Rosyjscy eksperci uważają, że sytuacja USA w Iraku pogarsza się, ale mimo to amerykańska marynarka wojenna jest gotowa do ataku na Iran w Zatoce Persk

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.

prof. Iwo Cyprian Pogonowski
Sarasota, USA
www.pogonowski.com

Poles Fond of Iranian Cinema

Poles Fond of Iranian Cinema

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 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

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

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.

Iranian Minister at Civilian Camp No.1, which housed Polish refugees

Persia - From Hell to Heaven!

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)

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.

Doucuments concerning Polish-Persian relations before the Second World War

Photo of Basia and Farynka Sgrunowski on the train from Lugova to Krasnovodzk (in the evacuation to Persia), 23 March 1942 (from the private archives

Photo of Basia and Farynka Sgrunowski on the train from Lugova to Krasnovodzk (in the evacuation to Persia), 23 March 1942 (from the private archives of Zofia Jordanowska - courtesy of VideoFact).

See also http://www.Kresy-Siberia.org
The "Kresy-Siberia Group" brings into contact people from countries around the world with a special interest in the tragedy of over one million Polish citizens of various faiths and ethnicities (Polish, Ukrainian, Belorussian, Catholic, Orthodox, Jewish, etc.) arrested or deported from eastern Poland (Kresy) in 1940-41 to special labour camps in Siberia, Kazakhstan and Soviet Asia. Some 115,000 of these were evacuated through Persia in 1942 as soldiers of Anders Army and their families - and eventually made their way to the West. The circumstances of their odyssey and the tragic history of the Polish citizens under Soviet occupation during the war was hushed up by the Allies during the war to protect the reputation of the Soviet Union, an important ally in the war against the Nazis.

Sixty years later the survivors have aged and many have died. With this list we hope to bring together surviving deportees and their descendants to remember, learn, discover and spread the word of their ordeal to the world and to future generations.

If this list group can play even a small role in that effort, it will have been an important achievement.

Poland and Persia during the Safavid Period

Poland and Persia during the Safavid Period

The waning of the Middle Ages and the demise of the idea of the "Christian Commonwealth" paved the way for new conceptions shaping the political order in Europe. There arose states approximating the modern sense of the term, and the nascent awareness of national separateness meant that alliances between them came to be predicated largely by the specific interests of each one. The search for a workable balance of power led the continent's statesmen further and further afield, even to countries as faraway as Persia which, under the rule of the Safavids (1501-1736), was gradually regaining her might.

The ever-developing political configurations led to gradual emergence of the diplomatic service. Envoys and emissaries set out upon the highways of Europe and Asia in the names of their masters, often accompanied by magnificent trains numbering hundreds of retainers. These resplendent delegations headed mostly to the east, bearing precious gifts as a sign of respect. By gist of such diplomatic exchanges, treaties, commercial intercourse, and developing travel links, Christian Europe became familiar with the Orient - with a world amazing on account of its wealth, culture, and sheer variety.

Long before the first envoys of the Polish Commonwealth arrived at the Safavid court, news of this exotic land called Persia permeated back to Poland thanks to merchants travelling to the farthest reaches of the commercial routes. Their tales, oftentimes embellished with elements of the fantastic, left a trace in the imagination, serving to bring Persia - with all its wealth, alternately an object of wonderment and of fear - somewhat closer to the realm of experience. Archaeological finds of coins bear testimony to lively commercial exchange with Persia thriving in as early as the 9th and 10th centuries; Samanid dirhems are well-represented among them. At that time, the Iranian rulers of the Samanid dynasty (864-1005) held sway over vast expanses of eastern Persia and Central Asia - right up to Kashgar, subordinated to the Arab caliphs on a nominal basis only. Samanid cities such as Bukhara or Samarkand were important centres of culture and commerce; it is from them that the 10th century silver Samanid coins unearthed in Poland, among other places in Piwonice by Kalisz, originate. In the Middle Ages, this district was crossed by a trading route linking Silesia and Pomerania which, most probably, overlapped the old Amber Route once plied by the Romans. Merchants travelling to the Samanid state from eastern Europe carried furs, honey, wax, and amber; another prized commodity was constituted in Slavic captives, much valued as slaves. In the Middle Ages, Poland was connected to Persia by two principal routes, one running through Moscow, and the other - to Lvov by way of Wallachia and then along the northern shore of the Black Sea to the Crimea, then on to Erevan, Djulfa, and Tabriz.

This booming commerce notwithstanding, the times were not propitious for the forging of closer ties with Muslim countries. Quite on the contrary - the fighting with the Saracens and the Crusades put a damper on any possibilities for mutual exploration. While the participation of Poles in the Crusades was, all in all, a modest one - the Church exempted Polish knights from expeditions to the Holy Land in consideration of the fact that they were busy fighting pagans closer to home, namely the Pomeranian Slavs and the Prussians - Poland went down in history as a defender of the Christian faith facing the Mongol onslaught of the 13th century. Thus, Polish knowledge about Persia during Mediaeval times was very limited. The earliest mentions of Persians in the Polish literature refer to their pre-Muslim glory. The 13th century chronicles by Wincenty Kadlubek, Chronica Polonorum, includes information about the great Persian rulers Cirrus, Darius, and Xerxes (6th-5th century BC). The Muslim period of Persian history, in turn, did not arouse much interest and was left undiscussed as was, for that matter, the cultural splendour of the Muslim world as a whole.

The first cracks in the wall of animosity and indifference separating the Muslim and Christian realms began to appear when a new power, Ottoman Turkey, began to rise in the east. In the wake of the Turkish victory at Varna in 1444 and of the taking of Constantinopole in 1453 there transpired a shift in the political consciousness of Europe. A new view was being taken of history, partly through the influence of the Reformation. Common political interests took the fore over religious differences, and it was demonstrated that collaboration among adherents of different faiths is by all means possible. Alliances transcending religion were being sought by the European powers, erstwhile enemies of Islam, and Persia was one of the countries whose favour was being curried. This change of thinking had much to do with a tangible fear of the nascent power of Turkey which came to threaten not only Persia, its archenemy of long standing, but also all of south-eastern Europe. The Italian city-republics of Venice and Genoa were particularly proactive in seeking to build an anti-Turkish alliance. Naturally enough, any efforts towards mounting an initiative against the Turks brought the European states closer to Persia, a country which had its own disagreements with the Ottomans. Diplomatic missions began setting out from Europe to Persia with increasing frequency. The European overtures were addressed to the Turkmen ruler of the Ak Koyunlu confederation, Uzun Hassan (1453-1478), master over well-nigh all of Persia. The negotiations usually proceeded through the good offices of Catholic missionaries who were entrusted with the establishment and maintenance of contacts; in their travels to and fro, many of them passed through Poland. In 1474, the court of King Kazimierz the Jagiellon (1447-1492) received a fully fledged Persian delegation, the first in the history of contacts between Poland and Persia. The delegation was headed by Ambrosio Contorini, legate of the Venetian Republic; he delivered to Kazimierz a letter from Shah Uzun Hassan in which the Polish king was assured of the shah's friendship and was asked to provide military assistance in the fight against the Turkish Sultan Mehmed II. The Persian hope was that Poland can be enlisted in attacking Turkey from two sides, from the east and west. This plan had the wholehearted support of Venice and Poland, whose King Wladyslaw fell at the hands of the Turks during the Battle of Varna, and was the repository of much hope.

Kazimierz the Jagiellon, however, declined the offer made by Uzun Hassan; his foreign policy was one of avoiding direct confrontation with the Turks and, at least as importantly, of maintaining his alliance with the Crimean Tartars. The Polish monarch was also anxious to protect Moldavia, a land which - while sparsely populated and bare of as much as decent fodder - was of considerable strategic importance in that it constituted a natural buffer protecting the approach to Poland. "If Moldavia is defended, the Crown will be defended as well", as Primate Zbigniew Olesnicki said. Furthermore, Kazimierz was worried that, should matters come to a head, Poland may be left as the sole combatant facing Turkey in that the support of Hungary's king Maciej Korwin as well as of the Holy See for a war with the Turks was far from unequivocal. Accordingly, Poland's diplomats strove to maintain some semblance of good relations with the Ottomans, and the envisaged anti-Turkish coalition came to naught.

The interest in all things Persian, meanwhile, continued unabated. What's more, the merchants and adventurers travelling eastwards, to Persia and to India, were increasingly often joined by missionaries. The comparatively liberal stance adopted by Persia's consecutive shahs towards different religions meant that Christian missions were established in Persia in as early as the 14th century. The first to arrive were the Dominicans and the Franciscans, followed by the Jesuits; all of them produced chronicles, accounts, and memoirs. These writings, however, did little to increase the general knowledge about Persia back in Europe in that, during those times, the average European was illiterate and had no time for such concerns. Fantastic and make-believe stories of the East continued to dominate.

The situation in Poland was somewhat different in that, here, the Muslim cultures were not some unknown, mysterious, and exotic world but, rather, a real-life presence. Muslim Tartars played an important role in the country's political life; the Armenians settling in Poland continued to use Turkish (in the form of an Armenian-Kipchak dialect) and, in many instances, also Persian. The Polish merchants returning from voyages to the east brought back Persian carpets, textiles, Persian arms, horse trappings, precious stones, roots, and sweets; sometimes, they came back in the company of craftsmen, most usually of Armenian stock, who took up residence in Poland's cities, principally in Lvov. It is thanks to them that the local weaving shops developed; it is no coincidence that such establishments were known as persjarnie.

The close contacts with the diverse cultures of the East left their indelible mark on the art of the Polish Commonwealth as well as on the mentality of its inhabitants. A strong cultural current known as Sarmatism took hold of the Polish nobility for several centuries; it featured as its central tenet the conviction that Poles are descended from the ancient Sarmatians, a nomad people of Iranian origin living between the Don and Volga rivers as of the 3rd century BC. This proud people, belonging to the federation of Scythian tribes, was renowned for its fierce warriors who "never swore fealty to Alexander the Great nor to the Roman state". The Polish knights and nobles - the story continues - were descended from these indomitable fighters. Whether the fact that the various Scythian traditions form part of a greater whole, the Persian heritage as set out in the Royal Book by Ferdousi, was known in Poland at that time, we cannot tell. All that is known on this subject is that Poles learned about the Sarmatians not from the Persians, but from the ancient historians of Rome. The designation "Sarmatia" is first used by Claudius Ptolemy in the 2nd century to refer to the lands of central and eastern Europe; Ptolemy called the various peoples inhabiting this area "Sarmatians". The durability of the conviction about the Sarmatian lineage of the local peoples and the acceptance of the genealogy associating their origins with the Asian steppes presents a point of considerable interest. Taken together, all this would suggest that the concept of the East, of the Orient, carried positive connotations for the Polish gentry. They also had their bearing on aesthetic standards in Poland - here, Oriental influences ran deep. Garb based on Oriental models, as worn by Polish nobles of the 16th century, became almost a national costume and, with time, was enshrined as a symbol of attachment to Polish tradition and customs; the Persian influence in this realm is beyond dispute. The quality of craftsmanly production in Persia was among the highest in the known world; the risk entailed in trips to Persia was deemed worth taking when one considered the magnificent goods which were to be had there.

The 16th century brought a renewed threat on the part of Turkey which, having completed a series of conquests in Asia and Africa, undertook a push towards Europe; this was the reign of Sultan Suleyman I the Magnificent (1520-1566). Soon, the idea of an anti-Turkish alliance incorporating Persia was again circulating in the halls of power. European states had already made advances in this direction earlier, during the reign of King Zygmunt I (1506-1548), seeking to gain Persia's acquiescence; in reply, the Persians dispatched (in 1516) an envoy to Poland - Petrus de Monte Libano, a Maronite monk from Syria. Petrus carried letters from the Shah addressed to the European monarchs in which the drawing up of anti-Turkish treaties was proposed. The Polish king, however, displayed limited enthusiasm for similar solutions; in spite of low-intensity aggressive actions on the part of the Turks, he adhered to a policy of maintaining sound relations at all costs.

The idea of a wider anti-Turkish alliance assumed a more concrete shape under the rule of Stefan Batory (1576-1586). The king was planning a great crusade leading through Moscow and on to Istanbul; he secured subsidies from the Holy See and permission of the noblemen's assemblies to wage war on Poland's eastern neighbour. It is reputed that negotiations in this regard were carried on with the Persian shah through the intermediation of Marcin Broniowski; this secretary to the king, much experienced in diplomatic negotiations, is supposed to have sojourned at the court of the Persian shah, Mohammed Khodabande (1577-1581) on a mission. Yet the far-reaching plans of the combative king came to naught, interrupted as they were by the sudden death of Stefan Batory in 1586. The friendly relations between Poland and Persia struck up during this time, however, survived, assuming a special character during the reign of his successor, King Zygmunt III Vasa (1587-1632). The escalating conflict with the Ottoman Porte brought an end to the lively commercial exchange with the Turkish cities, and it became necessary for Poland to seek new markets as well as allies for her military endeavours; Persia was a natural, if geographically distant, candidate.

Meanwhile, Persia was undergoing momentous political change with profound implications for her future. The Safavid dynasty (1501-1738) was established in power, and a new era in the country's history began. The long years of political fragmentation came to an end; Persia became a strong, centralised state, perfectly able during the high point coinciding with the rule of Shah Abbas I (1581-1629) to compete with the Ottoman Empire and with Mameluke Egypt in the political and military spheres as well as in the cultural one, most notably in the area of architecture. Artistic handicrafts, such as weaving and carpet making, also reached unprecedented heights in their development. The Safavids underscored their distinctiveness in the Islamic world by imposing Shiism as Persia's state religion. Surrounded by hostile Sunni powers, Turkey to the west and the Uzbek-Shaibanid state in Central Asia - and waging protracted wars with both - the Safavids opened themselves to contacts with the countries of Europe, regarding them as potential friends in their fight with the Ottomans. Commercial initiatives by Western merchants were stepped up, as were diplomatic contacts. The memoirs and accounts written by travellers to Persia and by diplomats assigned there during this time - to mention only the Frenchmen Jean de Chardin and Jean-Baptiste Tavernier, Adam Olearius, secretary of the mission of Holstein, or Sefer Muratowicz, the Polish merchant - have proven to be a source of much valuable information, replete with descriptions of the sumptuous receptions held in welcome of arriving envoys. Sefer Muratowicz has recalled how, in the course of the audience, Shah Abbas I sent for some wine and, raising a toast, proclaimed "'o guest, I drink with you to the good health of his Majesty the great and famous King, your lord and my dear brother' and drank the half. He then had them pour a full goblet for me and quoth, 'if you do love his Majesty the King, your lord and my brother, than down this at one go' ".

Contacts with the West were very much eased by the policy of tolerance pursued by Abbas I the Great with regard to the Jews and Christians living in Persia. It is likely that such accommodating attitudes towards these religions were the result of the Shah's foreign as well as domestic plans for undermining the position of the Turkmenian aristocracy. It is for similar reasons that the Persian army recruited increasing numbers of Georgians and Armenians. The Safavid court began to solicit foreign advisors; their knowledge and skills were held in great esteem. These included two Englishmen, Anthony and Robert Sherley, and - later on - the Polish Jesuit Tadeusz Krusinski.

This enlivening of diplomatic relations with Persia meant that Poland, always a convenient transit point on the East-West trail, became frequent host to passing diplomatic missions, Persian ones travelling West as well as European ones headed in the opposite direction. And the proximity of Turkey constituted yet another reason why the Polish Commonwealth, already a country of considerable importance in international politics, found itself at the centre of the diplomatic stage.

In those days, any voyage to Persia, what with the need to circumvent the Ottoman state and all areas inhabited by its supporters, was a time-consuming and perilous undertaking. Most travelling parties chose to pass through Astrakhan. All carried letters of safe passage and substantial sums of cash as well as including many wagons and an armed escort; all the same, not all missions reached their destinations. Such a sad fate befell the Persian delegation dispatched to Rome by Shah Abbas I, who kept up close ties with Pope Clemens VIII and Pope Paul V. In 1599, Abbas sent out a mission with instructions to call on King Zygmunt III and then to proceed through Germany to Rome, to Clemens VIII. The Shah, his interest piqued by the offer of forming a common front against Turkey delivered to him by the English envoy Anthony Sherley, was hoping to convince the Pope to incite the various Christian countries to a war against Turkey and to assist Persia in bringing together an anti-Turkish league. The mission was led by Hussein Ali Bek and by Robert Sherley. The envoys never reached Poland; according to some sources, the Russian Tsar Boris Godunov, acting in collusion with the Ottoman Porte, intercepted the mission and imprisoned its Persian leader, with only Sherley being permitted to make his way to England.

The papal mission of 1602 travelling through Poland and on to Russia in hopes of reaching Persia was likewise arrested by the Tsar. This mission was headed by Paul Simon of Jesus, a Barefoot Carmelite. On his way eastward, the friar spent two weeks as a guest at the court of Zygmunt III, receiving from the Polish monarch letters recommending him to the Shah. The interference of the Russian sovereign and the subsequent death of the Pope, however, translated into a delay of five years. When Paul Simon of Jesus and his train did finally reach Persia, the Shah lavished a warm welcome on the Carmelites, not only permitting them to erect a monastery, but actually providing them with financial aid.

One is thus inclined to agree with the historians who maintain that the next expedition to Persia, this one by merchants, had political goals in addition to its overt commercial objectives. In 1601, Zygmunt III, a consummate lover of the arts, sent Sefer Muratowicz - an Armenian living in Warsaw, supplier of carpets to the royal court - on the long voyage to Persia, more specifically to Kashan (now in north-western Iran), a major carpet-making centre. The instructions issued to Muratowicz were simple enough: he was to order carpets with the King's coat-of-arms from the local craftsmen.

Surviving in part to this day is the account of Sefer Muratowicz's journey in which he describes his contacts with the highest Persian officials as well as with the Shah himself. His was the first Polish report to dwell in such detail on the relations prevailing in Persia's ruling house.

What was ostensibly a commercial journey did not arouse the suspicions of Poland's enemies and Muratowicz, carrying an assortment of letters of safe passage, was allowed to continue eastwards unmolested. "Having a free letter from his Majesty the King", he relates, "so that I am permitted to pass by all countries with such things as I may have purchased in Persia, I travelled from Warsaw to Lvov. Without pausing there, I continued across Volynia, crossed the Danube, and travelled to the Turkish city on the shore of the Black Sea known as Mangalia. Having rented a ship there, I set sail for Trapezand prima aprilis anno 1601". Arriving safely, the merchant continued overland to Erzerum, Kars, then on to Erevan and Nahichevan, "a great city which the Turks had likewise taken from the Persians a while back". After 158 days on the trail, Muratowicz safely reached Kashan and set about procuring the carpets requested by his monarch: "There, I had made for His Majesty the King a few carpets with silk and with gold, also a tent and a damascene sabre". Some of the carpets brought back by Muratowicz were incorporated into the dowry of the king's daughter and are preserved at Munich's Residenz Museum to this day.

In addition to its commercial dimension, the voyage of Sefer Muratowicz had a less patent purpose - a diplomatic one. Historians believe that the main purpose of his trip lay in sounding out the real Persian attitudes with regard to the anti-Turkish league, in assessing her military potential, and in appraising the possibilities for establishing permanent diplomatic relations between the Polish Commonwealth and Persia. Muratowicz was also charged with mapping out the safest and most direct route between Poland and Persia for use by the anticipated papal mission as well as with exploring the feasibility of attempting missionary activity in the land. Muratowicz, taking advantage of his command of the Persian language and of his familiarity with the Orient, disposed himself very well, gaining the favour of the shah. In his account, as edited by the castellan of Smolensk - Kazimierz Ignacy Niesiolowski (1752), Muratowicz proudly recounts the words addressed by Persia's supreme ruler to the vizier: "Haten beg, I have had in my halls many different envoys, Muscovite, English, Venetian, and papal, but with none was I more content than with this man with whom I can converse in my own tongue - one has little taste for speaking through an interpreter". After Muratowicz's return to Poland, the king recognised his services by bestowing upon him the title of servitor ac negotiator which placed him outside the jurisdiction of the ordinary courts.

The successful mission of the Polish merchant-cum-diplomat blazed new paths and dispelled the lingering doubts. Persia, led by its energetic ruler, stood open for an alliance with the Christian states and for friendly relations with the Polish Commonwealth. Muratowicz quotes the shah as enjoining him to "remember what I discussed with you and please tell this to His Majesty the King, your lord and my brother, assuring him that he has in my person a faithful friend".

The information about the fabulous wealth of the Persian court, the magnificence of the shah's capital - Isfahan, and of the Persians' kind attitude towards the Christian religion all augured well. There ensued a vigorous exchange of envoys between the courts of the two countries. It wasn't long before the shah personally reaffirmed his friendship and his desire to work together with Poland in a letter delivered to the court of Zygmunt III by Mahdi Kuli Bek Turkman, royal dragoman, in 1605; in it, Abbas I declared his friendship, recounted his recent military victories, and proposed an alliance against the Turks, making much of their status as a common enemy. In this letter, the shah writes "we recount this so that friendship and love arise between us two lords, as deep as it does between the Christian lords. The Turk is a foe to us as well as to all you Christians". These portentous developments notwithstanding, history again foiled the plans for a joint anti-Turkish undertaking. Resolutions adopted by the Polish Parliament (Sejm) in 1605 and 1606 with a view to securing peace with the Ottoman Porte pushed the perspective of joint military enterprises with the Persians further away. King Zygmunt, anxious to preserve the promising contacts with Persia in spite of this setback, again dispatched the Carmelite Paul Simon on a mission to the shah; this time around, the envoy carried a fine gift from Cardinal Bernard Maciejowski, the Bishop of Cracow - an illuminated bible from France dating to the middle of the 13th century. The shah welcomed this priceless book, ordering the miniatures appearing therein to be supplemented by Persian-language captions. Following the downfall of the Safavids, the book was shipped to England; today, it ranks among the most valuable holdings of the Pierpont-Morgan Library in New York.

Although Persia lost increasing swaths of territory to the Turks during the conflicts continuing across the 16th and 17th centuries, it continued to put up a steadfast resistance. In 1609, yet another mission sent forth by the shah travelled to Europe in hopes of arranging an alliance with Spain, England, France, the Roman Empire, Poland, and Muscovy so as to mount a joint defence against the Turkish onslaught. Zygmunt III, however, was loath to wage war on Turkey; his reply to the shah, while courteous and teeming with protestations of friendship, was rather short on specifics concerning the proposed anti-Turkish effort. Subsequent overtures made by the Persians over the coming years met with similar replies, both on the part of the Poles and on that of other European nations. No consensus regarding a common struggle was reached.

Diplomatic efforts pursued towards this end by Wladyslaw IV, successor to Zygmunt III, were likewise unsuccessful. The mind-set of Poland's new king was belligerent enough; he surreptitiously promulgated legal instruments preparing for war, amassed funds, and sent his envoys out to countries which might conceivably be interested in joining an anti-Turkish alliance. Venice and the Papal States pledged financial aid; an alliance with Moscow also seemed a real possibility, and negotiations were underway with the Cossacks. The king also dispatched an embassy to Persia. In the year 1639, Count Teofil Stahremberg spent some time at the court of the shah, endeavouring to fathom the current political situation and to gauge the chances for a joint enterprise as well as seeking protection for Polish missionaries. Diplomatic intercourse with Persia was on the upswing again, with many a delegation from Poland, Venice, and from the Pope making their way thither. In 1647, an embassy on a grand scale to Shah Abbas II (1642-1666) was headed by the nobleman Jerzy Ilicz. As with Count Stahremberg before him, the purely diplomatic aspect of Ilicz's mission was augmented with an assignment relating to a Jesuit facility in the shah's domain; while the shah declined to mount a joint initiative against the Turks, he did accord multiple privileges to the order.

Albeit the anti-Turkish designs of King Wladyslaw IV encountered staunch resistance on the part of the Polish nobility, he laboured stubbornly towards their execution. The king's death in 1648 moved the spectre of war with Turkey further to the future. Soon enough, however, it became manifest that a confrontation with the Ottomans is inevitable. After 1650, what was heretowith a stable balance of power in Central and Eastern Europe began to shift; the expansive policies pursued by Turkey as well as the absence of an agreement with Russia was generating new alliances. While the spectacular triumph of King Jan III Sobieski at Vienna temporarily checked the Turkish advance, effective counteraction of the Ottoman threat required further military measures. The king believed it necessary to mount a concentric offensive against Turkey. "This is the time", he wrote, "that the ages have been leading up to, and should we neglect it, we will answer to the Lord".

While King Jan III Sobieski did conclude an alliance with Austria and with Venice under the auspices of the Pope, he also sought allies in the Muslim world. His greatest hopes were associated with Persia; in the course of his reign, no less than eleven Polish missions made their way to the court of the shah. Surely the greatest authority on all things Persian working in the king's diplomatic service was Bohdan Gurdziecki, a Georgian by origin. Already during the rule of King Jan Kazimierz was he sent on missions to Isfahan, and King Jan III Sobieski availed himself of Gurdziecki's talents in like manner (in 1668, 1671, 1676-1678, in 1682-1684, and in 1687). Gurdziecki remained at the court of the shah for several years in the capacity of special resident and representative of the Polish king; it was him who delivered to the shah news of the victory at Vienna. Other Polish envoys to Persia included Stanislaw Swiderski, Grzegorz Ortalowicz, Zukowski, Count Suski, and - on several different occasions - Konstanty de Syri Zgórski. The latter made no less than three trips to Isfahan, and this as a representative of not only Poland, but also of the Republic of Venice.

The long months of negotiations with the Persian shah, however, did not bring the hoped-for results. The envoy Zgórski and the archbishop Knab, ambassadors of the Holy League representing Poland, the Emperor, and Venice, had to return home empty-handed. In the course of a gala audience held on March 20, 1686, Shah Sulayman (1666-1694), a vacillating ruler who was very much under the sway of his viziers and who was interested in the arts much more than in politics, officially refused to participate in a joint effort against the Ottomans.

Yet the intensive diplomatic contacts were engendering dynamic development in the commercial sphere. In the course of the seventeenth century, commercial expeditions travelling directly from Poland to Persia became increasingly common, although this was by no means tantamount to a neglecting of contacts with Turkey - Poland's traditional trading partner in the East. The conflict between Poland and Turkey was one factor contributing to the increasing turnovers between Poland and Persia; another lay in the commercial policies of Shah Abbas I geared at stimulating Persian exports to India on the one side and to Europe on the other. It was with a view to such growth in trade that the shah ordered the construction of many new roads and bridges. What's more, Persian goods were generally superior to Turkish ones in craftsmanship and decoration, characteristics which could only add to their appeal. The items imported to Poland included encrusted weapons, shields, textiles, belts, tents, as well as magnificent carpets and jewellery. Although Polish tradesmen could never attain the stature of their counterparts from England or from Portugal, the wiliness, in some instances even insolence, of Polish merchants kept up a healthy interchange between the two countries. Many Poles engaging in commerce with Persia were of Armenian extraction, and they made good use of the presence of their countrymen and relatives in this exotic land. And even though this commerce was essentially limited to luxury goods and, as such, could not have too much of an impact on the general economic picture, the importation of Persian handicrafts was not without significance as regards the development of Poland's own industries.

As mentioned above, while the demand for Oriental products was very large in Poland, the route by which importers of such products had to travel in order to actually deliver them was a long and perilous one. Accordingly, there arose in Poland indigenous production emulating the styles and techniques familiar from Persian imports, eventually rarefying imitation into original styles, most famously in the workshops of Lvov. This city became the home of many talented tanners, embroiderers, weavers, goldsmiths, as well as of other specialists who drew on the repertory of Persian art in order to produce items which, while being original products, retained the refinement and subtlety of the Persian examples. At that time, the Persian art of decorating weapons, shields, and saddles, of weaving sashes and tents, or of tying carpets was without equal. Assets lists of noble families drawn up in the late 16th and early 17th centuries included many carpets imported from Persia. Some members of the aristocracy also collected Persian, Arabic, and Turkish manuscripts; many of these bibliophile items were owned by the Czartoryski family. It may be true that Armain of the Bibliothèque Nationale, travelling through Warsaw in 1747, issued a somewhat unenthusiastic pronouncement as to the quality of the Oriental collection of August Czartoryski, but the very fact that such collections existed testifies to prevailing interest in things Persian - suffice it to note that Jadwiga Zamoyska, lady of the palace in Kórnik, took lessons in Persian language and calligraphy.

While the primary motivation for diplomatic relations between Poland and Persia was certainly a political one, they had another aspect also- that of fostering outposts of the Christian religion. The tolerant policy with regard to Christians as well as the rights and privileges granted to the missionaries by Shah Abbas I (and affirmed by his successors) brought about a state of affairs where many people in the West gave credence to the rumours subsisting since Mediaeval times whereby there thrives, someplace in the East, a great Christian state. Abbas I himself - son of a Georgian mother, the generous protector of missionaries, a ruler who kept up lively relations with the Holy See - sat easily with these preconceptions, and returning merchants and travellers as well as the Church itself also did their part to fuel them. Muratowicz, for one, has written in his accounts that Abbas I wore upon his chest "a gold cross framed in diamonds" and that he told the Polish envoy: "dear guest, let it be known to you that I am no longer a Muslim, but a Christian by the grace of God and that I have learned well by the teachings of the Holy Father, the Pope of Rome, about the true Messiah, the God and the Man, Jesus Christ. And that I am of that faith which the Roman Church preaches the world over and which your Lord, His Majesty the King, adheres to. Hence, it is my wish that His Majesty the King, knowing this, trusts me as he would a Christian. It is true that I do not show this openly yet, having more Muslims in my realm than Christians, but - with the aid of God one in the Trinity - I shall make effort to the ends of beautifully leading all people, with no tumult or coercion, unto knowledge of Christ the God". We can well entertain some doubts as to the true intentions of the shah and, for that matter, to the truthfulness of these words, yet the fact that the Persian attitude to Christianity was a special one is beyond dispute.

The Muslim Persians displayed much interest in the graphic renditions of religious themes disseminated by the Catholic missionaries. Being Shiites, the Persians did not abide by the proscription on images of living things in painting and in sculpture; they saw some of the Christian imagery presented to them as beautiful works and extended due esteem to their authors. The makers of such images, also from Poland, exerted no mean influence on the development of painting in Persia. It is believed that the Pointed Gate Madonna from Vilnius was copied many times over by Armenian miniaturists working in Isfahan; images of the Virgin and Child were actually credited with salubrious powers - they were believed to protect pox-stricken children from blindness. Another work much copied in Isfahan was the Lvov Bible by Lazarus of Babert, published in 1619 and illustrated with scenes from the Apocalypse of St John.

As the diplomatic ties between Poland and Persia grew stronger, the importance of Polish missionaries increased, and they pursued their activities on ever-wider levels. As mentioned above, King Wladyslaw IV took the issue of Polish missionaries working in Persia up with the Safavid court through the intermediation of his envoys arriving there in 1636 and in 1647. At this time, the principal Western orders active in Persia were the Barefoot Carmelites and the Jesuits. The first Polish Jesuit to organise, in 1654-1659, a mission in Persia was Tomasz Mlodzianowski; he was well-phrased in the Persian language as well as disposing of a thorough understanding of the customs and rules in force at the Persian court. With time, the Jesuits, by gist of this very knowledge of the political situation prevailing in Persia, came to be included in embassies as advisors, envoys, and as ambassadors. Over the years of 1690-1693, two Polish monks, Jan Gostkowski and Ignacy Franciszek Zapolski, parleyed with Shah Suleyman II concerning a war with Turkey; upon returning to Poland, they provided their principal with much information about the shah's intentions and about the political situation prevailing in Persia and in the Caucasus. Their competence is borne out by the fact that King Jan III Sobieski appointed Zapolski his permanent resident at the court in Isfahan, at which he remained until his death in 1703.

Jan III Sobieski was generous in extending his support to Christian missions in Persia. In the year of 1691, he donated one thousand red zloties from his private funds to the Jesuit mission in Shamaha (now in northern Azerbaijan). He appointed the members of this mission "chaplains of the embassy of his Majesty the Polish King" and obligated them to accompany his envoys from Shamaha to Isfahan (for a period of fifty days) as well as to remain with them at the court of the shah for two months.

Particularly noteworthy among the Polish Jesuits in Persia was Tadeusz Krusinski. A consummate expert on Persia, Krusinski arrived there in 1707 and remained for well-nigh twenty years; he was an eyewitness to the downfall of the Safavid dynasty. Father Krusinski's Persian activities were not limited to the religious sphere; he also contributed significantly to the improvement of relations between the two countries. Retained at the court of Shah Hussain (1694-1722) as a translator, he produced Persian-language versions of letters arriving from various European monarchs (among them from Louis XIV), of treaties, and of contracts. He also maintained an archive for the use of the shah, ordering and storing documentation pertaining to religious and diplomatic missions. Held in great esteem and respect by the shah and his officials, he became - in 1720 - the procurator general of the mission.

Father Krusinski travelled extensively in the Orient. Accompanying merchant caravans as a physician, he traversed the Caucasus and Syberia; he visited Kurdistan and Turkey, Palestine and Arabia, he reached Afghanistan. Adding constantly to his knowledge about the traditions and customs of the East, he gained renown as the first European researcher of Persian history. One of his many books discussing the past of Persia and her contacts with other countries and religions, Tragica vertenis Belli Persici Historia (about the mission of Durri Efendi of 1720-1721), was presented by the Polish government to Shah Reza Pahlavi as a coronation gift in 1926. Krusinski chronicled the onslaught of the Ghilzai tribe of Afghanistan which took Isfahan in 1722, overthrowing the Safavids and ruling Persia with a bloody hand for ten years; he recounted these tragic events in Relatio de Mutatinibus Memorabilibus Regni Persarum. In 1725, Krusinski left Persia and travelled to Italy; it is there that he set to paper his work about the Afghan-Persian wars. It is purported that he himself translated this work into Persian; the Persian-language version was put out in Istanbul in 1730 by the first Turkish printing shop, that of Ibrahim Müteferrik.

The civil war which broke out in Persia in the second decade of the 18th century upon the invasion of the Afghans not only precipitated the demise of the Safavid house, but also put an end to the Christian missions in Persia. The last official delegation of the Polish rulers set out for Persia in 1712 under the leadership of Stanislaw Chomentowski, Poland's last envoy to that country. In the end, the long-cherished designs of a joint Polish-Persian war on Turkey could not be brought to fruition. Soon enough, any further exchange of envoys was prevented by the partition of Poland. The various Christian missions likewise disappeared. History continued on her course, but culture and the arts retained the traces of close contacts between the Polish Commonwealth and Persia from their days of glory.



Jolanta Sierakowska-Dyndo
Poland, Warsaw University,Institute of Oriental Studies