On the way back from my recent trip to Poland, I decided to buy a number of socio-political weekly magazines not necessarily to catch up with contemporary issues. I wanted to grasp how certain problems are understood in Poland, what views are most dominant and how they are being advocated. I had missed spotting Polish 'accents' in international affairs – despite or because of their prominence, mainstream Western weeklies don't bother mentioning, for example, that the prime minister of the Basque Country, Patxi López, read out the poem “Nothing Twice” by Wisława Szymborska on his inauguration.Central and Eastern Europe has always been the area of my main political interest but I have to confess that latest series by George Friedman has inspired me to learn more and read more about the region. Here the Polish weeklies I had brought back to the UK came in handy. In his geopolitical journey, the founder of Stratfor tries to re-persuade the idea of Intermarium - the area as wide as from Poland to Turkey, one of enormous strategic importance. Although, unlike Dr Friedman, I doubt the next major international conflict will erupt there, it drew my attention to two great individuals of “Intermarium”: Józef Piłsudski and Kemal Atatürk.
In both Polish and Turkish cases, they are father-figures and inspiration for nationalist movements ever since they governed. There are many similarities between these two leaders, not only their importance in the shaping of the countries' identities, but also the years when they were politically active (1920s and '30s). Although arguably Atatürk's legacy is greater, both are considered as the most popular politicians of all-time in their respective countries.
Seventy years on and both of these great personalities are used by parties being in political opposition rather than ruling elites. Quite ironically, Piłsudski and Atatürk would have probably supported the parties currently in power instead. Despite taking decisions initially contradicting to views of two past leaders of Poland and Turkey, it made both countries stronger on the international stage as the role of religion, economy and security has also developed over the past few decades. Interestingly, however, the opposition still literally "copy and paste" the great examples from the past, without acknowledging new contexts, in order to boost its support in more and more desperate hope of winning the next elections.
Why is that? Since both Donald Tusk and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan aren't exceptional politicians either, the most straight-forward explanation would assume that modern politics generally lacks the charismatic personalities and great leadership skills that could look ahead towards the future - but not over their shoulders to seek comparisons with the greats of countries' past. Around the world, the struggle to find new father-figures is more and more common as can be seen in attempts to build images of Barack Obama and Wladimir Putin. Recent years in Polish and Turkish politics would suggest that both countries are currently governed by reactive administrators, not proactive visionaries. The trouble is, as in many other democratic countries, the opposition doesn't have anything special to offer either. As it stands, the wait continues and it gives a chance to look up to the past for inspirations.
P.S. Newsweek Polska looks into Polonezköy/Adampol, a Polish village in Turkey (story in Polish) but English-speaking readers should do with the Wikipedia,
If you are interested in further readings about the contemporary situation in Turkey:
Polish: Polityka, "Ile w Turku Atatürka"
English: Foreign Affairs, "Sultan of the Muslim World"
No comments:
Post a Comment