Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk will pay his fist visit to Russia on February 8. Interfax news agency became the first Russian media outlet to which he gave an interview in the run-up to his trip to Moscow. Interfax special correspondent Olga Golovanova and head of the agency's bureau in Poland Marcin Sobczyk interviewed him.
Mr. Prime Minister, over the past few days it has become clear that Poland and the United States agreed in principle on the deployment of an element of U.S. missile defense in Polish territory in exchange for the modernization of the Polish Armed Forces and the deployment of a NATO military base. What is the purpose of all this? Does Poland need the missile defense base? Does it mean that Warsaw sees a threat from Russia?
- As I announced right after assuming the office of prime minister, we do not want the missile shield project [the deployment of the missile defense facility in Poland] to cause negative emotions and fears among our neighbors. This is why we've made the effort to make the talks on the installation not just talks between Poland and the U.S., since they are obvious, but to also have these talks include other interested countries. Because in certain cases decision-making requires the development of an atmosphere of confidence.
This was why [Polish Foreign] Minister [Radoslaw] Sikorski spoke with Russian diplomats in Brussels, Moscow and Warsaw about various aspects of the anti-missile installation.
It personally means a great deal to me that the possible Polish-American agreement on this matter does not cause any doubts or emotions from third countries.
But it does raise such doubts. A few days ago Russia's envoy to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, recalled your assertions about the need to consult on the matter with Russia. In fact those consultations ended before they really began.
- They have sure begun and not necessarily ended. Just like Polish-U.S. talks, they are still waiting for conclusion. I will be speaking of that during my visit to Washington. I realize that this matter has not been concluded yet. It would be good, in my view, if comments from the interested politicians and media were as unemotional as possible.
One way or another, Polish-Russian relations must take into account the fact that Poland is a member of the European Union and NATO and an ally of the United States. But I would also like my intention to improve Polish-Russian relations to be taken seriously.
If so, are there any plans of further consultations with Moscow?
- We want to talk about the entirety of Polish-Russian relations. After my return from Moscow I would like to be able to say with a clear conscience that the intensity of Polish-Russian relations, the number of meetings at a high level, and those initial, very good gestures from both sides, are just a good beginning and not the end of building better relations between Poland and Russia.
Consultations will, of course, not mean that we will give up our own, autonomous strategy, but they should help explain to various interested parties, including Russia, that it is neither the goal nor intention of Poland to threaten any neighbor. Despite the obvious difference in Polish and Russian potentials, Russia is currently one of the few countries in the world that do not have to fear other countries.
As for the installation of the missile shield in Poland, if it happens, it should, in my view, be as transparent as possible. At the same time, all countries in our region should seriously treat the autonomy of any country in shaping its defense policy.
In case there is a final and positive reply of Poland to the deployment of the missile defense base, will the country agree for Russian officers to be permanently present at such a base? Can Poland guarantee to Russia that those missiles will not be targeted against Russia?
- It seems to be that there are different political possibilities to build trust and transparency than the presence of officers, in this case Russian officers, on Polish territory. It is thus worth talking about other ways that could assure Russia that Poland in no way plans to take any hostile action aimed at Russia, to say nothing of military action.
Anyone who suggests that there is any threat from Poland to Russia is making himself or herself ridiculous. I believe that Polish-Russian talks can deal with any matter. The only condition is good will. If any politician on any side formulates opinions that Poland is interested in conflict, that politician does not understand anything or clearly has bad intentions.
Security of the states in the entire region and the possibility of good Polish-Russian relations are in the interest of Poland and Russia.
And what does Poland need a NATO base for? Is it not to hide American missiles from Russia?
- I don't think you're suggesting that Poland faces a threat from Russia...
No, I am not. This is how I understand this logic in pure theory that if a U.S. base appears in Poland, Poland begins to perceive a threat from Russia. The Russian army's Chief of the General Staff Gen. Yury Baluyevsky recently said Poland can become a target of Russian nuclear weapons after the deployment of the missile shield. And because of such statements Poland feels it must seek additional protection, and that's why it needs a NATO base. Isn't that so?
- I don't accept and I don't understand such remarks. They can only worsen, rather than improve, relations between the countries in our region. Poland is building its security without any intention of confrontation with any country in the world. I'm sure that Russian leaders see the restrained response in Poland to such unreasonable and unnecessarily aggressive remarks. Today the key to a good future is the avoidance of confrontational declarations, especially since they have no justification in facts.
Recently Chief of Combat Training and Service of the Russian Armed Forces Lt. Gen. Vladimir Shamanov said Russia is planning to reposition its forces in Kaliningrad region in response to the deployment of U.S. missile defense in Europe. Military experts say that in response to the missile shield in Poland Russia should also deploy Iskander tactical missile systems in Kaliningrad region as well as new attack systems on Baltic Fleet ships. What would be your comment?
- Politics serves the purpose of avoiding situations in which generals would be playing first fiddle. This is what diplomats and political leaders are for – to avoid risk and excessive gambling. On the regional scale, Poland and Russia evidently have enough economic interests to give the first say to diplomats and entrepreneurs, instead of generals. On the global scale and in the strategic perspective, Poland and Russia should find an area of common interests that is big enough for using a language of dialogue, not confrontation.
Therefore today my compatriots – and I'm speaking of my people, not just about politicians, diplomats or generals - would like talks about how to make good business without distorting reality.
If there are any misunderstandings, there is even more reason to talk about them.
Could you still comment on the plans of regrouping forces in Kaliningrad region?
- The trick is that as the prime minister of the Polish government, I would not be acting like the chief of the General Staff. I am much more interested in the fact that hundreds of Polish entrepreneurs operate in Kaliningrad region. I would rather speak about how to facilitate trade and travel than those who overdo the war rhetoric.
The quieter you are, the further you'll go, as an old Russian saying goes.
What does Poland need a NATO base for?
- We don't have it in our plans. And it's not up to Poland to decide where NATO bases should be. Of course, there are practical consequences resulting from the fact that Poland is a NATO member. Any state, just like Russia, is projecting its own defense policy according to its own views. Poland will be doing the same thing, but no one who's reasonable can see in Poland today any threat, which is why I would suggest that the path of the Polish-Russian dialogue be changed from a dialogue over missiles to a dialogue about areas where we can cooperate well.
Yet Minister Sikorski said that Poland currently has only a NATO conference center and it would be good to deploy more NATO infrastructure in Polish territory.
- Minister Sikorski is a very mature diplomat. I'm glad that he has found a common language so quickly with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Deputy Minister Sergei Kislyak. We have had good impressions from the talks with the Russian side so far, and this is also the case when it comes to missile shield consultations.
Now let's proceed to the subject of energy. Are reports in the Polish media true that while in Moscow you will propose an alternative gas pipeline to Nord Stream, which would run through the Baltic states and Poland? According to those reports, the project is supposed to be 50% cheaper.
- I have no influence on Russian decisions as to the route of the pipeline along the bottom of the Baltic Sea.
I'm not and I will not be on the board of directors of Gazprom or other Russian companies or institutions. That's why I can propose a conversation about a good joint business, and for sure such a business is a pipeline that is significantly cheaper. This would take into account the economic interests of gas exporters and customers.
The pipeline along the Baltic Sea bed will not be accepted by Poland, but Russia will perhaps make decisions without considering our viewpoint. But there's the question of why should one build a pipeline that is two or three times more expensive? It seems that everybody's losing on this.
I don't think that the meeting in Moscow will bring a solution to this matter.
But before one unnecessarily spends a lot of money maybe it is worth talking about the possibilities of optimizing gas transfers to the West. Certainly, it is worth comparing benefits and losses of individual countries, if we give a fair comparison between Nord Stream and the Amber pipeline [which according to Poland's plan could be built from Russia to Europe via Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia and Poland]. I, for sure, am ready to guarantee that Poland, while taking care of its own interest, can be and will be a predictable and very responsible partner in any possible projects.
And what will happen to the project of building a gas pipeline from Norway and an LNG terminal?
- As you know we are living in the age of a price revolution when it comes to the sources of energy. Price relations when it comes to Russian and Norwegian gas are different from what they used to be four years ago. Today those prices are comparable. Any state should look for basic diversification of energy sources not because they hold something against this or that supplier, but because they should have influence on the prices through diversification. I understand energy security of my country to be the basic level of independence that will allow us to make choices.
As to the matters you're bringing up, this means that the Norwegian project and the LNG terminal will be seriously considered.
Does this mean that you believe those projects make more economic sense now than when they were originally initiated?
- If we compare the price dynamic on world markets, for sure yes. Every country is trying to adopt different approaches to what is needed and necessary when it comes to the diversification of energy sources. Without emotional undercurrents and with full openness we are ready to talk with the Russian side, also because the Polish economy is no longer as dependent on gas as a source of energy. That is why we want to talk to anyone, including Russia, about energy, just like you talk about any honest business. I think that we can expect, like Russians expect from us, to get an open and honest conversation about what can be a joint business in gas and oil.
Up until now things have been better or worse, but we have been doing business together. The value of our trade is $20 billion and a large part of the trade is the purchase of gas and oil by Poland. I think that there's no point in trying to hide anything here. Russia can provide very precise definitions of its interests, so what I'd like is for the Polish point of view to be considered as well. I think that we'll be able to reach some kind of an understanding.
Does your government still support the project of stretching a pipeline from Norway and an LNG terminal?
- Both projects allow for a practical possibility of diversifying gas deliveries. Today the economic sense of these projects is greater than several years ago.
Some time ago you mentioned the possibility of organizing a trilateral meeting between Poland, Russia and Germany on Nord Stream. Can Poland join this project?
- I've talked about this with [German Chancellor Angela] Merkel. It's not ruled out that it will also be the subject of our Moscow meeting. There's one problem – what is the reason why Russians and Germans are choosing a much more expensive project? If there are political misunderstandings, they should be resolved and explained before a controversial investment is approved. As I said already Poland cannot block or stop this investment, but for sure it will not take part in it. It is very expensive.
Would you agree with certain Western politicians that Russia is using the energy issue as a political weapon?
- There have been hundreds and probably thousands of articles written on the global energy strategy of Russia, the U.S., China, India. One can either write or talk about this objectively, or one can turn it into hostile propaganda against countries that are part of this global energy game.
I would be naive if I said I don't see attempts by the largest players to make energy one of the arguments in politics, but it doesn't mean that I'm holding it against any country.
Everybody is using the instruments that they have in hand. Russia is building its global and regional position by using the fact it has large gas and oil resources, as well as other raw materials. The fact that it runs such policy should not by definition hurt smaller countries, such as Poland. The real business is a win-win situation, and not a win-lose situation.
Russia should also care to see countries wanting to do business with it, not because they are forced to, but because they see it as a good business.
Russia and Poland have already signed a memorandum on lifting the meat embargo on Polish products. A plant products embargo has also been partially lifted. Do any other objective reasons remain for the Polish veto of talks on a new EU-Russia framework agreement? On what conditions will Warsaw lift the veto and may that happen as early as in February?
- I would very much like the practical effects of the lifting of the embargo to be more visible than they are today.
It's not enough to sign a document. We still must see people, companies trading with each other, and there's a lot to do in this respect. Secondly, we really want partnership and cooperation to be built on trust, also in the energy context. It's a good subject for talks during my visit in Moscow.
I appreciate the Russian side's step. But I'd like to mention that the signal from my government about the unblocking of Russia's negotiations with the OECD was the first step of my government – I know that it was to a large extent symbolic, but it showed that if we treat each other with respect and trust, more steps are also possible.
To what extent, in your view, do issues like the Katyn Massacre still weigh on Polish-Russian relations?
- Complex issues in Polish-Russian history cannot cast a shadow on relations. A patient explanation of the problems of the past is a key to that. Poland has complex but good experience of tackling historic issues with its neighbors. If you look at Polish-German relations, this is a skill that requires a delicate approach, farsightedness as well as good will on both sides.
Those difficult and tragic parts of our history, such as Katyn, should not be left in the dark. We will not put them in the closet or a drawer. They should not, however, become a weapon in the hands of those who want to spoil Polish-Russian relations.
I'm a historian and I have a very clear point of view, but I understand that this process cannot be sped up by force.
Poland and Russia have set up a group for complex issues. Its cochairmen - former Foreign Minister Adam Rotfeld on our side - met several days ago. They already have a plan of joint action.
So your government unlike the previous one will not demand apologies from Russia for Katyn?
- I don't quite agree with my predecessors, with the previous Cabinet. But I believe that all governments after 1989 without exception were very restrained. The fair evaluation of Katyn is now a problem for Russians. I don't think that it's a task of politicians to call on anyone to offer apologies. I think that Russian leaders today or in the near future will recognize that historical truth is the best foundation for good relations with neighbors, but I don't expect any spectacular declarations. What's more, I always try in such cases, be it the difficult Polish-German history, the history of Polish Jews, or Polish-Russian and Polish-Ukrainian history, to look at the point of view of the other side.
Will Poland continue to be as active in the East as it has been in the past two years?
- It is not a coincidence that right before my visit to Moscow I held a long conversation with Polish President [Lech] Kaczynski. Poland's international strategy has been built over many years together. I think that Russia has the right to its own strategy and Poland has the right to its own. It's important for the strategies not to clash, but even if we have different viewpoints, we would know to respect them. It is my intention to continue those efforts of the Polish diplomacy that allow us to maintain very good relations with all countries in the region.
I'm also convinced that President Kaczynski's actions in the region that are autonomous from what Russia would want in Poland's relations with Ukraine, Georgia, Azerbaijan, do not have to be and should not be treated as aimed against Russia's interests.
But much depends on the sensitivity of the Russian side. I think that we can see a change for lowering tensions and not building them up in the Polish activity in the East and Southeast.
Looking a few years forward, what could be the biggest problem in Poland's bilateral relations with Russia? How do you see the prospect of work with the Russian leadership after the presidential elections in March when as everything indicates Dmitri Medvedev can become the new leader?
- I hope that as time passes we will find it easier to speak the same language. If Russia wants true partnership with the European Union - if it's serious about joining OECD and WTO - it means that it will favor the adoption of values respected by free and democratic countries. The more countries observe those norms, which form the basis of the WTO, OECD or EU, the easier it will be for us to find common interests and values in bilateral relations.
Will Russia change after the elections? That is not a question to me. In what direction will it change? I can have my own assumptions but I will keep them to myself. Certainly, Russia, whose progress as a country will be typical for the democratic world, will be a desired partner for Poland and the entire free world. I want to stress that the adoption of those rules does not have to limit the feeling of the greatness of the Russian nation and state. I want the Russian nation and the country to be treated in a way that it deserves - like a nation with a great culture, a great history, even though difficult and sometimes tragic. Despite dramatic fragments of our history, there are more positive emotions between the people than some statements by some politicians, or events from our history, would suggest.
We really can, despite all our differences, treat each other the way we deserve it – Poles and Russians - with respect and trust.
