Photo: pl.freepik.com
1772, 1793, 1795, 202..?
“OUR FATHERS SHED THEIR BLOOD FOR POLAND, AND WE ARE GIVING OUR INDEPENDENCE DEMOCRATICALLY. IT IS UNTHINKABLE” — SUCH COMMENTS COULD BE HEARD AFTER SOME OPPOSITION POLISH MEPS SUPPORTED GERMANY‘S PROPOSAL OF TREATY CHANGES DURING A MEETING OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT’S CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE (COFE). HOWEVER, THE WAY IN WHICH THE EU MAINSTREAM DECIDED TO CHANGE TREATIES HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH DEMOCRACY PROPERLY UNDERSTOOD. THIS IS NOTHING MORE THAN A LEFT-WING ATTACK ON THE EUROPEAN UNION MEMBER STATES, INCLUDING POLAND, FROM WHICH, HOWEVER, WE STILL HAVE A CHANCE TO DEFEND OURSELVES.
“RAINBOW COALITION” WILL LACK AS MANY AS 59 VOTES
“The document adopted by the Committee on Constitutional Affairs will now go to the European Parliament, where the federalists have a majority of votes. If it is passed, the procedure for amending the European treaties will begin. Even then, however, changing the treaties will require a unanimous decision of all member states. The Polish constitution requires for ratification agreement limiting Polish sovereignty acceptance by a majority of 2/3 of the Sejm (307 deputies with full attendance) and 2/3 of the Senate (67 senators with full attendance). This means that Donald Tusk’s “rainbow coalition” will lack as many as 59 votes in the Sejm and 1 vote in the Senate. Our task is therefore to maintain this advantage and effectively stop ratification” – the attorney Jerzy Kwasniewski from the Ordo luris Institute for Legal Culture reassures.
“The greater the number of states convinced to defend their sovereignty and oppose the plan to build a European superstate, the greater the chance that federalists will not be able to break their opposition. That is why we are constantly developing our network of international cooperation, convincing analytical centers and politicians of other member states to oppose towards the draft amendments. Much will really depend on our commitment and consistency” – he adds.
The Institute of Schuman‘s Thought (IMS) is also involved in raising awareness of the consequences of adopting revolutionary treaty amendments. IMS analysts warn that the proposed mechanisms, which will certainly be voted on, will perpetuate the dictate of the strongest countries – France and Germany – over the weaker countries and enable decisions to be made over the heads of the latter. “Many important issues, including those relating to values and identity, and ideological issues, would de facto be transferred to the decisions of Brussels/Berlin, and member states would lose control over their own societies” – they state.
There is still the issue of religious freedom and freedom of belief – they would be threatened due to the aggressive ideological agenda. The situation is similar with the media – ultimately, one message should be broadcast in accordance with the designated line. Any derogation and attempts to think independently will be condemned. The dictatorship and affirmation of leftist anti-values in all areas of social, political and economic life will not leave any space of freedom for those who, attached to traditional values, want to defend the conservative order.
It is worth realizing one more thing, namely that getting rid of sovereignty will be tantamount to getting rid of subjectivity and, consequently, falling into slavery. The centralized European Union will not be a free state, but a totalitarian dictatorship with no regard for individual freedom and oppressive towards anyone who does not want to fully submit.
VULNERABLE TO ATTACK BY RUSSIA
The report on proposals for amendments to the treaties “calls for the creation of a defense union of permanently stationed European military units with permanent rapid deployment capability under the operational command of Brussels; proposes that joint procurement and development of weapons be financed by the Union through a dedicated budget subject to a procedure of joint decision and control parliamentary body and proposes an appropriate adjustment of the competences of the European Defense Agency; notes that these changes will not affect the clauses relating to national traditions of neutrality and NATO membership”.
This is rhetoric, but what effects will such solutions have on the defense of member states? First of all, it should be noted that the European Union has no tradition of being a defense alliance, so it has not developed appropriate structures or procedures, but this is only the tip of the iceberg. Transferring defense competences to the EU level will paralyze the ability of countries such as Poland or Lithuania to defend themselves against Russian aggression. This will happen primarily because the EU, controlled from Berlin, would first have to recognize Russia as an aggressor, which it has not clearly done so far and which – controlled by Germany — it simply will not be capable of. Then, possible scenarios of Russian aggression should be prepared, and then tactical military actions should be developed. In this respect, Brussels, under the direction of Germany, would purchase weapons supplied mainly by German industry, because business is a key motive for Germany and therefore putting pressure on building the EU army and removing the connection with NATO creates, according to Germany’s intention, an opportunity for them to maintain economic, ideological and technological dominance and management of the entire superstate.
The purchase of military equipment must be carefully considered because the outcome of a potential war depends on the synchronization of actions with using it. Purchases are made depending on the expected opponent and the capabilities it has, so defining potential aggressors is necessary. Meanwhile, we remember Berlin’s reaction to Russian aggression against Ukraine: first, the German authorities waited for a quick victory for Russia, and then took sham actions in order to disturb the aggressor as little as possible. Now, however, they want the European Union they control to have the right to command EU troops, with the heads of member states automatically waiving this prerogative.
Of course, someone could argue that the document does not say anything that member states could not maintain their own military. The problem, however, is that if command competences were transferred to the EU level, the entire army would have to be subordinated to them, because none of the countries could afford to pay the national army and the EU army at the same time. Moreover, the document refers directly to the Ventotene Manifesto, in which Altiero Spinelli wrote about a superstate in Europe: “lt will be a stable federal state with a European army instead of national troops”. Including it in the report means political will to liquidate the armies of the member states and replace them with one common army constituting a tool “enabling the enforcement in federalized states of resolutions aimed at maintaining a common order”.
A significant problem is the huge hole in the EU budget. During the last meeting of the European Council in Brussels, the President of the European Parliament, Roberta Metsola, in a dramatic speech appealed to the heads of government to supplement the revenues of the 7-year EU budget, because “our resources are stretched to the limit”. The EU has no money either to service the debt incurred under the Reconstruction Fund or to implement crazy “green” revolutions. Even less so would it find money for the army, which, given the lack of finances, would be a mere fiction. It cannot be ruled out that Germany, which is proposing these changes, has calculated that it will develop the Bundeswehr — which it is currently doing very intensively — so that its army will be stationed in each of the member states, guarding German interests more than security against external threats. This scenario is completely real and constitutes a serious threat, especially since the mentioned report refers directly to the Ventotene Manifesto and Altiero Spinelli’s concept, according to which the European army would be used to suppress rebellions within the European Union, and not to defend its borders.
Particularly noteworthy is the amendment tabled by co-rapporteur Helmut Scholz, who while taking note of the COFE (Conference of the Future of Europe) proposals on establishing an EU Defense Union and qualified majority, i.e. the majority of votes in the CFSP (Common Foreign and Security Policy), expresses reservations regarding the amendments covered by paragraphs 20 and 21 of the resolution. He believes that an EU Defense Union must be built on a comprehensive, multi-layer and non-military concept of security underpinned by unanimity of all EU Member States and requiring full parliamentary scrutiny both at Union and Member States’ level. Co-rapporteur Helmut Scholz intends to introduce proposals for a revised CSFP (Common Security and Foreign Policy) and CSDP
(Common Security and Defense Policy) during the Convention that is called for. He underlines in particular the Union’s responsibility for contributing to international peace and security in accordance with international law, fostering active engagement for disarmament, particularly of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction, and joining the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). Restructuring of EU Member States ‘military capacity into EU wide structures should, in his view, be based on the principle of structural non-aggression capabilities.
“As most Member states are also members of NATO, any treaty change, in his view, must rule out a duplication of military capacity and budget expenditure. Treaty change must therefore be accompanied with steps towards a decoupling from NATO” – concludes.
After a thorough analysis of his position, we will notice that it is nothing more than a disarmament plan and preparing the ground for Russia’s entry into the eastern territories of the European Union. Let us remember that, firstly, none of the German politicians has withdrawn the German-Russian plan to create a common economic zone from Vladivostok to Lisbon after Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, and secondly, current German aspiration maps clearly indicate that the “German lands” are on the west of Vistula, while Germany is ready to hand over all lands on the east of this river to Russia. It was probably no coincidence that during Donald Tusk’s government, the defense strategy. prepared was on the Vistula line.
Despite German rhetoric that appears in the media from time to time, the authorities in Berlin still do not perceive Russia as a threat, but as a partner for their interests. In this context, plans to create a common European army are nothing more than a method to disarm the Member States and paralyze their ability to defend themselves.
It is no coincidence that a German politician demands that they secede from NATO — this way it will be even easier for Russia to enter these territories and do business with Germany, because American troops will not be stationed there and by committing an act of aggression, the Kremlin will not automatically enter into armed conflict with the USA.
DANGEROUS AMENDMENTS
Among the more than two hundred amendments mentioned, there are many that are intended primarily to attack Polish national identity and state property.
And so, according to them, the school’s task is to “strengthen the common European identity “. National identity is therefore to be blurred and replaced by the supranational identity of the superstate being created.
There will be no space for culture and tradition, because the liberal-left mainstream perceives them as harmful stereotypes that need to be combated. One of the methods to do this is to bring in Muslim immigrants an masse.
“We recommend that the EU creates a mechanism to ensure monitoring and enforcement of minority rights (e.g. a portal or office where people can submit complaints)” – we read in the recommendations of the Conference on the Future of Europe, to which the authors of the treaty amendments refer. It is impossible not to notice that this would be a kind of ministry for political correctness in order to eliminate undesirable phenomena from society by the liberal-left mainstream, such as attachment to the family understood as a union between a woman and a man, attachment to values, or the vocation to be a woman and a man. If the law is divided into law and minority rights, it is necessarily assumed that one group – implicitly the mentioned minority – will be privileged. Moreover, it is known that the goal of the new leftist revolutionaries is to privilege LGBT activists.
The European Union is to be granted exclusive competences in the area of the environment and biodiversity, as well as negotiations on climate change. This means that the smallest planning works at the commune level will not be able to be carried out without the participation of EU institutions. Also, Polish State Forests – covering an area of approximately 1/3 of Poland’s territory – will not be able to conduct forest management, because the management of the forests – within shared competences – will be taken over by the EU.
This also means that Polish foresters will not be able – as before – to take care of the forests, which, if left to their own fate, will dry out in exactly the same way as the Bialowieska Forest, in the management of which Brussels “ecologists” interfered.
The granting of shared competences to the EU in the area of health is of no less concern, as the EU failed to cope with the pandemic and responded inadequately and with a delay of at least half a year. Moreover, the official EU mainstream agenda includes the introduction of universal access to abortion and euthanasia – the achievements of the civilization of death, which a large part of society in Poland is still fighting against.
Therefore, if the Eurocrats‘ plan succeeds, Poland, in addition to losing its sovereignty, will be subjected to a leftist experiment, as a result of which many of its citizens will die as a result of abortion and euthanasia.
It is worth realizing that human life is what is mainly fought for in this game.
POLAND STILL HAS A CHANCE TO DEFEND ITSELF
Poland still has a chance to defend its sovereignty and should make every possible effort to achieve this goal.
The loss of independence to neo-Marxist Germany will be tantamount to the destruction of the healthy social fabric and spirit of the nation, which has not been broken even by 123 years of partitions. The attack will also be on the Catholic Church, which is already in the crosshairs of the ideologized German “synodal path”, and on Christian values, and then it will already be a slippery slope towards the final collapse. We must not let this happen.
Source: S C H U M A N O P T I C S M A G A Z I N E
P U B L I S H E R :
I n s t y t u t M y ś l i S c h u m a n a
I n s t i t u t e o f S c h u m a n ‘ s T h o u g h t
u l . C h m i e l n a 2 l o k 3 1
0 0 – 0 2 0 W a r s z a w a
s c h u m a n o p t i c s @ i m s c h u m a n . c o m
