Scholar adds to questions about Szlajfer
A prominent Washington academic specialist on Poland has criticized this blogger for questions of tone and balance in his April 30 article about Henryk Szlajfer, but he calls the blogger an "impeccable source" nevertheless.
Michael Szporer, in his SIEC e-bulletin, says that the criticism of Szlajfer is valid. His comments follow:
"A more serious question is how well-suited is Mr. Szlajfer's appointment in the current political climate in Washington?
"Or what might happen if the next Polish government, likely to consist of center-right PiS and PO, will extend lustration to ambassadorial and other high-profile appointments?
"Will Mr. Szlajfer's appointment facilitate, or further complicate a relationship that is dangerously becoming unclear, muddled by the visa and military aid complications, and now the new VAT requirements, which could stifle US investment in Poland?
"Will Poland under the new ambassador achieve greater visibility in Washington, or will its concerns find their way to the back burner straining the relationship between Poland and US even further?
"Poland has not vetted its diplomatic corps, nor has it thoroughly reformed its Ministry of Foreign Affairs since 1989, as other countries that rejoined Europe have, notably Lithuania. What Warsaw has not understood is that what it imagines as passable or appropriate in Warsaw does not necessarily serve Poland's interests abroad. It is another reason for improving the channels between Warsaw and Washington by establishing an Institute [forum for exchange of ideas as well as a training center], and soliciting advice from Polonia.
"Washington is not in the business of selecting foreign ambassadors. More importantly, who should be ambassador is not a question of right political affiliation, liberal or conservative, or background. Few in Washington would deny that ambassador Jerzy Kozminski was a hallmark of Polish diplomacy, even though he had no ties to the opposition. Ambassador Kozminski amply demonstrates that Poland has competent individuals, on both the left and the right, to serve her well in a key post like Washington. These concerns demonstrate that Washington is not beyond understanding the "nuances" of Poland's internal politics or has forgotten its recent history. Warsaw should taylor its diplomats destined for Washington to Washington--and not to its whims.
"Mr. Szlajfer's nomination has surfaced some time ago, following the resignation by the former foreign minister and presidential candidate Andrzej Olechowski. It demonstrates a close association of certain elements of Freedom Union with president Aleksander Kwasniewski's circle. There is nothing wrong with forging a new left in Poland under the banner of a Democratic Party, which, given the pendulum swings of Polish politics, may take power down the road if the expected to win center-right coalition fails to deliver. However, it is not wise to assume Washington will gloss it over and all will be well."
Michael Szporer
Michael Szporer, in his SIEC e-bulletin, says that the criticism of Szlajfer is valid. His comments follow:
"A more serious question is how well-suited is Mr. Szlajfer's appointment in the current political climate in Washington?
"Or what might happen if the next Polish government, likely to consist of center-right PiS and PO, will extend lustration to ambassadorial and other high-profile appointments?
"Will Mr. Szlajfer's appointment facilitate, or further complicate a relationship that is dangerously becoming unclear, muddled by the visa and military aid complications, and now the new VAT requirements, which could stifle US investment in Poland?
"Will Poland under the new ambassador achieve greater visibility in Washington, or will its concerns find their way to the back burner straining the relationship between Poland and US even further?
"Poland has not vetted its diplomatic corps, nor has it thoroughly reformed its Ministry of Foreign Affairs since 1989, as other countries that rejoined Europe have, notably Lithuania. What Warsaw has not understood is that what it imagines as passable or appropriate in Warsaw does not necessarily serve Poland's interests abroad. It is another reason for improving the channels between Warsaw and Washington by establishing an Institute [forum for exchange of ideas as well as a training center], and soliciting advice from Polonia.
"Washington is not in the business of selecting foreign ambassadors. More importantly, who should be ambassador is not a question of right political affiliation, liberal or conservative, or background. Few in Washington would deny that ambassador Jerzy Kozminski was a hallmark of Polish diplomacy, even though he had no ties to the opposition. Ambassador Kozminski amply demonstrates that Poland has competent individuals, on both the left and the right, to serve her well in a key post like Washington. These concerns demonstrate that Washington is not beyond understanding the "nuances" of Poland's internal politics or has forgotten its recent history. Warsaw should taylor its diplomats destined for Washington to Washington--and not to its whims.
"Mr. Szlajfer's nomination has surfaced some time ago, following the resignation by the former foreign minister and presidential candidate Andrzej Olechowski. It demonstrates a close association of certain elements of Freedom Union with president Aleksander Kwasniewski's circle. There is nothing wrong with forging a new left in Poland under the banner of a Democratic Party, which, given the pendulum swings of Polish politics, may take power down the road if the expected to win center-right coalition fails to deliver. However, it is not wise to assume Washington will gloss it over and all will be well."
Michael Szporer
<< Home