought so. But it turned out that in a totally corrupt country, the army is also totally corrupt. And this results in inefficiency. Ukraine was also a totally corrupt country, but it successfully overcame corruption, not to the extent we would like, but enough for the army to have something to fight for. These strikes on Crimea are of great importance. First of all, the whole world wonders how you did it. It is not known whether these are more long-range American shells, whether it is aviation, or sabotage. The latter is perhaps the least likely, but, in any case, it is possible from a purely military point of view. Another operation. This is first of all. Second, the fact that Putin moved outside Donbas and struck from Crimea, and now Crimea is under attack, erases the difference between the territories seized in 2014 and now. This fact may have political significance and may lead to some negotiations. And, thirdly, if we are talking about nuclear weapons, I do not think that Putin will dare attack the West, and it will not look like pressing a button, as you formulated, because the button, if it exists at all, I do not think that there is one, but viewing it through the prism of this metaphor - is for the use of intercontinental missiles. At most, he'll consider using a tactical-grade weapon on the battlefield. They are polishing their doctrine of 'escalation through de-escalation'. I do not believe that he will do it, because he has been warned that in the event of something like this, the West will not wait for another frank and dramatic violation of the Budapest Memorandum, consequences will follow.

I would like to ask about Ukraine and Poland. We have experienced everything, during the past century there were moments both joyful and painful, we were both allies and enemies. Some issues remain irritating for both sides to this day, although now Poland is helping Ukraine a lot, as it was during the Revolution of Dignity, for which we are very grateful and highly appreciate this. However, recently Prime Minister Morawiecki compared Bandera and Putin, which sounded strange to Ukrainians, because in the eyes of Ukrainians, Bandera is associated with those who fought against the Russian occupation. I would like to ask whether we should leave the past in the past, or, on the contrary, talk together about difficult moments in order not to use either politicians or our Moscow enemies in their own interests, starting the topic of difficult moments of Polish-Ukrainian history exactly when Poland supports Ukraine?

The party I belong to, Civic Platform, opposes Morawiecki's Nationalist Party, which is in power. He, after all, has other ambiguous statements in a nationalist spirit. But, you know, we will probably never agree on those issues in such a way that certain historical figures lose their controversy. When I was Poland’s defense minister, I was visited by my Mongolian counterpart. Apparently exchanging gifts, he presented me with something that was very important to him, a beautifully framed collection of medals made to commemorate the 800th anniversary of Genghis Khan, who is a monumental hero in Mongolia. I told him: "Mr. Minister, Genghis Khan is a very ambiguous figure in Poland".

"The principle is the fact that Ukraine and Poland do not have mutual territorial claims regarding even the smallest pieces of the territory of both countries. What was the cause of wars and murders does not exist today".

And both countries see themselves in the future as part of a strong European family of nations. This is what brings us together on a fundamental level and, I hope, is the basis of a deep Polish-Ukrainian union, not only during the war, but also during your journey to the EU and after your accession to the EU.

My last question will be about the future. How, in your opinion, should this war end?

This is an easy question - with Ukraine's victory and Putin's defeat, and an unequivocal defeat, one that would have removed him from power, and a new generation has come to power in Russia, because I hope that it will have a different approach to its neighbors, Europe, and democracy. But I will not be one of those who will tell Ukraine how to conduct negotiations. Putin formulated his conditions for ending the war: Ukraine must capitulate. You also formulated your conditions: Russia must completely withdraw from Ukraine. Of course, both positions do not have points of coincidence. In the course of hostilities, one of the parties may change its negotiating positions, because war is politics by other methods. In the end, I will say one more thing that may be important for you, since you will win this war, one way or another.  Let's remember where it all started - it started with the Association Agreement with the EU, which I personally pushed through during the presidency of Poland in the EU, the text of the Agreement was agreed in 2012, and then Putin persuaded Yanukovych not to put it into effect and actually the Maidan began with this, and then everything else. You are now implementing this Agreement and will negotiate EU membership. In the spirit of frankness, as I warned you during Maidan and a week before the war, I now give you a friendly warning: although the process is called negotiations, the EU has its own legal developments, which fill over 80,000 pages. They will not be changed for Ukraine’s sake, just as they were not changed for Poland. So, this is not a negotiation, but a voluntary acceptance of those developments and the legal system. So, don't waste time thinking you're playing a game again. Those 80,000 pages of laws should be translated and voted on in the Verkhovna Rada. The sooner you do it, the sooner you will be a member of the EU.

I hope that Ukrainians and the Ukrainian authorities understand this. What is victory for you?

For me, the victory will be a democratic European Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders, successful and inspiring for Belarus and Russians.

Thank you, Mr. Radoslaw, for this conversation. Thank you for supporting Ukraine. Thank you that Poland is next to Ukraine and helps us win this war.

Glory to Ukraine!