Wydarzenia w Pakistanie a sytuacja międzynarodowa dr Mieczysław Ryba (2007-12-28) Aktualności dnia słuchajzapisz
RAQport Inc. 2004 North Monroe Street Arlington Virginia 22207 Washington DC Area USA TEL: 703-528-0114 TEL2: 703-652-0993 FAX: 703-940-8300 sms: 703-485-6619 EMAIL: office@raqport.com WEB SITE: http://raqport.com
Ryszard Antolak Ryszard Antolak interviews with filmmaker Khosrow Sinai There are gaps in our History, lost episodes in our collective memory caused not by forgetfulness, but by the deliberate policy of governments and politicians. There are also courageous individuals who fight to bring such material back into the public light. Khosrow Sinai is one such individual.
Author of "In the Alleys of Love", “The Inner Monster”, and “Bride of Fire”, Khosrow Sinai is internationally famous for over a hundred short films, documentaries and features. One of his works, “The Lost Requiem”, has never been publicly released. Sidelined and ignored for over a quarter of a century, its content has been deemed too politically sensitive to be shown. Now, at last, its official obscurity is coming to an end, and the film is being hailed as a priceless Iranian and Polish Historical document.
“The Lost Requiem” tells the story of the war-time exodus to Iran of hundreds of thousands of Polish citizens released from the Soviet labour camps of Siberia. During the two months of April and August 1942, leaking ships crammed with emaciated, men, women and children began arriving at the Caspian port of Anzali (then called Pahlevi). Their condition was desperate. Within days of their arrival, thousands had died from malnutrition and typhus. Of those who survived, the men travelled onwards to join the armies of the Allied Forces in Syria and Lebanon. The remainder (mostly women and children) remained in Iranian refugee camps for up to three years, their lives totally transformed in the process.
Twenty five years after those dramatic events, Khosrow Sinai began to seek out those who had chosen to remain behind in Iran. Among them was a doctor who had fought at the battle of Monte Cassino, the widow of an Iranian policeman who had been a student in Warsaw before the war, and many many more. He travelled half way across the world to find some of the 700 Polish orphans sent to New Zealand from Iranian refugee camps. Their reminiscences, together with the many graves left behind in Tehran, Anzali and Ahvaz, bear testimony to a chapter of history almost erased from the public memory.
When I talked with Khosrow Sinai recently, I asked what had made him want to produce a documentary about the Polish exodus to Iran.
K.S. “I happened to be in the Dulab cemetery in Tehran in 1970. I was there because the father of a Christian friend had died, and I saw the rows of polish gravestones, and became curious. As far as I remember, it was a priest in the graveyard who first told me about the polish refugees, and it became the starting point of my research”.
R.A. The film took twelve years to make and took you as far as New Zealand to interview survivors. What was it that kept you motivated all those years? Was there anything in this story that had special meaning or poignancy for you, personally?
K.S. What can be more poignant than destiny of a people who are thrown out from their homeland through the cruel plans of the world powers and politicians? The story has nothing to do with my personal life, except that for more than 12 years long I lived with it and could not complete it because of the political situation before (and after) the Iranian Revolution.
R.A. During that time, was there any one person (or event) that stood out for you above all the others?
K.S. I met many polish people who had married Iranians, or had chosen to stay and live in Iran. But two persons were most interesting for me: Anna Borkowska - because she was such a natural born artist - (today she is 93 years old) and doctor Filipowicz, whose father worked as a physician for about 40 years in Iran (Ghazvin). He himself was also for many decades a very well known physician in that city. The event which really shocked me, however, was the sudden death of the 26-year-old son of Anna Borkowska, who in my film seemed to be so indifferent about his mother's harsh destiny. His sudden death (through a heart attack), caused a radical change to the ending of my film.
R.A. During the Communist era, no mention of the events related in the film was allowed in Poland. In the West, the subject was similarly “buried”, as it touched upon the sensitive matters of Katyn, the Teheran and Yalta Conferences, Soviet-Nazi cooperation (and, of course, the Anglo-American betrayal of Poland to Stalin). Did any of these matters have any bearing on why the “The Lost Requiem” was never released in Iran?
K.S. I really don't know why this film hasn’t been shown for many long years in Iran or in other countries. Of course it has been shown at two festivals over the years, once in Iran, and the other in Sweden in 1986 (Immigrants Film festival). I think the reason that the film hasn’t been distributed around the world is because of the carelessness and ignorance of people who should have known better and could have done it. But after years of waiting without a result, I have decided to do what I can to save this important Document of Polish and Iranian History!
R.A. You were in Poland recently, where you met the Polish director Andziej Wajda. His new film “Katyn” tells the story of the mass murder of 15000 Polish officers by the Soviets in 1940 (buried in mass graves in Katyn Forest and elsewhere). It is a very different film in style from yours. But in many ways they complement each another, exploring twin sides of a single story. Did you find you had much to talk about? K.S. Ever since I was a film student in Vienna during 1960s, I have been very fond of modern Polish films. So I was very glad to meet Mr. Wajda. He was very kind to me, and we agreed how important filmmaking can be to preserve History. I am glad that after 25 years, my film has found its way to the people for whom and about whom it was made.
R.A. There are many who might say: “The past is dead. You can’t change it. Stop obsessing about it. Leave it alone and concentrate on the present.” How would you answer these critics?
K.S. Please tell my critics this wise saying (of a polish philosopher whose name I can’t remember!): “that human tragedies repeat themselves because people prefer to forget the tragedies of the past!” That is the main reason for my making "The Lost Requiem".
The Polish premiere of “The Lost Requiem” took place on the 26th September 2007 in Poznan (the home of Polish cinema). Shortly afterwards, a documentary by Dorota Latour about the Iranian director’s life and work was screened on public television by TVP Polonia.
Khosrow Sinai was born in Sari, northern Iran, in 1940. He studied film directing and screenwriting at the Academy of the Dramatic Arts in Vienna and music theory at the Vienna Conservatoire. His most recent work, “Talking with a Shadow”, is a film about the celebrated Iranian writer Sadegh Hedayat.
Ryszard Antolak is a writer and teacher based in the UK. antolak@blueyonder.co.uk
" Antolak interviews Khosrow Sinai on his film about the story of the war-time exodus of Polish citizens from the labor camps in Siberia to Iran. "
The Second World War Invasion: Iran and the Polish Exodus from Russia 1942 By: Ryszard Antolak, December 2004 Thank you to all great people from Iran,
Poland and Polish people we only want good for your great IRAN
Please take care of my brothers, Polish army soldiers, some of them come from my home town in Poland.
Please contact all friends do not attack Polish People in Iraq an d Afanistan.
I wish all people from the great country of IRAN with 5 thousand years of history all the best!! One more time. We as the Polish People are only to help. Poland did not got any contract like others. It was long time polish slogan “for your freedom and ours” Alex Lech Bajan CEO RAQport Inc. 2004 North Monroe Street Arlington Virginia 22207 Washington DC Area USA TEL: 703-528-0114 TEL2: 703-652-0993 FAX: 703-940-8300 sms: 703-485-6619 EMAIL: office@raqport.com WEB SITE: http://raqport.com
Exhausted by hard labour, disease and starvation - barely recognizable as human beings – we disembarked at the port of Pahlavi (Anzali). There, we knelt down together in our thousands along the sandy shoreline to kiss the soil of Persia. We had escaped Siberia, and were free at last. We had reached our longed-for Promised Land. – Helena Woloch.
In Tehran's Dulab cemetery, situated in a rundown area of the city, are the graves of thousands of Polish men, women and children. It is not the only such cemetery in Iran, but it is the largest and most well-known. All of the gravestones, row upon row of them, bear the same date: 1942.
In that year, Iran stood as a beacon of freedom and hope for almost a million Polish citizens released from the Soviet labour camps of Siberia and Kazakhstan. After enduring terrible conditions travelling across Russia, 115,000 of them were eventually allowed to enter Iran. Most of them went on to join the allied armies in the Middle East. The rest (mostly women and children) remained guests of Iran for up to three years, their lives totally transformed in the process. They never forgot the debt they owed to the country that had so generously opened its doors to them. Their reminiscences, as well as the many graves left behind in Tehran, Anzali and Ahvaz, are testimony to a chapter of Iranian history almost erased from the public memory.
From Poland to Iran In 1939, the Soviet Union had participated with Nazi Germany in the invasion and partition of Poland. In the months that followed, the Soviets began a policy of ethnic cleansing in the area to weed out what they called socially dangerous and anti-soviet elements. As a result, an estimated 1.5 million civilians were forcibly expelled from their homes in the course of four mass deportations. Thrust at gunpoint into cattle trucks, they were transported to remote labour camps all over Siberia and Kazakhstan.[1]
Their fate was completely changed in June 1941 when Germany unexpectedly attacked Russia. In need of as many allies it could find, Russia agreed to release all the Polish citizens it held in captivity.[2] Shortly afterwards, provision was also made for the creation of an army from these newly-freed prisoners. It was to be commanded by General Wladyslaw Anders, recently released from the Lubyanka prison in Moscow. Stalin intended to mobilize this new army immediately against the Germans in the West; but Anders persuaded him to hold back until the Poles had recovered their health and strength after two years of exhaustion in the labour camps.
Swept onwards by the rumours that Stalin was about to allow some of them to leave his Soviet Paradise , these former prisoners of the Gulag system began a desperate journey southwards, some of them on foot, to reach the reception camps set up for them on the borders of Iran and Afghanistan. They travelled thousands of miles from their places of exile in the most distant regions of the Soviet Union. It was an exodus of biblical proportions in terrible conditions. Many froze to death on the journey or starved. Others kept themselves alive by selling whatever personal objects they had been fortunate enough to have brought with them. Exhausted mothers, unable to walk any further, placed their children into the arms of strangers to save them from certain death.[3]
Arrived at the army reception camps in Tashkent, Kermine, Samarkand and Ashkhabad, the refugees attempted to enlist in the Polish army, for which the Soviets had allocated some food and provisions. There was nothing, however, for the hundreds of thousands of hungry civilians, mostly women and children, who were camped outside the military bases. Instead of increasing provisions to the camps, the Soviets actually cut them. In response, the Polish army enlisted as many of the civilians as they could into its ranks, even children (regardless of age or sex) to save them from starvation. In the baking heat, dysentery, typhus, and scarlet fever became rampant. Communal graves in Uzbekistan could not keep up with the numbers who were dying. By 1942, only half of the 1.7 million Polish citizens arrested by the Soviets at the start of the war were still alive.
Their salvation finally came when Stalin was persuaded to evacuate a fraction of the Polish forces to Iran. A small number of civilians were allowed to accompany them. The rest had no option but to remain behind and face their fate as Soviet citizens.
Pahlavi The evacuation of Polish nationals from the Soviet Union took place by sea from Krasnovodsk to Pahlavi (Anzali), and (to a lesser extent) overland from Ashkabad to Mashhad. It was conducted in two phases: between 24 March and 5 April; and between the 10th and 30th of August 1942. In all, 115,000 people were evacuated, 37,000 of them civilians, 18,000 children (7% of the number of Polish citizens originally exiled to the Soviet Union).
A makeshift city comprising over 2000 tents (provided by the Iranian army) was hastily erected along the shoreline of Pahlavi to accommodate the refugees. It stretched for several miles on either side of the lagoon: a vast complex of bathhouses, latrines, disinfection booths, laundries, sleeping quarters, bakeries and a hospital. Every unoccupied house in the city was requisitioned, every chair appropriated from local cinemas. Nevertheless, the facilities were still inadequate.
The Iranian and British officials who first watched the Soviet oil tankers and coal ships list into the harbour at Pahlavi on the 25th March 1942 had little idea how many people to expect or what physical state they might be in. Only a few days earlier, they had been alarmed to hear that civilians, women and children, were to be included among the evacuees, something for which they were totally unprepared.[4] The ships from Krasnovodsk were grossly overcrowded. Every available space on board was filled with passengers. Some of them were little more than walking skeletons covered in rags and lice. Holding fiercely to their precious bundles of possessions, they disembarked in their thousands at Pahlavi and kissed the soil of Persia. Many of them sat down on the shoreline and prayed, or wept for joy. They were free at last!
They had not quite escaped, however. Weakened by two years of starvation, hard labour and disease, they were suffering from a variety of conditions including exhaustion, dysentery, malaria, typhus, skin infections, chicken blindness and itching scabs. General Esfandiari, appointed by the Iranians to oversee the evacuation, met with his Polish and British counterparts to discuss how to tackle the spread of Typhus, the most serious issue facing them.
It was decided to divide the reception area into two parts: an infected area and a clean area, separated from each other by a barbed wire fence. On arrival, those who were suspected of having infectious diseases were quarantined in the closed section for four days, or else sent to the camp hospital. 40% of patients admitted to the hospital were suffering from typhus. Most of these died within a month or two of arriving. At this time there were only 10 doctors and 25 nurses in the whole of Pahlavi.
In the clean area, the arrivals were channelled into a series of tents where their clothes were collected and burned. They were then showered, deloused, and some of them had their heads shaved in the interests of hygiene. As a result, women began to wear headscarves to conceal their baldness. Finally, they were given sheets, blankets and fresh clothes by the Red Cross and directed to living quarters.
Food provision was inappropriate. Corned beef, fatty soup and lamb, distributed by the British soldiers, caused havoc with digestions accustomed only to small pieces of dry bread. They could not tolerate the rich food, and a large number died purely from the results of over-eating.
Beggarly, unwell and dishevelled, the Polish refugees were nourished more by the smiles and generosity of the Iranian people than by the food dished out by British and Indian soldiers. Iran at that time was going through one of the unhappier episodes of her history. Occupied by the Russians and the British, her relations with the soldiers of these two countries were understandably strained and difficult. With the Poles, however, there was an immediate affinity which was evident from the moment they arrived and which extended from the lowest to the highest levels of society.
On 11th April 1942 Josef Zajac, chief of Polish forces in the Middle East, noted in his diary on a visit to Tehran that the Persian population were better disposed to them than either the British or the White Russian émigrés (who were distinctly hostile). His relationship with the Iranian Minister of War, Aminollah Jahanbani (released a year earlier from prison for plotting against Shah Reza Pahlavi), was genuinely friendly and cordial. During the course of their discussions together on 13th April 1942, they discovered that they had been students together at the same French military academy.[5] Personal friendships such as these further smoothed relations between the two populations. Contacts between Polish and Persian soldiers were equally cordial. The custom of Polish soldiers saluting Persian officers on the streets sprang up spontaneously, and did not go unnoticed by the Iranians.
Isfahan: The City Of Polish Children Washed up in the detritus of evacuees arriving at Pahlavi had been over 18,000 children of all ages and sexes (mostly girls).[6] Not all of them were orphans. Some had been separated from their families during the long journey through Russia. Their condition was especially desperate. Many were painfully emaciated and malnourished. Orphanages were set up in immediately in Pahlavi, Tehran and Ahvaz to deal with them as a matter of urgency.
The first major orphanage to be opened was situated in Mashhad, and was run by an order of Christian nuns. It opened its doors on March 12 1942. The children at this home were predominantly those transported over the border from Ashkabad by trucks.
Eventually, however, Isfahan was chosen as the main centre for the care of Polish orphans, particularly those who were under the age of seven. They began arriving there on 10th April 1942. It was believed that in the pleasant surroundings and salutary air of this beautiful city, they would have a better chance of recovering their physical and mental health.
Iranian civil authorities and certain private individuals vacated premises to accommodate the children. Schools, hospitals and social organizations sprang up quickly all over the city to cater for the growing colony. The new Shah took especial interest in the Polish children of Isfahan. He allowed them the use of his swimming pool, and invited groups of them to his palace for dinner. In time, some of the children began to learn Farsi and were able to recite Persian poems to a delegation of Iranian officials who visited the city. At its peak, twenty-four areas of the city were allocated to the orphans. As a result, Isfahan became known ever after in Polish émigré circles as The City of Polish Children.
Exile in Iran The refugees remained in Pahlavi for a period of a few days to several months before being transferred to other, more permanent camps in Tehran, Mashhad, and Ahvaz. Tehran possessed the greatest number of camps. A constant stream of trucks transported the exiles by awkward twisted roads from the Caspian to Quazvin, where they were put up for the night on school floors, before continuing their journey next morning to the capital.
Tehran s five transit camps, one army and four civilian, were situated in various parts of the metropolitan area. Once again, certain Iranian authorities and individuals volunteered buildings (even sports stadiums and swimming baths) for the exclusive use of the refugees. Camp No.2, however, (the largest) was nothing more than a collection of tents outside the city. Camp No. 4, was a deserted munitions factory. No. 3 was situated in the Shah s own garden, surrounded by flowing water and beautiful trees There was also a Polish hospital in the city, a hostel for the elderly, an orphanage (run by the Sisters of Nazareth) and a convalescent home for sick children (Camp No. 5) situated in Shemiran.
Most able-bodied men (and women) of military age enlisted forthwith in the army and were assigned to military camps. Their stay in Iran was a short one. The army was quickly evacuated to Lebanon and included in the Polish forces being reformed there. Their route to Lebanon was either overland from Kermanshah (6 rest stations were set up for them along the way to Latrun), or by ship from the southern port of Ahvaz. The remainder women, children and men over the age of military service - remained behind in Iran, some of them for periods up to three years.
Something more than food and clothing are necessary for the human spirit to survive and grow. Art and Culture are antibodies to feelings of despondency and decay, and within a few months of their arrival, the exiles had set up their own theatres, art galleries, study circles, and radio stations all over the city. Artists and craftsmen began to give exhibitions. Polish newspapers began to spring up; and restaurants began to display Polish flags on the streets.
Among the organizations formed to care for the educational and cultural needs of the exiles was the influential Institute of Iranian Studies begun by a small group of Polish academicians.[7] In three years from 1943 to 1945 this group published three scholarly volumes and scores of other articles on Polish-Iranian affairs. Most of the material was later translated into Farsi and published under the title Lahestan .
By 1944, however, Iran was already emptying of Poles. They were leaving for other D.P camps in places such as Tanganyika, Mexico, India, New Zealand and the UK. Their main exit route was Ahvaz, where an area of the city still called Campolu today, is a distant echo of its original name Camp Polonia. Mashhad s last children left on the 10 June 1944. Ahvaz finally closed its camp doors in June 1945. The last transport of orphans left Isfahan for Lebanon on the 12 October 1945.
What Remains The deepest imprint of the Polish sojourn in Iran can be found in the memoirs and narratives of those who lived through it. The debt and gratitude felt by the exiles towards their host country echoes warmly throughout all the literature. The kindness and sympathy of the ordinary Iranian population towards the Poles is everywhere spoken of.[8]
The Poles took away with them a lasting memory of freedom and friendliness, something most of them would not know again for a very long time. For few of the evacuees who passed through Iran during the years 1942 1945 would ever to see their homeland again. By a cruel twist of fate, their political destiny was sealed in Tehran in 1943. In November of that year, the leaders of Russia, Britain and the USA met in the Iranian capital to decide the fate of Post-war Europe. During their discussions (which were held in secret), it was decided to assign Poland to the zone of influence of the Soviet Union after the war. It would lose both its independence and its territorial integrity. The eastern part of the country, from which the exiles to Iran had been originally expelled, would be incorporated wholesale into the Soviet Union. The Polish government was not informed of the decision until years later, and felt understandably betrayed. 48,000 Polish soldiers would lose their lives fighting for the freedom of the very nations whose governments had secretly betrayed them in Tehran, and later (in 1945) in Yalta.[9]
Footnotes: There were four mass deportations of the civilian population of eastern Poland in 1940/41 alone: a) 10 Feb 1940. 250,000 from rural areas sent to Siberia in 110 cattle trains. b) 13 April 1940. 300,000, mostly women & children 160 trains) mostly to Kazakhstan and Altai Kraj. c) June/July 1940. 400,000 to Archangielsk, Sverdlovsk, Novosibirsk etc. d) June 1941. 280,000 to various part of USSR. Some 500,000 Poles had also been arrested by the Soviets between 1939 and 1941, mostly the government officials, judges teachers lawyers, intellectuals, writers etc. So the total of 1.7 million Poles were in captivity in the Soviet Union. Under an agreement signed on 30th July 1941 by the Polish premier, General Sikorski and the Russian representative I. Mayski, Russia agreed to release all the Poles who had been arrested under what was termed an amnesty . The word amnesty was extremely ill-chosen. The amnesty was signed in London in the presence of Winston Churchill and Anthony Eden. Although the amnesty was announced in July, the news did not filter through to many of the remoter camps of eastern Siberia until December. For others, the news never reached them at all, and they remained in Russia. General Anders himself took the responsibility to evacuate the civilians before he had even discussed it with the British. They had studied at the Ecole Superieure de Guerre in Paris. General Anders, who visited Jahanbani in Teheran a few months later, was also a graduate of this school. On Jan 6 1943, the Polish embassy was told to close all 400 of its welfare agencies on Russian soil (including orphanages and hospitals). Two months later, all Polish citizens remaining on Russian soil were deemed to be Soviet citizens. The president was Stanislaw Koscialkowski. The word kish-mish passed into the vocabulary of the survivors. Many Polish boys were named Dariusz, still extremely popular as a boy s name in Poland today. Polish soldiers were not even allowed to participate in the Victory parade in London in 1945.
References: Faruqi, Anwar. Forgotten Polish Exodus to Iran. Washington Post. 23 Nov 2000. Kunert, Andrzej. K., Polacy w Iranie 1942-45. Vol I. R.O.P.W.i M. Warsawa. 2002. Mironowicz, Anna, Od Hajnowki do Pahlewi. Editions Spotkania. Paris 1986. Woloch, Helena, Moje Wspomnienia. Sovest. Kotlas 1998 On September 1st., 1939, 1.8 million German troops invaded Poland on three fronts; East Prussia in the north, Germany in the west and Slovakia in the south. They had 2600 tanks against the Polish 180, and over 2000 aircraft against the Polish 420. Their "Blitzkrieg" tactics, coupled with their bombing of defenceless towns and refugees, had never been seen before and, at first, caught the Poles off-guard. By September 14th. Warsaw was surrounded. At this stage the poles reacted, holding off the Germans at Kutno and regrouping behind the Wisla (Vistula) and Bzura rivers. Although Britain and France declared war on September 3rd. the Poles received no help - yet it had been agreed that the Poles should fight a defensive campaign for only 2 weeks during which time the Allies could get their forces together and attack from the west.
There are many "myths" that surround the September Campaign; the fictional Polish cavalry charges against German tanks (actually reported by the Italian press and used as propaganda by the Germans), the alleged destruction of the Polish Air Force on the ground, or claims that Polish armour failed to achieve any success against the invaders. In reality, and despite the fact that Poland was only just beginning to modernise her armed forces and had been forced (by Britain and France) to delay mobilisation (which they claimed might be interpreted as aggressive behaviour) so that, at the time of invasion, only about one-third of her total potential manpower was mobilised, Polish forces ensured that the September campaign was no "walk-over". The Wehrmacht had so under-rated Polish anti-tank capabilities (the Polish-designed anti-tank gun was one of the best in the world at that time) that they had gone into action with white "balkankreuz", or crosses, prominently displayed in eight locations; these crosses made excellent aiming points for Polish gun-sights and forced the Germans to radically rethink their national insignia, initially overpainting them in yellow and then, for their later campaigns, adopting the modified "balkankreuz" similar to that used by the Luftwaffe. The recently-designed 7TP "czolg lekki", or light tank, the first in the world to be designed with a diesel engine, proved to be superior to German tanks of the same class (the PzKpfw I and II) inflicting serious damage to the German forces, limited only by the fact that they were not used in concentrated groups. They were absorbed by the Germans into their own Panzer divisions at the end of the campaign.
On September 17th. Soviet forces invaded from the east. Warsaw surrendered 2 weeks later, the garrison on the Hel peninsula surrendered on October 2nd., and the Polesie Defence group, after fighting on two fronts against both German and Soviet forces, surrendered on October 5th. The Poles had held on for twice as long as had been expected and had done more damage to the Germans than the combined British and French forces were to do in 1940. The Germans lost 50,000 men, 697 planes and 993 tanks and armoured cars.
Thousands of soldiers and civilians managed to escape to France and Britain whilst many more went "underground" . A government-in-exile was formed with Wladyslaw Raczkiewicz as President and General Wladyslaw Sikorski as Prime Minister.
The Fourth Partition: Under the German-Soviet pact Poland was divided; the Soviets took, and absorbed into the Soviet Union, the eastern half (Byelorussia and the West Ukraine), the Germans incorporated Pomerania, Posnania and Silesia into the Reich whilst the rest was designated as the General-Gouvernement (a colony ruled from Krakow by Hitler's friend, Hans Frank).
In the Soviet zone 1.5 million Poles (including women and children) were transported to labour camps in Siberia and other areas. Many thousands of captured Polish officers were shot at several secret forest sites; the first to be discovered being Katyn, near Smolensk.
The Germans declared their intention of eliminating the Polish race (a task to be completed by 1975) alongside the Jews. This process of elimination, the "Holocaust", was carried out systematically. All members of the "intelligentsia" were hunted down in order to destroy Polish culture and leadership (many were originally exterminated at Oswiencim - better known by its German name, Auschwitz). Secret universities and schools, a "Cultural Underground", were formed (the penalty for belonging to one was death). In the General-Gouvernement there were about 100,000 secondary school pupils and over 10,000 university students involved in secret education.
The Polish Jews were herded into Ghettos where they were slowly starved and cruelly offered hopes of survival but, in fact, ended up being shot or gassed. In the end they were transported, alongside non-Jewish Poles, Gypsies and Soviet POWs, to extermination camps such as Auschwitz and Treblinka; at Auschwitz over 4 million were exterminated. 2000 concentration camps were built in Poland, which became the major site of the extermination programme, since this was where most of the intended victims lived.
Many non-Jewish Poles were either transported to Germany and used as slave labour or simply executed. In the cities the Germans would round-up and kill indiscriminately as a punishment for any underground or anti-German or pro-Jewish activity. In the countryside they kept prominent citizens as hostages who would be executed if necessary. Sometimes they liquidated whole villages; at least 300 villages were destroyed. Hans Frank said, "If I wanted to put up a poster for every seven Poles shot, the forests of Poland would not suffice to produce the paper for such posters."
Despite such horror the Poles refused to give in or cooperate (there were no Polish collaborators as in other occupied countries). The Polish Underground or AK (Armia Krajowa or Home Army) was the largest in Europe with 400,000 men. The Jewish resistance movement was set up separately because of the problem of being imprisoned within the ghettos. Both these organisations caused great damage to the Nazi military machine. Many non-Jewish Poles saved the lives of thousands of Jews despite the fact that the penalty, if caught, was death (in fact, Poland was the only occupied nation where aiding Jews was punishable by death).
Fighting on all Fronts: The Polish Army, Navy and Air Force reorganised abroad and continued to fight the Germans. In fact they have the distinction of being the only nation to fight on every front in the War. In 1940 they fought in France, in the Norwegian campaign they earned a reputation for bravery at Narvik, and in Africa the Carpathian Brigade fought at Tobruk.
Polish Squadrons played an important role in the Battle of Britain, accounting for 12% of all German aircraft destroyed at the cost of 33 lives. By the end of the war they had flown a total of 86,527 sorties, lost 1669 men and shot down 500 German planes and 190 V1 rockets.
The Polish Navy, which had escaped intact, consisted of 60 vessels, including 2 cruisers, 9 destroyers and 5 submarines ( one of which was the famous "Orzel") which were involved in 665 actions at sea. The first German ship sunk in the war was sunk by Polish ships. The Navy also took part in the D-Day landings.
When the Soviet Union was attacked by Germany, in June 1941, Polish POWs were released from prison camps and set up an army headed by General Anders. Many civilians were taken under the protection of this army which was allowed to make its way to Persia (modern-day Iran) and then on to Egypt. This army, the Polish Second Corps, fought with distinction in Italy, their most notable victory being that at Monte Cassino, in May 1944, and which opened up the road to Rome for the Allies as a whole. One of the "heroes" of the Polish Second Corps was Wojtek, a brown bear adopted in Iran as their mascot; at Monte Cassino Wojtek actually helped in the fighting by carrying ammunition for the guns. He died, famous and well-loved, in Edinburgh Zoo in 1964, aged 22.
All the Polish forces took part in the Allied invasion of Europe and liberation of France, playing a particularly crucial role in the significant Battle of the Falaise Gap. The Polish Parachute Brigade took part in the disastrous Battle of Arnhem in Holland. In 1945, the Poles captured the German port of Wilhelmshaven.
In 1943 a division of Polish soldiers was formed in Russia under Soviet control and fought on the Eastern Front. They fought loyally alongside the Soviet troops, despite the suffering they had experienced in Soviet hands, and they distinguished themselves in breaking through the last German lines of defence, the "Pomeranian Rampart", in the fighting in Saxony and in the capture of Berlin.
The "Home Army", under the command of General Stefan Roweki (code-named "Grot"), and after his capture in 1943 (he was later murdered), by General Tadeusz Komorowski (code-named "Bor"), fought a very varied war; at times in open combat in brigade or division strength, at times involved in sabotage, often acting as execution squads eliminating German officials, and often fighting a psychological campaign against German military and civilians. It was a costly war since the Germans always took reprisals.
The Intelligence Service of the Home Army captured and sent parts of the V1 to London for examination, providing information on German military movements (giving advanced warning of the German plan to invade Russia), and gave the RAF full information about Peenemunde, where the Germans were producing V2 rockets.
Betrayal: The crime of Katyn was discovered in 1943 and created a rift in Polish-Soviet relations. From now on the Home Army was attacked by Soviet propaganda as collaborating with the Germans and being called on to rise against the Germans once the Red Army reached the outskirts of Warsaw.
Secretly, at Teheran, the British and Americans agreed to letting the Russians profit from their invasion of Poland in 1939 and allowing them to keep the lands that had been absorbed. The "accidental" death of General Sikorski at this time helped keep protests at a minimum.
When the Russians crossed into Poland the Home Army cooperated in the fight against the Germans and contributed greatly to the victories at Lwow, Wilno and Lublin only to find themselves surrounded and disarmed by their "comrades-in-arms" and deported to labour camps in Siberia.
On August 1, 1944, with the Russian forces on the right bank of the Vistula, the Home Army rose in Warsaw; the Warsaw Rising. Heroic street-fighting involving the whole population, using the sewers as lines of communication and escape, under heavy bombardment, lasted for 63 days. The city was completely destroyed. Not only did the Russians cease to advance but they also refused to allow Allied planes to land on Russian airfields after dropping supplies. After surrendering many civilians and soldiers were executed or sent to concentration camps to be exterminated and Warsaw was razed to the ground.
The defeat in Warsaw destroyed the political and military institutions of the Polish underground and left the way open for a Soviet take-over.
With the liberation of Lublin in July 1944 a Russian-sponsored Polish Committee for National Liberation (a Communist Government in all but name) had been set up and the British had put great pressure, mostly unsuccessful, on the Government-in-exile to accept this status quo. At Yalta, in February 1945, the Allies put Poland within the Russian zone of influence in a post-war Europe. To most Poles the meaning of these two events was perfectly clear; Poland had been betrayed. At one stage the Polish Army, still fighting in Italy and Germany, was prepared to withdraw from the front lines in protest; after all, they were supposed to be fighting for Polish liberation. It is a reflection on Polish honour that no such withdrawal took place since it could leave large gaps in the front lines and so was considered too dangerous for their Allied comrades-in-arms.
The war ended on May 8th, 1945.
The Cost: The Poles are the people who really lost the war.
Over half a million fighting men and women, and 6 million civilians (or 22% of the total population) died. About 50% of these were Polish Christians and 50% were Polish Jews. Approximately 5,384,000, or 89.9% of Polish war losses (Jews and Gentiles) were the victims of prisons, death camps, raids, executions, annihilation of ghettos, epidemics, starvation, excessive work and ill treatment. So many Poles were sent to concentration camps that virtually every family had someone close to them who had been tortured or murdered there.
There were one million war orphans and over half a million invalids.
The country lost 38% of its national assets (Britain lost 0.8%, France lost 1.5%). Half the country was swallowed up by the Soviet Union including the two great cultural centres of Lwow and Wilno.
Many Poles could not return to the country for which they has fought because they belonged to the "wrong" political group or came from eastern Poland and had thus become Soviet citizens. Others were arrested, tortured and imprisoned by the Soviet authorities for belonging to the Home Army.
Although "victors" they were not allowed to partake in victory celebrations.
Through fighting "For Our Freedom and Yours" they had exchanged one master for another and were, for many years to come, treated as "the enemy" by the very Allies who had betrayed them at Teheran and Yalta.
Alex Lech Bajan CEO RAQport Inc. 2004 North Monroe Street Arlington Virginia 22207 Washington DC Area USA TEL: 703-528-0114 TEL2: 703-652-0993 FAX: 703-940-8300 sms: 703-485-6619 EMAIL: office@raqport.com WEB SITE: http://raqport.com
Please do what you can to save the polish troops Iraq and Afganistan.
Please contact all your friends and do that.
Poland is only to help you. "For our freedom and yours" and thank you all Persian friends for the help during the World War II. Solidarity and Labor Unions in Poland and Iran in Farsi
Konferencja nie przyniesie przełomu Nasz Dziennik, 2007-11-03 Nie ma większych szans na rozwiązanie konfliktu na Bliskim Wschodzie bez rozwiązania konfliktu w Iraku
Z prof. dr. hab. Januszem Daneckim, wykładowcą w Szkole Wyższej Psychologii Społecznej w Warszawie, rozmawia Anna Wiejak
Jak ocenia Pan obecną sytuację na Bliskim Wschodzie, gdzie Izrael - deklarując chęć i gotowość prowadzenia rokowań pokojowych - prowadzi działania zbrojne przeciw Palestyńczykom i nakłada sankcje na Strefę Gazy? - Z Izraelem i Palestyną zawsze był problem. Dla mnie jest to sytuacja, w której obie strony boją się i przez to podejmują czasami nieskoordynowane działania, niejasne i trudne w odbiorze. Moim zdaniem, jest to psychologia strachu. Izrael boi się Palestyńczyków i Arabów, a ci ostatni boją się Izraela. To właśnie tutaj jest główny problem, bo my, Europejczycy, obserwujemy to z zupełnie innej perspektywy. Kiedy patrzymy na Izrael, to z jednej strony mamy współczucie dla Żydów, ponieważ byli oni kiedyś tutaj pokrzywdzeni. Z drugiej strony jednak widzimy, że w sposób zupełnie niezawiniony cierpią Palestyńczycy. Jest to kompleks bardzo trudny do rozwiązania. Co więcej, wchodzą te siły zewnętrzne, które mają, mówiąc ogólnie, różne polityczne cele i różne tendencje wspierają.
Jakie siły zewnętrzne? - Mamy przede wszystkim Stany Zjednoczone jako tę główną siłę, która próbuje rozgrywać bliskowschodnią kartę w różny sposób, a to Irak, a to Afganistan, no oczywiście od lat pięćdziesiątych również Izrael, a z drugiej strony mamy Unię Europejską. Następna siła, o której nie powinniśmy zapominać, to Chiny, dla których ropa naftowa Bliskiego Wschodu staje się niezwykle ważna i strategicznie istotna. Mają one coraz większe wpływy. Chiny zajmują stanowisko przeciwne do Stanów Zjednoczonych, to znaczy bardziej wspierają świat arabski aniżeli Izrael.
A jakie jest miejsce Iranu w tym całym układzie? - Iran w konflikcie izraelsko-palestyńskim - jak wiemy - jest bardzo antyizraelski i w związku z tym również gra Izraela stanowi bardzo poważne zagrożenie, pośrednie jako wróg Izraela, a także bezpośrednie przez wspieranie różnych ruchów antyizraelskich i propalestyńskich typu Hezbollach. Dlatego Izrael robi wszystko, żeby ukrócić działania Iranu, nakłaniając Stany Zjednoczone do ograniczenia Iranu. Izrael się po prostu boi. Tak samo jest z tarczą antyrakietową.
Tak, ale Kongres zrezygnował w tej chwili z zakładania w budżecie na 2008 r. dodatkowej kwoty na wydatki związane z budową tarczy antyrakietowej i nie wiadomo, na ile w tym momencie należy spodziewać się zwrotu w amerykańskiej polityce. - Myślę, że jeżeli wygrają demokraci, będzie nieco inna sytuacja w stosunku do polityki wobec świata arabskiego. Zaczną się poważne starania, aby wycofać się z Iraku, bo to, co się dzieje, jest niedopuszczalne, i myślę, że też inaczej będzie się patrzeć na rozwiązanie konfliktu bliskowschodniego, palestyńsko-izraelskiego i irańsko-izraelskiego.
A czy uda się przezwyciężyć te dzielące Izrael i Palestynę różnice interesów? Amerykanie usiłują doprowadzić do zwołania w listopadzie konferencji pokojowej, ale - biorąc pod uwagę ostatnie posunięcia Izraela i eskalację konfliktu - jak szczere są w tym momencie intencje Izraela? - Mamy rozbicie wśród samych Palestyńczyków, co też nie ułatwia rozwiązania tego problemu. Naród palestyński jest rozbity - zresztą zawsze był - na radykałów i umiarkowanych. Podobne rozbicie jest w Izraelu. W Izraelu i wśród Izraelczyków też mamy radykalne i umiarkowane skrzydło. Nie widzę zatem większych szans, żeby ten proces nagle w wielkim tempie ruszył i żeby się cokolwiek zmieniło, dopóki ta zewnętrzna sytuacja się w jakiś sposób nie rozwiąże, a przede wszystkim najważniejsza sprawa Iraku. Dotychczas zawsze mówiliśmy, że najpierw rozwiążmy konflikt palestyński, a później się iracki rozwiąże, a teraz jest odwrotnie. Dopóki mamy do czynienia z konfliktem w Iraku, trudno będzie zmierzyć się z problemem palestyńskim.
Dlaczego? - Bliski Wschód nie przyłoży ręki do tego, żeby w jakikolwiek sposób wesprzeć Amerykanów. Skoro Amerykanie siłą rozwiązują problemy, jak np. w Iraku, to z nimi nie można rozmawiać. Nie da się prowadzić rozmów pod presją siły i dlatego świat arabski nie wesprze Amerykanów, ponieważ miał swoje inicjatywy i chciał sam swoje problemy rozwiązywać. Z jednej strony nie udaje mu się to, a z drugiej, pozostaje w konflikcie z Izraelem, czyli rzeczywiście dochodzi do pewnego zwarcia obu stron i właściwie nie ma wyjścia. Coś się musi zmienić, żeby mógł ruszyć proces pokojowy - w sytuacji geopolitycznej albo przynajmniej regionalnej.
Jak Pan ocenia, czy w najbliższym czasie będzie możliwość osiągnięcia jakiegokolwiek kompromisu na Bliskim Wschodzie? - Nie. Bliski Wschód się nagle nie zmieni. W najbliższym czasie takiej możliwości nie ma. To wymaga długiego procesu. Osobiście ciągle upatruję szansę w działaniach Unii Europejskiej. To jest rzeczywiście taka siła, która może coś zrobić. Ona działa inaczej. Europa jednak nie działa jako mocarstwo, które narzuca pewne rozwiązania, tylko stara się pomagać od środka wszystkim stronom jednakowo.
A czego można się spodziewać po Stanach Zjednoczonych, które z jednej strony deklarują chęć doprowadzenia do pokoju, a z drugiej finansują obie strony konfliktu? Pozwalają na rozwój infrastruktury nuklearnej Izraela, finansują Palestyńczyków, grożą Iranowi, który de facto nie wiemy, czy posiada broń atomową, najprawdopodobniej nie. Jak tłumaczyć tego typu politykę? USA z jednej strony starają się rozwiązać ten problem, z drugiej jednak doprowadzają do jego eskalacji. - Jest to podyktowane obawą, że coś się wymknie spod kontroli Zachodu. Iran na pewno nie ma broni nuklearnej, tylko istnieje groźba, że może ją wytworzyć, ale nie przesadzajmy, Pakistan też ma broń nuklearną i jego zacięty wróg - Indie, też ma broń nuklearną, co jeszcze nie oznacza, że zostanie ona użyta. Zresztą te państwa dają się utrzymać w ryzach. A Iran deklaruje, że nie chce mieć broni atomowej i z kolei skoro Izrael ma broń jądrową, to świat arabski, świat muzułmański zarzuca Zachodowi tworzenie podwójnych standardów: innych dla państw zachodnich i państw sprzyjających Zachodowi, a za takie państwo uznawany jest Izrael, który traktowany jest jako przyczółek kultury zachodniej w świecie muzułmańskim. Z drugiej strony mamy świat muzułmański, który traktuje się jako gorszy i w związku z tym takie działania są dla niego nielogiczne, nieuzasadnione, wywołujące sprzeciw, niechęć. A co Amerykanie mają robić, skoro boją się nuklearnej potęgi w Iranie, i jeszcze do tego Izraelczycy, którzy są najbardziej tym przerażeni i naciskają na Stany Zjednoczone, żeby interweniowały. To jest ważne. Nie jest tak, że to Stany Zjednoczone jako mocarstwo światowe się boją, ale mają jeszcze wsparcie różnych sił, ale takich sił jak Izrael, nie zaś takich jak Chiny czy Rosja.
Jakie międzynarodowe reperkusje mogłaby mieć eskalacja konfliktu izraelsko-palestyńskiego? Czy jest możliwe, że w konflikt zaangażują się te dwa bloki, o których Pan wspomniał? - Nie. Nie widzę niebezpieczeństwa wybuchu wojny między Izraelem a Palestyną. Chyba do tego nie dojdzie. To raczej jest konflikt, któremu towarzyszą działania zbrojne, ale Izrael jest ciągle w stanie przywrócić dawną sytuację, czyli kontrolować Strefę Gazy. Ta ostatnia stanowi przecież poważne zagrożenie dla Izraela. Oni też się boją. Starają się nie dopuścić do atakowania Izraela. Nawet jeżeli doszłoby do eskalacji konfliktu, to nie będzie on większy niż w tej chwili: napięcia, potyczki, wojna partyzancka, która gdzieś tam trwa.
Czyli wizja "zderzenia cywilizacji" rysowana przez Samuela Huntingtona w najbliższym czasie się nie sprawdzi? - Nie. Jakich cywilizacji? Huntington mówił o wielu cywilizacjach, a to jest uproszczenie, ponieważ to nie cywilizacje walczą ze sobą, tylko ludzie. Istnieje pewna solidarność ludzi przekonanych o słuszności jednej albo drugiej ze stron konfliktu. Jeżeli zatem mówimy o takim konflikcie, to mamy konflikt tych, którzy są po stronie Izraela i którzy są po stronie Palestyńczyków. Ale nie należy tak dzielić świata. Jestem przeciwny dzieleniu wszystkiego na czarne i białe. Dla jednych "czarny" jest Izrael, dla drugich "czarni" są Palestyńczycy. Czego ciągle brakuje? Poważnych rozmów między wszystkimi stronami, bo wszyscy się boczą na siebie. Amerykanie mówią: nie będziemy rozmawiać z tymi bandyckimi państwami, takimi jak Iran albo Syria, a do niedawna Libia. Z kolei druga strona mówi: my nie będziemy rozmawiać z Amerykanami, bo są to ludzie, którzy wywołują wojny i wszystko niszczą. Tak nie można. W ten sposób nie prowadzi się polityki międzynarodowej.
Jaki wpływ na obecną pozycję Stanów Zjednoczonych ma w tej sytuacji konflikt turecko-kurdyjski? Czy USA również obawiają się, że w pewnym momencie sytuacja może wymknąć się spod kontroli? - Tak. Oczywiście. Konflikt turecko-kurdyjski jest poważny i bardzo komplikuje sytuację Amerykanom. Ci ostatni są przecież w Iraku, a jednocześnie Kurdystan jest autonomicznie bardzo rozwiniętą częścią tego państwa. Osiągnięty tam sukces może zostać zmarnowany. To znowu ma międzynarodowe konotacje, które tutaj się koncentrują. Jak rozumiem, Europa jest również przeciwko temu, aby Turcja interweniowała. Chodzi o to, ażeby ten konflikt załagodzić.
Ale Europa jakoś specjalnie na Turcję nie naciska. Nie stawia ultimatów, za to wyraża zrozumienie dla sytuacji, w jakiej znalazła się Turcja. Przyjęła raczej pozę obserwatora. - Ma pani rację, ale pamiętajmy o tym, że Europa niechętnie patrzy na turecki stosunek do Kurdów. Tutaj naciski europejskie są bardzo wyraźne, a dotyczą demokratyzacji. Unia obserwuje i ocenia, co ma wpływ na późniejsze decyzje Wspólnoty.
Stany Zjednoczone jednoznacznie opowiedziały się przeciwko rebeliantom kurdyjskim. Szefowa amerykańskiej dyplomacji Condoleezza Rice określiła Partię Pracujących Kurdystanu mianem "wspólnego wroga". A jeszcze niedawno kokietowali Kurdów wizją własnego państwa, jeżeli poprą działania USA w Iraku, co jest o tyle niezrozumiałe, że przecież Turcja, której się tym samym narazili, jest jednym z najpoważniejszych sojuszników Stanów Zjednoczonych w tym regionie. Jak to tłumaczyć? - Jest to znowu taki podwójny standard, pewne rozdwojenie. Z tym że niełatwo określić jego przyczyny. Pamiętajmy o tym, iż Turcja jest członkiem NATO. Stanom Zjednoczonym na Turcji bardzo zależy, bo stanowi ona przeciwwagę dla Rosji. Myślę, że gotowi są poświęcić Kurdystan dla Turcji. Musiała tu nastąpić jakaś zmiana polityczna, ponieważ sprawa iracka swoją drogą, ale Turcja pod względem strategicznym ciągle pozostaje bliższa sercu Ameryki. To partner, na którym można polegać, natomiast na Iraku - znacznie mniej. Poza tym kurdyjska scena polityczna wcale nie jest taka jednolita, a KPP to zaledwie jedna ze stron działających wśród Kurdów. Jest to pewien pomysł na politykę kurdyjską, a zarazem iracką, bo przecież Kurdowie mają na nią znaczny wpływ. W końcu prezydent Iraku jest Kurdem. Być może jest to wyraźne przygotowywanie się do wycofania wojsk z Iraku i próba zmuszenia Irakijczyków, aby przejęli ciężar odpowiedzialności na siebie, ale to jest tylko domysł. Kończy się kadencja republikanów, może zatem chodzić o jakąś wewnętrzną kartę przetargową przed wyborami. To zawsze się liczy, ale to już jest pole do dyskusji dla amerykanistów.
Wartość dolara spada z powodu kolosalnych długów państwowych oraz bezpośrednio z powodu obniżki stopy procentowej w USA. Obecnie inwestorzy umieszczają swoje zasoby gotówki w innych walutach, o wyższej stopie procentowej. Jednocześnie gazeta The Wall Street Journal informuje 20go września, 2007, że cena standartowej baryłki ropy naftowej dochodzi do 82 dolarów. Ma to wpływ na gospodarkę światową, która jest w stadium ustalania nowej równowagi między walutami, według profesora Kenneth’a Rogowa z Harvard University.
Jednocześnie ambasador USA przy ONZ, Zalmay Khalilzad, Afgan z pochodzenia na słuzbie dyplomacji amerykańskiej, stwierdził że prezydentowi Iranu Mahmud’owi Ahmadinedżad’owi odmówiono pozwolenia na złożenie wieńca na miejscu gdzie stały wieżowce zawalone 11go września, 2001 w Nowym Jorku, żeby on nie mógł być tam „tryumfalnie fotografowany.”
Nastrój między Iranem i zachodem pogorsza się, zwłaszcza od kiedy minister spraw zagranicznych Francji, Bernard Kouchner, groził Iranowi wojną, mimo obecnych, ale nieco spóźnionych starań Francji, żeby naprawić swój błąd dyplomatyczne. Tymczasem parlamenty Francji i Iranu dokonują wspólnej analizy wypowiedzi Kouchner’a celu złagodzenia skutków jego pogróżek.
Rzecznik rządu w Teheranie, Gholamkossein Elham, określił wypowiedż Kouchner’a jako „nieodpowiedzialne podjudzanie do wojny,” kiedy świat szuka pokoju, a Republika Iranu „wysoko podnosi w górę flagę pokoju i równości.” Niedyplomatyczne wystąpienie i pogróżki Kouchnera przeciwko Iranowi, przed kamerami telewizyjnymi 14go września, 2007, spotkały się z potępieniem w wielu stolicach.
Mahomed ElBaradei, szef Agencji Energji Atomowej przy ONZecie potępił podjudzanie do wojny przez Francję (która dokonała jak dotąd 210 próbnych ekspkozji nuklearnych) oraz nieodpowiedzialny udział Francji w rozpowszechnianiu broni nuklearnych na świecie, tym razem za pomocą pogróżek przciwko Iranowi, który obecnie nie ma broni nukleanej.
Jest to przeciwny skutek do zamierzonego przez prezydenta Nicolas’a Sarkozy’ego, który twierdzi że chce „podnieść szacunek dla Francji” na świecie, jak zauważa to redaktor pisma The Economist. Czyta się o tym w prasie nie-dominowanej przez neokonserwatystów-sjonistów w Europie, Rosji i Chinach, gdzie czyta się ostrą krytykę interwencji USA w Iraku, oraz ślepe poparcie dla ekstremistów rządzących w Izraelu, jak też przekreślanie przez rząd Bush’a traktatów rozbrojeniowych.
Obecny brak traktatów rozbrojeniowych i agresywna polityka neokonserwtystów-sjonistów, spowodowały wprowadzenie do terminologji geopolityków wyrażenia „wojna ostateczna” („terminal war”) czyli wojna katastrofalna w skutkach dla całej ludzkości. Słusznie na temat dotyczący tej sprawy napisał były prezydent Jimmy Carter, w niedawna opublikowanym artykule, w piśmie The Cuardian of London. Prezydent Carter nie mógł tego artykułu umieścić w controlowanej prasie w USA.
Powtarzanie przez Francję pogróżek, jak też podjudzanie do wojny przez neokonserwatystów w USA oraz w Izraelu, stawia znak zapytania nad francuską „rolą cywilizacyjną” („la mission civilisatrice”). W rzeczywistości, jest jasne że żaden międzynarodowy problem, włącznie z programem nuklearnym Iranu, nie może być rozwiązany za pomocą katastrofy wojennej.
Nawet, były dowódca wojsk USA na Bliskim Wschodzie, generał John Abizaid, Libańczyk z pochodzenia, powiedziął, że świat „może nauczyć się żyć” z nuklearnie uzbrojonym Iranem, ponieważ Iran nie ma zamiarów samobójczych, oraz że nigdy nie waży się atakować innych państw, a zwłaszcza tych z wielkimi arsenałami nuklearnymi jak USA i Izrael. Abizaid powiedział to jako generał w stanie spoczynku, ale nie mniej człowiek mający duży prestiż w wojsku USA. Wypowiedź ta jest przeciwna propagandzie wojennej neokonserwatystów-sjonistów w rządzie Busha oraz w senatacie USA, takich jak na przyład senator Joseph Lieberman.
Natomiast dziwne jest, że generał Abizaid mówi o broni nuklearnej Iranu, podczas gdy nie ma na taką broń wogóle żadnych dowodów, mimo gołosłownych oskarżeń Kouchner’a oraz radykalnych sjonistów w USA i w Izrealu. Jak wiadomo od lat Izrael zaciekle broni swego monopolu nuklearnego na Bliskim Wschodzie.
Inspektorzy agencji energji atomowej przy ONZ po dokonaniu gruntownych inspekcji w Iranie, włącznie z centryfugami w Nantaz, stwierdzają, że program Iranu ma charakter pokojowy i że Iran stara się wyprodukować paliwo dla elekrowni nuklearnej.
Bieżące opinie inspektorów ONZ nie mają wpływu na rząd Francji, który stara się przypodobać neokonserwatystom rządzącym w USA i popiera ich plany natępnej nie-sprowokowanej wojnu na Bliskim Wschodzie „dla dobra Izraela,” oraz niby w imię ograniczania broni masowego rażenia w ramach „liberalnego interwencjonalizmu.”
Nie-dyplomatyczne słowa Kouchner’a nawet są przeszkodą dla USA w sformułowaniu sankcji przeciwko Iranowi, który ostatnio dał nuklearnym inspektorom z ONZ wolny dostęp do swoich instalacji. Przeważająca większość członków ONZ jest przeciwna sankcjom przeciwko Iranowi i doskonale zdaje sobie sprawę z dysproporcji sił nuklearnych USA oraz Izraela w stosunku do konwencjonalnej broni Iranu, która jedynie mogłaby mieć znaczenie w formie rozpaczliwej salwy odwetowej przeciwko Izraelowi i marynarce wojennej USA.
Prezydent Ahmadinedżad nazwał broń nuklearną „bronią przeszłości,” która powinna być eliminowana w ramach konstruktywnego dla ludzkości programu rozbrojeniowego. Iran natomiast powinien zgłosić się do pomocy ONZtu w akcjach pokojowych oraz rozbrojeniowych. Nie-dyplomatyczne słowa Sarkozy’ego oraz Kouchner’a dają okazję prezydentowi Iranu występować w ONZcie jako człowiek humanitarny i przemawiać ze zwiększonym autorytetem na rzecz pokoju, dzięki dziwnej dyplomacji Francuzów, którzy powinni nie zapominać o silnych powiązaniach gospodarczych Francji z Iranem
Rosyjscy eksperci uważają, że sytuacja USA w Iraku pogarsza się, ale mimo to amerykańska marynarka wojenna jest gotowa do ataku na Iran w Zatoce Perskiej. Celem Waszyngtonu nadal pozostaje zmiana reżymu w Teheranie, a opinia w USA jest stale mobilizowana przeciwko Iranowi. Demokraci, pod wpływem lobby proizraelskiego, oficjalnie nie zabraniają prezydentowi George'owi Bushowi otwarcia trzeciego frontu, tym razem przeciwko Iranowi, a wcześniej przeciwko Afganistanowi i Irakowi.
Międzynarodowa Agencja Energii Atomowej przy ONZ kontynuuje program inspekcji w Iranie, ale najbliższe dwa, trzy miesiące będą okresem krytycznym. Mimo to Władimir Putin zdecydował się odbyć 16 października br. wizytę oficjalną w Teheranie. Weźmie udział w szczycie państw regionu Morza Kaspijskiego oraz przeprowadzi rozmowy dwustronne z przywódcami irańskimi. Jakie sprawy poruszy rosyjski prezydent? Wiadomo, że Moskwa nie zmienia swego stanowiska w kwestii irańskiego programu nuklearnego, ale nadal stoi na gruncie przestrzegania prawa międzynarodowego w tej sprawie i odrzuca jednostronne decyzje Waszyngtonu. Popiera działania ONZ i Rady Bezpieczeństwa oraz przypomina fatalne skutki pomijania przez USA Narodów Zjednoczonych w przypadku wojny z Irakiem i domaga się dalszego "prowadzenia pertraktacji z Iranem". Rosja odrzuciła inicjatywę Waszyngtonu, żeby zaostrzyć sankcje przeciwko Iranowi i otwarcie krytykuje inicjatywę USA i UE przedłużenia sankcji przeciwko Iranowi. Moskwa uważa, że z Teheranem należy zawrzeć układ podobny jak z Koreą Północną, powołuje się przy tym na inspektorów ONZ, z dyrektorem generalnym Międzynarodowej Agencji Energii Atomowej Mohamedem El Baradeiem na czele. Rosja czyni tak mimo coraz ostrzejszej krytyki USA, a zwłaszcza sekretarza stanu Condoleezzy Rice. Moskwa upiera się, żeby Iranowi dać czas do końca roku na wyjaśnienie, by szef MAEA wyjaśnił sprawę programu nuklearnego Iranu zgodnie z procedurami ONZ, co miałoby zażegnać niepotrzebny kryzys z Iranem. Tymczasem francuska firma Total ma otrzymać udziały w eksploatacji irackich pól ropy naftowej u boku amerykańskiej firmy Chevron, w zamian za poparcie polityczne Francji dla USA na Bliskim Wschodzie - donosi "San Francisco Chronicle". To wszystko wskazuje, jak bardzo stanowisko Moskwy koliduje z polityką Waszyngtonu. Tym bardziej więc październikowa wizyta prezydenta Putina w Teheranie jest nie na rękę neokonserwatywnemu rządowi Busha, gdyż utrudnia rozmowy USA - Rosja na takie tematy, jak sprawa tarczy antyrakietowej, kwestia Gruzji, republik bałtyckich, Ukrainy, Kosowa itd. W cieniu tych dyplomatycznych rozgrywek Rosja zacieśnia stosunki z Teheranem i negocjuje z ministrem spraw zagranicznych Iranu, Manuszehrem Mottakim, sprawę ukończenia budowy elektrowni nuklearnej w Buszer. Znana jest też już data spotkania w Moskwie irańsko-rosyjskiej komisji ekonomicznej. Rosyjski szef Federalnej Agencji Energii Atomowej (Rosatom), Siergiej Kirijenko, będzie towarzyszył Putinowi w czasie wizyty w Teheranie. Kirijenko omawiał już sprawę ukończenia elektrowni atomowej w Buszer z wiceprezydentem Iranu, Gholamem Rezą Aghazadehem. Zawarto umowę, że paliwo nuklearne dla tej inwestycji dostarczać będzie wyłącznie Rosja. W ten sposób Moskwa twierdzi, że obiekcje USA przeciwko ukończeniu budowy elektrowni Buszer są bezpodstawne. Jest to sukces polityki prezydenta Iranu Ahmadineżada i jego zabiegów w Szanghajskiej Organizacji Współpracy oraz w byłych republikach sowieckich w Azji centralnej. Obecność Putina na szczycie w Teheranie podniesie prestiż spotkania państw regionu Morza Kaspijskiego, można się spodziewać, że Iran będzie popierał stanowisko Rosji w sprawie Azji centralnej i Afganistanu. Moskwa pozostanie też głównym dostawcą broni do Iranu, podczas gdy naftowe firmy rosyjskie nie mają dostępu do złóż naftowych Iraku. Rosja potępia plany zmiany reżimu w Teheranie pod jakimkolwiek pretekstem, żeby nie dopuścić do kontroli USA nad zasobami energetycznymi Iranu. Na początku 2008 r. Moskwa organizuje zjazd państw-producentów gazu ziemnego, promuje Szanghajską Organizację Współpracy jako "klub energetyczny" z udziałem Iranu i Turkmenistanu. Natomiast prezydent Turkmenistanu Gurbanguly Berdimuhammedow został zaproszony przez prezydenta George'a Busha do Waszyngtonu. Wśród protestów w USA przeciwko wojnie w Iraku, wizyta Putina w Teheranie jest manifestacją poparcia Rosji dla Iranu.
TEHRAN (Fars News Agency)- A large number of people in Poland are advocates of Iranian cinema, Poland's deputy minister of culture and national heritage said.
The polish official voiced regret that his country's cine artists are not provided with the required possibilities and opportunity to introduce Poland's cinema to Iranians, but meantime said that Iranian cinema and filmmakers are well known in his country, reiterating that the poles admire Iranian cinema.
He also said his country's cine production institutes are keen on cooperating with their Iranian counterparts, and further expressed the hope that proper grounds would be paved for enhanced contacts and relations between the two countries' young artists.
Also reminding that the poles are familiar with Iranian culture, literature and music to a large extent, he hoped that the required measures would be adopted for the translation of polish masterpieces to the Persian language and also for the acquaintance of Iranian people with Polish music.
Waszyngton pod kontrolą lobby Izraela? Professor Ivo Cyprian Pogonowski
Waszyngton jest pod kontrolą lobby Izraela w sprawach dotyczących interesów Izraela, rządzonego przez radykalnych sjonistów. Wiadomo jest, że lobby Izraela popiera wszystkie żądania żydowskiego ruchu roszczeniowego, który może użyć presji rządu w Waszyngtonie, żeby wymusić od Polski 65 miliardów dolarów, na rzecz organizacji żyowskich w USA. Poniżej cytowane wypowiedzi powinny być ostrzeżeniem dla Polski że w żądaniach żydowskiego ruchu roszczeniowego, lobby Izraela z łatwością uzyska poparcie rządu USA, który obecnie stoi u progu rozpętania katastrofalnej w skutkach wojny w Zatoce Perskiej przeciwko Iranowi.
„Wiosną bieżącego roku, Nancy Pelosi [demokratka, przewodnicząca izbie deputowanych] po nacisku ze strony lobby Izraela, skasowała poprawkę ustawy kongresu, która to poprawka zmuszała Bush’a do uzyskania specjalnego upoważnienia od izby deputowanych, na atak przeciwko Iranowi.
Przed wakacjami sierpniowymi 2007, senat głosował 97 głosami, bez jednego głosu sprzeciwu, na rzecz postanowienia [senatora-sjonisty] Joe Lieberman’a, żeby oficjalnie potępić Iran, za udział w zabijaniu żołnierzy USA w Iraku. Postanowienie to odrzuca potrzebę starania się o upoważnienie przez Bush’a, na wszczęcie akcji zbrojnej przeciwko Iranowi, oraz stwierdzenie, że Iran bierze udział w działaniach wojennych przeciwko Stanom Zjednoczonym, jest samo w sobie podstawą do konfrontacji [USA przeciwko Iranowi].
Co może wstrzymać Bush’a przed atakiem na Iran i rozpowszecheniem wojny, w czasie i miejscu przez niego wybranym i to szybciej niż się tego spodziewamy? Nic i nikt,” pisze były doradca prezydentów Nixon’a i Regan’a, katolik i były kandydat w wyborach na prezydenta USA, Patrick Buchanan, 1go września 2007, w „Antiwar.com” w artykule pod tytułem „Trzecia Faza Wojny Bush’a.”
Buchanan zaczyna ten artkuł od słów: „Większość wyborców amerykańskich, którzy głosowali na demokratów i mieli nadzieję, że USA skończy okupację Iraku, doświadczyli szoku i niedługo spotka ich następny.”
Również 1go września, 2007 Katherine Heddon, opublikowała wywiad z szefem sztabu armii brytyjskiej, przeniesionym w stan spoczynku, generałem Sir Mike Jackson’em pod tytułem „Wyższy oficer brytyjski krytykuje strategię USA w Iraku.” W wywiadzie tym generał określił strategię neokonserwatywnego rządu Bush’a jako „nie właściwą” ponieważ zbyt duży nacisk kładzie się na wojsko, kosztem dyplomacji i konstruktywnego pomagania państwom w organizowaniu się („nation-building”).
Generał Jackson został mianowany naczelnym dowódcą armii brytyjskiej na miesiąc przed atakiem na Irak, w marcu 2003 roku. Jego krytyka strategji w wojnie przeciwko Irakowi jest krytyką uległości rządu i władz w Waszyngtonie, wobec lobby Izraela, co powinna być ostrzeżeniem dla Polski.
Artykuł Patrick’a Buchanan’a, wyraźnie precyzuje problem uległości polityków u steru USA, wobec lobby Izraela. Fakt, że były doradca prezydentów, który forułował teksty przemówień prezydentów Richarda Nixon’a i Ronald’a Regan’a nie jest w stanie opublikować swojej krytyki w powszechnie dostępnych mediach amerykańskich sam mówi za siebie i jest jednym z dowodów kontroli lobby Izraela w Waszyngtonie oraz cenzury niezależnych opinii w USA.
Najsilniejszym dowodem tego stanu rzeczy jest akcja zbrona USA przeciwko Irakowi, z wyboru a nie z konieczności, akcja, która rujnuje opinię Ameryki na świecie i jest nadal prowadzona wbrew woli większości wyborców amerykańskich. Najwyraźniej w opinii Patrick’a Buchanan’a lada dzień może nastąpić katastofalna dla świata wojna przeciwko Iranowi w Zatoce Perskiej. Jest to poważny głos ostrzegawczy patrioty amerykańskiego.
Waszyngton jest pod kontrolą lobby Izraela w sprawach dotyczących interesów Izraela, rządzonego przez radykalnych sjonistów. Wiadomo jest, że lobby Izraela popiera wszystkie żądania żydowskiego ruchu roszczeniowego, który może użyć presji rządu w Waszyngtonie, żeby wymusić od Polski 65 miliardów dolarów, na rzecz organizacji żyowskich w USA. Poniżej cytowane wypowiedzi powinny być ostrzeżeniem dla Polski że w żądaniach żydowskiego ruchu roszczeniowego, lobby Izraela z łatwością uzyska poparcie rządu USA, który obecnie stoi u progu rozpętania katastrofalnej w skutkach wojny w Zatoce Perskiej przeciwko Iranowi.
„Wiosną bieżącego roku, Nancy Pelosi [demokratka, przewodnicząca izbie deputowanych] po nacisku ze strony lobby Izraela, skasowała poprawkę ustawy kongresu, która to poprawka zmuszała Bush’a do uzyskania specjalnego upoważnienia od izby deputowanych, na atak przeciwko Iranowi.
Przed wakacjami sierpniowymi 2007, senat głosował 97 głosami, bez jednego głosu sprzeciwu, na rzecz postanowienia [senatora-sjonisty] Joe Lieberman’a, żeby oficjalnie potępić Iran, za udział w zabijaniu żołnierzy USA w Iraku. Postanowienie to odrzuca potrzebę starania się o upoważnienie przez Bush’a, na wszczęcie akcji zbrojnej przeciwko Iranowi, oraz stwierdzenie, że Iran bierze udział w działaniach wojennych przeciwko Stanom Zjednoczonym, jest samo w sobie podstawą do konfrontacji [USA przeciwko Iranowi].
Co może wstrzymać Bush’a przed atakiem na Iran i rozpowszecheniem wojny, w czasie i miejscu przez niego wybranym i to szybciej niż się tego spodziewamy? Nic i nikt,” pisze były doradca prezydentów Nixon’a i Regan’a, katolik i były kandydat w wyborach na prezydenta USA, Patrick Buchanan, 1go września 2007, w „Antiwar.com” w artykule pod tytułem „Trzecia Faza Wojny Bush’a.”
Buchanan zaczyna ten artkuł od słów: „Większość wyborców amerykańskich, którzy głosowali na demokratów i mieli nadzieję, że USA skończy okupację Iraku, doświadczyli szoku i niedługo spotka ich następny.”
Również 1go września, 2007 Katherine Heddon, opublikowała wywiad z szefem sztabu armii brytyjskiej, przeniesionym w stan spoczynku, generałem Sir Mike Jackson’em pod tytułem „Wyższy oficer brytyjski krytykuje strategię USA w Iraku.” W wywiadzie tym generał określił strategię neokonserwatywnego rządu Bush’a jako „nie właściwą” ponieważ zbyt duży nacisk kładzie się na wojsko, kosztem dyplomacji i konstruktywnego pomagania państwom w organizowaniu się („nation-building”).
Generał Jackson został mianowany naczelnym dowódcą armii brytyjskiej na miesiąc przed atakiem na Irak, w marcu 2003 roku. Jego krytyka strategji w wojnie przeciwko Irakowi jest krytyką uległości rządu i władz w Waszyngtonie, wobec lobby Izraela, co powinna być ostrzeżeniem dla Polski.
Artykuł Patrick’a Buchanan’a, wyraźnie precyzuje problem uległości polityków u steru USA, wobec lobby Izraela. Fakt, że były doradca prezydentów, który forułował teksty przemówień prezydentów Richarda Nixon’a i Ronald’a Regan’a nie jest w stanie opublikować swojej krytyki w powszechnie dostępnych mediach amerykańskich sam mówi za siebie i jest jednym z dowodów kontroli lobby Izraela w Waszyngtonie oraz cenzury niezależnych opinii w USA.
Najsilniejszym dowodem tego stanu rzeczy jest akcja zbrona USA przeciwko Irakowi, z wyboru a nie z konieczności, akcja, która rujnuje opinię Ameryki na świecie i jest nadal prowadzona wbrew woli większości wyborców amerykańskich. Najwyraźniej w opinii Patrick’a Buchanan’a lada dzień może nastąpić katastofalna dla świata wojna przeciwko Iranowi w Zatoce Perskiej. Jest to poważny głos ostrzegawczy patrioty amerykańskiego.
Polska nie deklarowała poparcia ataku na Iran Marta Kamińska / 05.01.2006 14:37
Ministerstwo Spraw Zagranicznych wydało oficjalny komunikat, w którym zdecydowanie zaprzecza doniesieniom prasowym, jakoby Polska zapewniła Stany Zjednoczone o pełnym poparciu dla ewentualnego amerykańskiego ataku na Iran. O rzekomym poparciu Polski dla takiej operacji zbrojnej pisała dzisiejsza "Rzeczpospolita".
W oświadczeniu można przeczytać, że „Rząd RP nie składał administracji amerykańskiej żadnych deklaracji w tej sprawie. Problematyka irańska nie była przedmiotem rozmów Ministra SZ RP ani Ministra ON podczas wizyt w Waszyngtonie". Rzecznik MSZ przyznaje, że oczywiście kwestie związane z polityką Iranu, zwłaszcza z realizowanym programem nuklearnym, są omawiane przez przedstawicieli polskich władz w ramach np. UE czy NATO.
Iran, Poland to boost bilateral trade ties TEHRAN, Sept. 7 (MNA) – Iran and Poland called for expansion of bilateral trade ties here on Friday.
Sakaravad Hunto, Polish deputy culture and national heritage minister, has expressed his government's readiness to invest in different sectors of Iran's economy.
Attending a meet with Iran’s Deputy Commerce Minister Mehdi Ghazanfari, he said that a delegation from Poland's Chamber of Commerce, accompanied with private sector, would pay a visit to Iran by the end of year to discuss trade and economic ties reinforcement.
Referring to Iran’s rich culture and cultural heritage, the Polish official said that the country is willing to facilitate bilateral trade relations.
He obliged the countries’ officials to do their best for paving the way for the promotion of imports, exports, and joint ventures.
Calling for Iran’s information and knowledge about agriculture, industry, and technical and engineering services, he announced that holding exhibitions of sides’ common market products and activating the private sector and the countries’ trade delegation would boost bilateral trade ties.
Ghazanfari, also the head of Trade Promotion Organization of Iran (TPOI), said that Polish investors could take part in Iran’s economic projects in line with enforcement of Article 44 of the Constitution.
He voiced Iranian engineers’ and expert’s readiness to transfer the related and information and guidance on Poland’s projects, adding a specialized gathering would make the two countries more familiar with trade potentials.
Shifting to allocation of facilities to the exporters, he said that country’s whether state-run or private banks will offer facilities to exporters.
Mehdi Ghazanfari added that the banks would do so by receiving a $50 million budget from Foreign Exchange Reserve Fund.
Morning greeted us to a new world at Pahlevi. The waterland sky were calm and blue--the sun no longer a blazing furnace. From our anchorage a mile offshore, we beheld sparkling beaches and a city of white tents and buildings. Excitement swept the ship as people cried and hugged. Small supply boats with fruit and vegetables (treasures to us!) sailed alongside our filthy ship. Then the Poles, some crawling or carried, were taken ashore. English soldiers in uniforms and white gloves, like waiters, appeared on the dazzling beach to offer us orange juice on silver trays. Smiling, they directed us toward the baths, fresh clothing and haircuts while doctors and nurses in clean smocks gathered up the sick. Polish refugees who'd arrived earlier frolicked on the beach. Everywhere there was food--and laughter. We'd gone from hell to heaven!
Along the beach stretched a city of tents, borrowed from the Iranians for the Polish army, side by side with palm huts for civilians. Eventually 200 British and 2,000 Persian tents would be utilized--and people still lived in the open. The refugee complex covered several miles on either side of the harbor, and housed Polish refugees who'd arrived in March and April. Ships full of Polish refugees had been arriving day and night, and the facilities ran 24-hours a day. The Polish and British authorities were well-organized and understanding; involved in our care�was the Red Cross and other religious and charitable organizations. Persia, or Iran as it would be called, was divided into two spheres: the Anglo-American and the Soviet. The USSR led by Joseph Stalin, was no better than Nazi Germany...but now they were our "allies." The British and certainly the Polish authorities, walked a fine line in this regard. This was now my home. Here the Persians would sell you eggs, fruit, souvenirs...and a few would steal your blankets.
Old Friends...and Typhoid Fever
Shortly after arrival, Leon Gladun, whom I had seen in Krasnoovodsk, came to visit me with wine and several pounds of halvah, that sweet delicacy. He'd arrived on August 26 aboard the Marx, with 575 soldiers and 507 civilians--one of the more spacious passages. Leon was overjoyed to leave "paradise" behind, as Poles referred to the USSR with bitter sarcasm. He had been here for less than a week, and in a week he was bound for Iraq and training with the British as part of the Polish Second Corps under General Anders. His intention was to gorge himself on food and swimming--and he was sticking to his regimen. Very quickly he was returning to the athletic figure that I knew from the sports fields of Krzemieniec High School. With Lilka Zurawska who'd been in the Polish army for half a year, the three of us went to a little beach caf�. I should have been happy and talkative, but I found myself glum and nauseous. Both the wine and the conversation seemed sour. My companions hoped it wasn't the first signs of malaria...hundreds had already perished.
The next few days my fever increased--surely it was malaria. I was reduced to tossing and turning on an army bed, where one morning a voice informed me that my father had just arrived on the very last ship leaving the USSR. He had been evacuated with an orphanage and was now among the personnel of the Children's Colony here. It was good news.
In spite of my feverish state, I decided that I would be better utilized among these children than in the army, which I disliked. After all I was a teacher and not a soldier. I insisted on going to see Jakub Hoffman who informed me that he had resigned his army position and was joining the Ministry of Labor and Welfare, to devote himself to educational and social work. He was taking Polish orphans to a new life in Africa. This confirmed my choice: the army accepted my resignation.
I immediately transferred to the civilian camp where I found a bed in the sand in a semi-hallucinatory state. I then went in search of my father at the Children's Colony. In the barracks, as part of the personnel taking care of 400 orphaned and sick children, I found him alive--but very weak. He was reading a newspaper surrounded by his beloved children. We collapsed in each other's arm, while an unspoken thought passed between us that we couldn't allow ourselves to die...for the sake of Natalia and Wanda still in the USSR. He had arrived with his orphans from Bukhara aboard the Zhdanov, the final ship which left the USSR, overcrowded with 5130 people. For hundreds of thousands of remaining Poles it meant imprisonment in the Soviet Union.
I was taken to an area for victims of malaria, where I was put into bed with just a prayer for treatment. Medical care was stretched to the limit with not enough doctors or medicine. The Polish graveyard was winning the battle. But Marzenka Piatkwoska, my old Gulag companion, arrived at my bedside bearing quinine for my condition. She too had just made it across the Caspian Sea as a member of the Polish Army. Once more her uncompromising character urged me on. Marzenka stayed by my side as I descended into cramps, fever and hallucinations. Slowly I slipped into semi-consciousness and was taken to the main hospital. Here there were some 820 beds--and this was proving inadequate. And then it was discovered that I was suffering not from malaria, but from typhoid fever. I was disinfected and my head was shaved.
A soldier came to help me turn in my possessions at the hospital magazine. We felt something familiar in spite of our appearances: me sickly, and he in a uniform. It was Antoni Hermaszeswszki! The very one who helped me take my underground oath so long ago in Poland. He ordered me to get better so we could have a reunion. Death hovered near me...but the vigil of my father and friends, and wine, the only medicine available, pulled me through. I began my recovery by trying to walk from bed to bed. I set out on little expeditions along the seashore escorted by my father and friends. My appetite returned just as Antoni showed up as with some wonderful fish caught in the Caspian Sea by him and cooked by him. The taste of that meal convinced me I was on the way to recovery. He brought me up to date on all the events that took place following our mass arrests. I listened tearfully to the litany of friends who had survived, and of those who hadn't. I was transferred to the hospital in Teheran where Lusia Madalinska, my mother's half-sister, visited me. I was sure that she must have perished in the harsh labour camps of Archangel where few survived. And then the predication of Moses, so long-ago and far away, floated into my mind, about "travelling to where there's few women and many men, and being sick here once more." And so here I was in the Polish Army full of men--and having survived typhoid fever! Polish Orphans
I recuperated with my father in Civilian Camp No.1 in Teheran. There were four such camps with several thousand Poles. I started to teach elementary classes in the orphanage school equipped with a copy of "With Fire and Sword" by Henryk Sienkiewicz. The children, many of them orphans, were eager to learn and even tried to teach themselves under palm trees amid ancient ruins, with a newspaper or a letter that survived a trek of thousands of miles. I was still recuperating from typhoid and my head was shaved, which fitted in with the many of the children who also suffered the same humiliation.
The British made efforts to find homes for the children and for adults not in the army, but only those with family serving in the Polish Forces in England would be allowed entry there. The United States, Canada and several South American countries were hostile or else put up conditions which were tantamount to a refusal. Kenya, Uganda, Tanganyika and Nyasaland allowed some refugees on temporary settlement. India agreed to take 11,000 children, and Mexico accepted several thousand Poles on condition that they work in agriculture. Eventually many Polish children would make it to the United States, Canada, New Zealand and Australia where they became citizens and parents. ���
About 74,000 Polish troops and 41,000 civilians were brought out of the USSR through Persia. But those were the lucky few. Of the estimated 2 million Poles deported into the USSR, about half perished, while hundreds of thousands�remained in the prisons, labour camps and collective farms. And the deportations of Poles by the Soviets would resume in 1944-45 and continue under Stalin after the war ended.�The United States and England turned a blind eye to the genocide being carried out against the Poles--and one must accuse them of complicity in war crimes, such as the forced return of people to the Soviets. Contrary to Allied propaganda, totalitarian murder did not end with the defeat of Hitler--it merely consolidated Stalin's reign of terror.
Ahvaz - To India
I was transferred to a transit camp at Ahvaz, 90 miles from Khorramshar on the Persian Gulf. Refugees arrived by regular train and were shipped in box-cars to this port where they set sail for Palestine, England, Africa and New Zealand. I continued teaching in a makeshift school under a tent.�Two children, a brother and sister, ages 6 and 8, were typical of my students. Their parents were presumed dead and we weren't even sure of their last names. They spoke a mixture of Polish, Ukrainian and strange words learned on the steppes of Uzbekistan. They were excited about heading to the port and a new life. Alas, they would never make it, succumbing to dysentry.
On May 8, 1943, my father and I were�loaded aboard the SS Kosciuszko, a Polish luxury-liner now in war service. There were over 4,000 adults and children housed in cramped quarters awaiting transport, and we were elated at getting out of these conditions. But we had mixed feelings about our destination, a place that Poles only read about in adventure stories: the continent of India. (I recalled the insight I experienced in the prison cell in Dubno, about being allowed to experience amazing things!)
The last sight of this chapter of our lives was a shoreline of palm trees, as we entered the calm waters of the Persian Gulf, bound for Karachi, India, on the banks of the Indus River, home to another ancient culture.�It was beautiful weather, and my father and I quickly made new friends among the Poles aboard, including the crew and officers. What awaited us in India?
Polish contribution to the Allied victory in World War 2 (1939-1945)
Poland was the only country to fight in the European theatre of war from the first to the last day of the greatest armed conflict in the history of mankind. The war began with invading Poland: first, on September 1st, 1939, by the Nazi Germany, soon after, on September 17th, by the Soviet Union. Both invaders acted in concert, upon the Ribbentrop – Molotov Treaty (concluded on August 23rd). The allies of Poland – Great Britain and France – declared war upon Germany on September 3rd, but did not undertake any efficient military actions (the so-called “Phony War”). The Soviet Union joined the anti-Nazi alliance only in the summer of 1941, when invaded by Germany. The United States, although they gave a lot of significant material aid, joined the military actions within the frames of the coalition in December 1941 when assaulted by Japan and when Germany declared war upon them.
In the Polish contribution to the defeat of Germany in the first place we notice determination and perseverance: despite the severe defeat in 1939, the Poles formed armies five more times, including four outside of their country: in France in 1939, in the United Kingdom in the summer of 1940 (after the defeat and capitulation of France), in the USSR in 1941 (the army of Gen. Anders that fought later in the South of Europe), and then again in the Soviet Union in 1943 there emerged the one that later fought at the Red Army’s side. The fifth Polish army, created at the end of September of 1939 was the conspiratorial armed force in the occupied territory. For the entire period of the war there also existed the very important “silent front” – the intelligence. Probably up to 2 millions Poles served since September 1st, 1939 to May 8th, 1945 in all the Polish military formations – regular armies, partisan troops and underground forces. In the final stage of war the Polish troops on all the European fronts amounted to some 600 thousands soldiers (infantry, armored troops, aircraft and navy), and in the summer of 1944 while entering the open fight with the retreating Germans, the armed underground numbered more than 300 thousands sworn soldiers. It can be concluded that Poland put in the field the fourth greatest Allied army.
Basic bibliography:
Józef Garliński, Poland in the Second World War, 1939-1945, London 1985
ed. Edward Pawłowski, Wojsko Polskie w II Wojnie Światowej, Warszawa 1995.
The 1939 Campaign
At the outbreak of the war, Polish army was able to put in the field almost one million soldiers, 2800 guns, 500 tanks and 400 aircraft. On the September 1st, the German forces set to war against Poland amounted to more than 1.5 million solders, 9000 guns, 2500 tanks and almost 2000 aircraft. The Red Army began the invasion sending in the first lot more than 620 000 soldiers, 4700 tanks and 3200 aircraft. Despite the overwhelming odds and the necessity of defense against the offensive in all directions, the Polish army fought for 35 days. Warsaw held until September 28th, the Polish garrison of Hel Peninsula for more than a month. The last battle against German troops took place on October 5th.
Polish losses in combat against Germans (killed and missing in action) amounted to ca. 70 000. 420 000 were taken prisoners. Losses against the Red Army added up to 6000 to 7000 of casualties and MIA, 250 000 were taken prisoners. Of these, almost all of the officers were murdered in the spring on 1940 in Katyn, Kharkiv and Tver upon Stalin’s decision. Although the Polish army – considering the inactivity of the Allies – was in an unfavorable position – it managed to inflict serious losses to the enemies: 14 000 German soldiers were killed or MIA, 674 tanks and 319 armored vehicles destroyed or badly damaged, 230 aircraft shot down; the Red Army lost (killed and MIA) about 2500 soldiers, 150 combat vehicles and 20 aircraft. For many weeks Poland contained significant German forces, no advantage of this was taken by the Allies. Besides that, the necessity to reinforce the destroyed in Poland German military forces gave France and Great Britain more time to prepare to repulse invasion.
Basic bibliography:
Paweł Wieczorkiewicz, Kampania 1939 roku, Warszawa 2001;
Steven J. Zaloga, Poland 1939. The Birth of Blitzkrieg, London 2002;
Alexander B. Rossion, Hitler Strikes Poland. Blitzkrieg, Ideology, and Atrocity, Kansas 2003.
The underground army home
Home Army
In the night from September 26th to 27th, 1939, a day before Warsaw’s capitulation, General Michał Karaszewicz-Tokarzewski received from the Commander-in-Chief of the Polish army (at the time interned in Romania) an order to create a military conspiracy. Over a few weeks he summoned up a group of officers who avoided captivity and from the scratch they built the most powerful underground army in the occupied Europe. The first name of it was Służba Zwycięstwu Polski (SZP – Polish Victory Service), later Związek Walki Zbrojnej (ZWZ - Union for Armed Struggle), and from February 1942 – Armia Krajowa (AK – Home Army). This resistance is widely known under this last name. The actual creator of the Home Army was Gen. Stefan Rowecki (also known as “Grot”) who was the chief of staff first, and from June 1940 to June 1943 – the Commanding Officer. After his seizure by Gestapo, this post was taken by Gen. Tadeusz Komorowski (aka Bór). The Home Army, being a voluntary force, in the same time was both a part of Polskie Siły Zbrojne (PSZ – or PAF – Polish Armed Forces) whose high command was located in exile, and the most important element of the Polish Underground State. The main goal of the AK was preparation and conducting the national uprising in case of advancing frontlines or general collapse of the German armed forces. There were created suitable structures – staff, high commands of arms and services, territorial commands (regions, and on lower level – districts), weapons were collected, officers and soldiers trained, information about enemy gathered. However, because of the atrocious nature of the German occupation, public feelings and attitude, it was necessary to undertake daily struggle. Therefore the AK activities consisted of two strictly connected to each other parts: 1. the daily conspiratorial struggle, 2. the national uprising (during which the Home Army was supposed to recreate the full structure of armed forces).
Parallel to the official army there emerged military units of political parties, conspiracies based upon social organizations (e.g. upon the Fire Brigades emerged Skała, or “the Rock”) and youth associations (e.g. Szare Szeregi, or “the Grey Ranks”, based upon the Związek Harcerstwa Polskiego, or the “Polish Scouting Association”). They emerged thanks to the sabotage groups prepared by the General Staff before the war’s outbreak. One of the tasks of the AK Commanding Officer was uniting them into one force. This took quite a lot of time. Eventually, only a part of radical nationalists (NSZ – Narodowe Siły Zbrojne – National Armed Forces) and, emerging up from the summer 1942 – military units of communist party remained out of the AK structures. In the spring of 1944, when the process of unification was ended, the Home Army numbered more than 300 thousand sworn soldiers.
Apart from the staff and territorial structures there existed special units dealing among others with subversion and sabotage. In April 1940 the Związek Odwetu emerged (ZO - Retaliation Union), later transformed into the Kierownictwo Dywersji (Kedyw – Subversion Command) which acted on central level and in each region. In September 1941, because of the change in the Polish-Soviet relations the organization “Wachlarz” (or the “Fan”) was created. It dealt with intelligence and sabotage closely behind the German-Soviet frontlines. From January 1st 1941 to June 30th, 1944 within the frames of daily struggle the AK and subordinate units ditched among others 732 trains, set fire to 443 transports, destroyed about 4300 vehicles, burnt 130 magazines of weapons and equipments, damaged 19 000 train carriages and 6900 engines, set fire to 1200 gasoline tanks, blew up 40 railway bridges, destroyed 5 oil shafts, froze 3 blast-furnaces, conducted about 25 sabotage acts in war factories, 5700 attempts on officers of different police formations, soldiers and volksdeutschs (Polish citizens of German origin that volunteered to quisle with Germans), set free prisoners of 16 prisons. The partisan troops – active from 1943 – fought more than 170 combats, killing more than 1000 Germans. At the beginning of 1944 there were about 60 active AK partisan troops (some numbered up to a few hundred soldiers) and about 200 sabotage squads. The AK organized a few conspiratorial groups in some of the concentration camp (e.g. in Auschwitz) and among Poles sent to Germany for slave work. The runaway allied prisoners of war were also helped. A contact by radio and couriers with the Polish government in exile and the Commander-in-Chief staff was also maintained. There functioned permanent transfer bases (the most important one in Budapest) and courier routes (e.g. to Sweden). Since February 1942 began to arrive the trained in England Polish sabotage and intelligence officers (the so called “cichociemni” – literally the “silent and dark ones”). In total 316 of them were parachuted in Poland. There also was a subversion propaganda action going on, addressed to German soldiers (the so called Action “N”). The AK conducted some large publishing activities: there were about 250 newspapers edited, including the largest resistance title – “Biuletyn Informacyjny” (Information Bulletin), which was published from November 5th, 1939 up to January, 1945. Besides the “Biuletyn” there were also issued military books of rules, handbooks and manuals for the cadets of the underground military schools (some 8600 soldiers graduated from them). As it can be seen, there were many various activities going on. Their own contribution to fight against the occupation regime paid Żydowska Organizacja Bojowa (ŻOB – Jewish Fighting Organization) and the supported directly by the AK Żydowski Związek Wojskowy (ŻZW – Jewish Military Union) – mainly in the form of the heroic and desperate Warsaw Ghetto Uprising (April 19th – May 16th 1943).
To the most spectacular actions of the Home Army belong: paralyzing the railway junction in Warsaw (night from October 7th to 8th , 1942), recapturing the prisoners in Pińsk (January 18th, 1943), bomb assault in a city railway station in Berlin (February 15th, 1943), recapturing the prisoners in downtown Warsaw (the so-called Arsenal action, March 26th, 1943), assassination of Franz Kutschera, the SS and Police Commander for the District of Warsaw (February 1st, 1994).
It is estimated that until July, 1944 about 34 thousand soldiers of the Home Army and subordinate units were killed– some in combat but mostly they were executed or tortured to death in prisons – more or less 10% of the ranks. Among the “cichociemni” the losses added up to 1/3 of the ranks.
The Underground State It was possible to build up the conspiratorial army to such a great size and manage for it to be so active only because it was closely connected with the Polskie Państwo Podziemne (PPP – the Polish Underground State) and civil resistance. The PPP was a unique phenomenon: in none of the European states there existed such a vast and differentiated structure. Besides the AK the main component of the PPP was Delegatura Rządu na Kraj (Government Delegate’s Office at Home) which created a network of underground administration of all levels. The Kierownictwo Walki Cywilnej (Civil Fighting Executive) coordinated the activities of the so-called “little sabotage”, undertook propaganda actions and activities aiming at maintaining the morale and spirit of resistance against Germany. A daily set of news was prepared for the Polish radio “Świt” (or the“Dawn”) which broadcast from England but pretended to exist in Poland. The Kierownictwo also conducted secret education (including university level), helped the families of the victims of the invader and ran a separate action aiding the Jews (“Żegota”). It had its sections in prisons, by the post offices employees blocked the denunciations sent to German authorities, prepared plans for the after-war period and projects of running the territories that were expected to be captured on Germany (Biuro Ziem Nowych – the New Lands Office).
There existed secret courts (civil and military ones), which sentenced the traitors and punished Nazi collaborators with infamy. Another part of the PPP was the existing from 1940 representation of political parties which eventually was named Rada Jedności Narodowej (RJN, the Council for National Unity) and was a substitute of the parliament. The RJN published proclamations and program declarations (e.g. about the goals of war and future political system of the country). Besides the PPP there functioned hundreds of social, political and cultural associations, there were published more than two thousand books and brochures and more than 1.8 thousand different periodicals. Within the resistance but outside of the PPP were situated only extreme organizations: the NSZ on the right side and the communists on the left. Both these formations tried to create their own substitute of quasi-state structures.
“Burza” (the “Tempest”)
The plans of national uprising, which was the main goal of the AK, were changed a few times. The first one emerged when there still existed the Soviet-German alliance, the second one when the Soviet Union joined the anti-Nazi coalition. The last one was elaborated in the autumn of 1943 after breaking off by Moscow the diplomatic relations with Poland and when it turned out for sure that the Polish territory would be first entered by the Red Army. In this plan the uprising received the codename “Burza” (the “Tempest”). It assumed that the very moment when the frontlines would advance close to Poland, all the troops and structures of the AK would be called up to arms under the names of the pre-war Polish Army units (divisions and regiments), and increase sabotage actions. But first of all, they would begin to fight openly the retreating German troops, trying to get in touch at tactical level with the Red Army. In captured cities the underground authorities would come to light (the region and district delegate offices), take over the power and welcome as hosts the entering Soviet troops. Thus the uprising was to be a successive action and not just a one-time appearance in the entire country.
“Burza” began on January 15th, 1944 with mobilization in Volhynia (the so-called “Polskie Kresy Wschodnie” – the Polish Eastern Borderlands) where local troops – transform into the 27th Volhynian Infantry Division of the AK – began actions against the Germans. However, when during the fights the AK units had to cross the frontlines, they were disarmed by NKVD (the Peoples Commissariat for Internal Affairs – Soviet secret political police). Despite the negative turnout, the AK High Command decided to continue the “Burza”. More and more mobilized units entered the combat, and the greatest concentration of troops fought together with the Red Army in the battle of Vilnius (July 6th and 7th, 1944). A few days later the NKVD troops surrounded the Poles, disarmed them and interned. A part of them were able to manoeuvre out of encirclement. Again, the AK continued the insurgent action and its troops participated in capturing the subsequent cities and town: together with the Red Army in case of the big cities (like Lviv or Vilnius), or often on their own, in case of attacking some smaller German garrisons. For instance, in the region of Lublin, the AK units captured 7 cities on their own and 11 more together with the Soviets. The “Burza” covered a large territory from the Carpathians to Vilnius and the Lower Bug River, some 120 thousand soldiers fighting. On July 30th, 1944, Stalin ordered to disarm the AK, and the representatives of the Underground State that came out of the hiding and took over the offices were arrested. At least 20 to 30 thousand people were deported to penal colonies in the interior of the Soviet Union, most of them have never returned.
The Warsaw Uprising
Because of the experiences from the East and fears that fights in Warsaw would cause the destruction of the city and losses among the civil population, the opinions whether the “Burza” should take place varied. Eventually, it was decided that the battle of Warsaw would have not only the military significance but also political one. The emotional tension among the citizens and a hearty will to fight expressed by the AK soldiers were also taken into consideration. Finally the decision about starting the uprising in Warsaw was made (with participation of the Government Delegate Home and the head of RJN) on July 31st, when the advancing Red Army units were coming close to the lying on the eastern bank of the Vistula River city district of Praga. Some 23 000 of the AK soldiers started the uprising in the afternoon of August 1st, 1944, under the Warsaw Region Commanding Officer, colonel Antoni Chruściel (aka “Monter”). Although during the first few days of combat the insurgents captured a lot of strategic objects, and as the days went by the ranks were increasing (together there fought some 34 thousands of soldiers), the Home Army was unable to fully drive the Germans out of the downtown, nor to seize the main communication routes and bridges. The 16-thousand-strong German garrison was significantly reinforced (including the troops specializing in fighting partisans) and on August 5th, 1944, the Germans began to counter-strike, using tanks, heavy artillery and assault aircraft. In the first of recaptured districts (Wola), the German troops committed a mass slaughter of civilians. This was to happen again later a few times. The attacking German columns split Warsaw into the “insurgent islands”, the contact between which was managed by secret passages through cellars and sewers. In these areas the authority was taken over by Polish administration, newspapers were published, a radio station broadcast (“Błyskawica”, or the “Lightning”), municipal services worked.
It was expected that the battle would last a few more days, until the Red Army entered the city. Despite many pleas, including the ones from the Polish prime-minister who was paying a visit in Moscow since July 31st, sometime before August 8th, Stalin ordered to delay offensive actions nearby Warsaw. He did not even agree for the allied transport airplanes to land on Soviet airfields which practically precluded helping the uprising by airdropping the supplies, because the nearest airfields were located in England and Italy. Not till the middle of September, when the uprising was already on the verge of disaster, a mass air-drop was possible but the insurgents took over only some 47 tons of it. The battle dragged on, the death toll among the civilians increased, there lacked food, water and medicines. Capturing Praga by the Red Army and unsuccessful attempts of the Polish troops commanded by General Berling to establish a bridge-head in the left-bank Warsaw did not change the situation. On October 2nd, 1944, the insurgents capitulated. Some 150 000 civilians were killed, most of the city was utterly ruined (later on special German squads kept destroying the remaining buildings), 520 000 citizens expelled of the city. 17 000 insurgents were taken prisoners.
The Warsaw Uprising was the greatest battle fought by the Polish army in WW2: 10 000 soldiers were killed, 7 000 more were missing in action. Major losses were inflicted to Germans – 10 000 killed, 6 000 MIA, 300 tanks, guns and armored vehicles lost.
The uprising did not reach its military nor political objectives, yet for the generations of Poles to come it became a symbol of courage and determination in the struggle for independence.
Basic bibliography:
Norman Davies, Rising ’44. “The Battle for Warsaw”, London 2004;
Stefan Korboński, The Polish Underground State: A Guide to the Underground 1939-1945, Boulder 1979;
Marek Ney-Krwawicz, The Polish Home Army, 1939-1945, London 2001.
Polish Armed Forces in the West
The campaign in Poland had not finished yet when Polish troops abroad started to form. The government of Poland in exile that emerged in Paris adopted as its main goal the fight at the side of the Allies and creating a Polish army in France. This was the beginning of the Polskie Siły Zbrojne (PSZ – Polish Armed Forces) in the West which fought until May 1945 in three war theatres: Western Europe (1940 and 1944-1945), North Europe (1940) and Mediterranean (North Africa in 1940-1942, Italy 1944-1945). The first Commander-in-Chief was General Władysław Sikorski, who also was the Prime Minister of the government in exile. After his death (July 1943), his post was assigned to General Kazimierz Sosnkowski, dismissed in September 1944. After him General Tadeusz Komorowski, the AK Commanding Officer was appointed who after the Warsaw Uprising defeat became a German prisoner of war.
Campaign in France
Polish troops emerged of a stream of soldiers and officers that reached France through Romania, Hungary, Lithuania and Latvia. 43 000 evacuated, the rest of them ran away on their own. Also the Polish immigrants living in France applied to the army. In a few months the Polish Army reached the number of 84 000 soldiers in four infantry divisions and two brigades. There were also formed four air squadrons and units of anti-aircraft artillery that amounted to about 7 000 people. Besides, a part of withdrawing troops found their way to Syria (administrated by the French) where Samodzielna Brygada Strzelców Karpackich emerged (Independent Carpathian Riflemen Brigade).
During the German Blitzkrieg in France in May 1940 the Allied defense broke already after two weeks which was the reason for a hasty withdrawal of the British troops and capitulation of France. Polish units fought in the southern section of the front: the Polish Grenadier Division after one week of fighting was dissolved because of the French-German armistice talks; the soldiers of the Brygada Kawalerii Pancerno-Motorowej (Armoured Cavalry Brigade) after the battles of Champaubert and Montbard upon the order of their commander, General Maczek, destroyed their equipment and withdrew south; 2 Dywizja Strzelców (2nd Riflemen Division) stopped the German attack on the Clos-du-Doubs hills but when on June 19th it turned out that the fight is almost over, it crossed the Swiss border and was interned there. The Samodzielna Brygada Strzelców Podhalańskich (Indipendent Podhalan Riflemen Brigade) was included in Allied forces sent to Norway in May 1940 and participated in the battle of Narvik. Altogether, about 50 000 Polish soldiers fought defending France, 1400 were killed, more than 4500 were wounded. Polish fighter pilots achieved 50 confirmed and 5 probable kills of enemy aircraft. The defeat of France meant the defeat of the Polish troops fighting at the side of the French. Only about 20 000 men were able to withdraw to England. The great organizational effort made since the autumn 1939 was wasted.
Battle of Britain and the Polish Air Force
The Polish pilots stood out during the campaign of 1939 and highlighted during the campaign in France. But the most distinguished role they played in 1940 when the decisive for the fate of the England and the coalition Battle of Britain took place (August 8th – October 31st, 1940). The British industry produced enough aircraft but it was not possible to train enough pilots in such a short time. Therefore the role of foreign airmen, of whom the greatest group formed the 151 Polish pilots, cannot be overemphasized. They fought both in the British and Polish squadrons (302nd and 303rd fighter and 300th and 301st bomber squadrons). During the Battle of Britain the Poles shot down 203 Luftwaffe aircraft which stood for 12% of total German losses in this battle. The success of the Polish pilots inclined the British command to expand the Polish Air Force: until summer 1941 8 fighter and 4 bomber squadrons emerged. Later on new ones were created, including the Polish Fighting Team (commonly called the “Skalski’s circus”, named derived from its commander’s surname) that fought in North Africa. Polish pilots protected England, e.g. by destroying 193 German V1 and V2 missiles, and participated in many operations over the continent, escorting the bombers, bombing different targets (e.g. Ruhr, Hamburg, Brema), provided air support to the landing troops during the invasion in June 1944. In 1944 the Polish air unit operating from Italy airdropped in Poland men and equipment for the AK, and during the Warsaw Uprising the Polish crews flew 91 times with the supplies for the fighting insurgents. From 1940 to 1945 the Polish squadrons and the Polish pilots serving in British units achieved 621 confirmed kills, and together with campaigns of 1939 and France– 900 confirmed and 189 probable.
Basic bibliography:
Lenne Olson, Stanley Cloud, A Question of Honour. The Kosciuszko squadron: forgotten heroes of World War II, New York, 2003;
Adam Zamoyski, The Forgotten Few: The Polish Air Force in the Second World War, New York 1996.
The Battle of Atlantic and the Polish navy
Just before war’s outbreak three Polish destroyers (Błyskawica, Burza and Grom) left for Great Britain. Later on they were joined by the submarines Orzeł and Wilk that managed to escape the Germans. The Polish Navy since 1940 was constantly expanded by the ships leased from the Royal Navy and in 1945 it amounted to 4 thousand seamen on 15 ships (1 cruiser, 6 destroyers, 3 submarines and 5 torpedo boats). During the war there served 26 ships (2 cruisers, 9 destroyers, 5 submarines and 11 torpedo boats). At the side of the British and American fleets, the Polish vessels participated in tens of operations: e.g. in May 1940 in Narvik, during the evacuation from Dunkirk, in 1944 during the landing in Normandy (operation “Overlord”), escorting convoys to Murmansk and Malta but most of all in the Battle of the Atlantic which took place from 1940 to 1944, including the famous “hunt for Bismarck”, the greatest Kriegsmarine battleship (May 1941). Totally, they participated in 665 battles and escorted 787 convoys, sunk 12 enemy ships (including 5 submarines) and 41 merchant vessels, damaged 24 more (including 8 submarines). Besides that the Allied sea transport was reinforced with 36 Polish merchant vessels which 1939 were abroad, total displacement of 117 thousand tons.
Basic bibliography:
Michael A. Peszke, Poland’s Navy 1918-1945, New York 1999;
Jerzy Pertek, Mała flota wielka duchem, Poznań 1989.
Land battles 1941-1945
After the defeat of France, the Carpathian Riflemen Brigade left Syria and joined the British forces in Egypt. It was an excellent unit of 5 000 men, mainly experienced soldiers, the 1939 veterans and volunteers. In August 1941 it moved to Libya where it won fame in the heavy fights during the defense of the besieged Tobruk, and in the spring of 1942 in the Libyan Desert.
About 20 00 men managed to withdraw from France to Great Britain. They formed 1st Polish Corps that was supposed to defend the eastern coast of Scotland, and 1st Independent Parachute Brigade that was supposed to be airdropped in Poland once the national uprising began. In 1941 1st Armored Division was created within the frames of the 1st Corps. However, this army could not develop because the Polish immigration on the British Islands was not very numerous. No Poles were arriving from the conquered by Germany and Italy Europe, and the voluntary recruitment in the United States, Canada and Latin America brought only a few thousand men. Situation changed when after the 3rd Reich’s assault on the Soviet Union. The Polish government signed a treaty with the Soviets guaranteeing (among others) releasing the Polish citizens from prisons and camps and creating Polish Army. It was formed under the command of General Władysław Anders. In the spring of 1942 it amounted to more than 70 000 men but it suffered from the lack of officers. The pre-war Polish officers were looked for in vain because it was not known that they were executed two years earlier by NKVD. The Soviet authorities caused more and more trouble in expanding the army, for example by drastically limiting food rations to 40 000 portions a day. In the same time the situation of the Allies in the Middle East was very difficult, the United States had just begun mobilization, and the Great Britain ran out of reserves. In such conditions it was agreed to evacuate the Polish units to Persia, yet with the army some civilians left as well (mainly children and families of soldiers) – altogether some 114 tousand people.
From the forces moved to the Middle East (first to Persia, then to Iraq and Palestine) the 2nd Polish Corps emerged. In December 1943 and January 1944 it was transported to the Italian front. About 50 000 soldiers fought for almost year and a half, distinguishing themselves with glory, especially during the bloody struggle to break the Gustav Line. The key position there was the hill and monastery of Monte Cassino, captured by the Poles on May 18th, 1944. In July the Corps captured the city and port of Ancona, and in August participated in breaking the Gothic Line at the Adriatic Sea. In 1945 it took part in the spring offensive in the North of Italy, in battles of Faenza and Bolonia, which was first entered by the Polish soldiers. During the campaign in Italy some 2600 of them were killed.
The Polish forces stationed on the British Islands, reinforced by the soldiers who came from the Soviet Union, prepared to participate in the invasion of the continent. In June 1944, in the operation “Overlord” in Normandy, the Polish Air Force and the navy took part. Then the 1st Armored Division (under the command of Gen. Maczek), total of 16 000 men, 380 tanks and 470 guns was moved to France. It formed a part of the Canadian Corps and won fame in the battles of Falaise and Chambois (August 18th to 22nd, 1944) where it closed the “cauldron”, cutting off the retreating German divisions. Later on it liberated the cities of Abeville, St. Omar and Cassel in France, Ypres and Gent in Belgium and Breda (October 28th to 30th, 1944) in the Netherlands, finally capturing the German seaport of Wilhelmshaven. Its combat route amounted to 1800 km, the division destroyed 260 enemy tanks and self-propelled guns, loosing 4600 soldiers, including more than a 1000 of casualties. In September 1944 the 1st Parachute Brigade was airdropped near Arnhem in the Netherlands as a part of the unfortunate “Market-Garden”, suffering great losses.
When the war in Europe was coming to an end, the Polish troops fighting at the side of the Western Allies numbered more than 210 thousand soldiers, 1335 tanks, about 4000 of armored vehicles, 2050 guns and mortars, 32 thousand different mechanical vessels.
Basic bibliography:
Witold Biegański, Polskie Siły Zbrojne na Zachodzie, 1939-1945, Warszawa 1990;
Margaret Brodniewicz-Stawicki, For your freedom and ours: the Polish Armed Forces in the Second World War, St. Catharines, Ont, 1999.
Polish Army on the Eastern Front
After bringing into light the Katyn massacre and breaking off the diplomatic relations with Poland (April 1943), Stalin decided to organize Polish armed forces fighting at side of the Red Army. These troops emerged without the approval of the legal authorities of Poland, most of the commanding personnel were Soviet officers, the political officers recruited from the Polish communists but ordinary soldiers were Poles deported in the years 1939-1941 to the interior of the Soviet Union, and from the spring 1944, also the inhabitants of the Polish Kresy Wschodnie (Eastern Borderlands). Though its origin was not legal, and it played a significant role in imposing the communist system in Poland later on, the Polish Army fighting on the Eastern Front contributed a lot to the Polish military effort. From a single division (1st Tadeusz Kościuszko Infantry Division, commanded by colonel Zygmunt Berling) eleven-thousand-people strong, which began to form in May 1943, it expanded to one-hundred-thousand-people-strong army in July 1994, and at the end of the war it amounted to more than 330 thousand soldiers formed in two armies with all land forces arms (infantry, artillery, engineers, tanks and different supporting troops).
This army’s baptism of fire took place at the battle of Lenino (Belarus) in October 1943. In July and August 1944 the Polish troops fought at the bridgeheads on the Western Bank of the Vistula River, and in the battle of Studzianki the Polish armored brigade fought its first battle against the Germans. In September 1944 the Polish Army attempted at helping the insurgents in Warsaw – unsuccessfully and with great losses. From January 1945 it participated in the great Soviet offensive: in February and March it fought a dramatic battle to break the Wał Pomorski (Pomeranian Position – the highly fortified German defense line) and capturing Kołobrzeg (Kolberg), a Baltic seaport transformed into a fortress; the Polish troops fought at Gdańsk and Gdynia, and also by Zalew Szczeciński (Bay of Szczecin). The crowning of the combat route was participation in capturing Berlin. In the entire operation took part 180 000 soldiers from the 1st and 2nd Polish Army, and in the assault in the downtown of Berlin an important role played the 1st Tadeusz Kościuszko Division. It was the only military unit besides the Red Army that stuck its national flag over the ruins of the German capital. Polish troops reached the Elba River and got in touch with American units. In April 1945, the 2nd Army forced the Nysa River, then fought in the region of Dresden and Bautzen, suffering great losses. Its combat route it ended in May in Czechoslovakia. In battles against the Germans on the Eastern Front participated also some Polish air units (however, they consisted mainly of Soviet pilots).
From the battle of Lenino till the combat over Elba and in Saxony 17 500 soldiers were killed, almost 10 000 were considered to be MIA. The most casualties cost the fighting in Pomorze (Pomerania – 5400 killed and 2800 MIA) and in the Berlin operation (7200 killed and 3800 MIA). Because of the combined nature of the Soviet and Polish actions it is difficult to estimate how much damage the Poles inflicted to the enemy. Some partial data is available only for a few battles: at Lenino 1800 Germans were killed, wounded or taken prisoner, in the tank battle at Studzianki the Germans lost 20 tanks and self-propelled guns and 1500 soldiers, at Wał Pomorski 2300 killed. In Berlin the soldiers of the Kościuszko Division captured four subway stations and took prisoner 2500 German soldiers.
The Polish Army fighting in the East was the greatest regular military force fighting at the side of the Red Army. Its almost two years long combat route added up to 1000 kilometers. It participated in different and important activities: forcing rivers, capturing cities, attacking fortifications, pursuing enemy troops. Its share in victory was paid dearly.
Basic bibliography:
Czesław Grzelak, Henryk Stańczyk, Stefan Zwoliński, Armia Berlinga i Żymierskiego. Wojsko polskie na froncie wschodnim 1943-1945, Warszawa 2002.
The „Enigma” and Intelligence On July 25th 1939, before the war began, the Polish intelligence (Section 2 of the General Staff) provided Great Britain and France with one copy each (with necessary documents) of the German coding machine “Enigma” that allowed to read the secret German messages. A team of Polish cryptologists was evacuated to France, later on to England, where a special center for monitoring and decoding was organized in Bletchley Park. The Polish “Enigma” played a significant role, especially during the Battle of Britain, Battle of the Atlantic and the invasion of the continent in 1944. Other evacuated to England Polish scientists and technicians have to be mentioned as well. The electronics specialists helped with creating the submarine detection system (HFDF – High Frequency Direction Finding). The Polish engineers constructed the reversible tank periscope and an anti-aircraft cannon, with tens of thousands of which the British troops were equipped.
The Intelligence
Due to the impossibility of forming regular troops in the occupied Poland, a very important role in the Polish contribution to the anti-Nazi alliance played the intelligence which had a lot of experience in the territory of Germany from before war. During the conflict the Polish intelligence based on two centers: Section 2 of the Commander-in-Chief Staff, operating mainly in Western Europe and North Africa, and Section 2 of the AK Commanding Officer that worked mainly home and in Germany. Section 2 in London was the coordinator of all and had close contacts with correspondent British services, including Special Operations Executive (SOE) that dealt with intelligence and sabotage in occupied Europe. In August 1941 there was an agreement signed with the intelligence of the United States (OCI, later OSS). For some time in 1942 the AK intelligence had direct radio connection with the Red Army. Before that and later on, a lot of information from the Polish intelligence reached Moscow with the help of the British. The relations with the Allies were very important, because the Polish army could not use all the information gathered because of the limited own potential.
The intelligence commanded directly from London created – starting in September 1940 – a lot of posts, a network of which covered practically entire Western and Southern Europe and North Africa. The greatest and the most important was the network in France (Agency “F”, later “F2”), that amounted to more than 2500 agents and only in the years 1940-1942 provided the center in London with more than 5200 reports. In 1944 the working in Paris network “Interallie” focused on the issues related to the invasion. There also existed the networks in Denmark, Belgium, the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, Spain, Portugal, Greece, Palestine, Italy, in the Balkans and the Baltic states. Information sent by the network of the Agency “AFR” played an important role in planning the allied attack on the North Africa (Operation “Torch”, December 1942). In France the intelligence network was closely related to a wider Polish conspiracy activity that had also subversion and propaganda tasks (Polska Organizacja Walki o Niepodległość – Polish Organization of Fight for Independence, aka “Monika”).
The first intelligence structures in the occupied Polish territories emerged in the autumn of 1939, parallel in the framework of the ZWZ staff and upon individual initiatives. Of the latter ones the most important one is the organization “Muszkieterzy” (the Musketeers). The proper development of the intelligence activity began after the fall of France when it was realized that the war was going to last longer than expected. Section 2 was an extended structure with all the departments and services existing in military intelligence, both in the center in Warsaw, and in the AK regions and districts. It is estimated that within their framework some 15 000 people worked, and an important role was played by the employees of the post offices and railways. One of the most important elements were the posts working in Germany (general codename “Stragan” or the “Stall”), located (among other places) in Berlin, Hamburg, Cologne, Wienna, Konigsberg, Wroclaw (Breslau), and Szczecin (Stettin). The offensive intelligence of the “Stragan” (codename “Lombard”, or the “Pawnshop”) undertook also the sabotage actions, like bomb attempts. After the outbreak of the Soviet-German war, the intelligence in the East expanded (codename “Pralnia” or “Laundry”) by organizing posts in Smolensk, Kharkiv, Riga and Daugavpils. In the spring of 1941 the Polish intelligence sent to Moscow via London some comprehensive reports on the German invasion plans.
The most spectacular achievement of the AK intelligence was a thorough study of the research center and factory in Pennemunde, where V1 and V2 missiles were produced. The first information was obtained in the autumn 1942 and in March 1943 a detailed report was sent to London. This allowed the British to conduct a massive bomb attack (night from August 17th to 18th, 1943) which for many months stopped the Wunderwaffe (Wonderful Weapon) construction plans. In 1944 the AK intelligence captured a missile that had not exploded during the drill and sent its parts to London. Quite a role played the data on localization of gasoline factories (operation “Synteza”, or the “Syntesis”) and the military facilities in Germany and Poland. The information on concentration and death camps was also sent. The materials sent by the Poles were very much appreciated by the partners. In the Intelligence Service evaluations it can be read that “the Polish intelligence provided a lot of very valuable information” (first half-year 1942), the estimations delivered by the AK “belong to the most precious ones that we get” (June 1944).
In total, from the second half of 1940 to the end of 1943 (the data for the later period is missing) from the network of the Polish intelligence more than 26 000 reports and a few thousand decoded German messages were delivered to the Allies.
Basic bibliography:
Władysław Kozaczuk, Jerzy Straszak, Enigma: how the Poles broke the Nazi code, New York 2004;
Piotr Matusak, Wywiad Związku Walki Zbrojnej – Armii Krajowej 1939-1945, Warszawa 2002;
Andrzej Pepłoński, Wywiad Polskich Sił Zbrojnych na Zachodzie, 1939-1945, Warszawa 1995.
A thought for the anniversary Polish soldiers were not invited to participate in the victory defilades which took place in 1945 in London and Moscow. This meant that the Great Powers treated Poland more like an object of mutual relations than like a partner. However, the Western Allies many times emphasized the heroism and determination of the Polish soldiers and the fact that Poland was a very valuable ally, therefore belonging to the winners of the war. Many Poles thought, and still think, that it was a “bitter victory” because the Polish state that emerged after the war was harmed by subordinating it to the Soviet Union. Despite this no one seems to doubt that it was necessary to fight and the homage to those who fought, is paid by everyone.
