Archive Article: Poland Divided over Rospuda Valley

Originally published by the now-defunct WiK English Edition, part of Poland’s reputed Wprost publishing house, in May 2007

Into the Valley of Strife

The Rospuda Valley in the north-east of Poland is undoubtedly one of the most stunning areas of natural beauty in the whole of Europe where many rare species of bird and plants can be found which simply do not exist elsewhere on the continent. However, it is here that a sometimes-ugly battle has raged between the European Union and ecologist groups on one hand and local residents and the government on the other.

The reason for the conflict is that the government is on the verge of building a road by-pass – as a section of the Via-Baltica highway that will stretch from Helsinki to Poland and beyond - through part of the valley which has been designated by the EU as part of its Natura 2000 network of protected districts, and this is something neither it nor the environmentalist groups can tolerate. In their opinion, the planned road will disrupt the ecological balance of the area irreparably.

Yet the government says it is putting people first, though it insists it neither has any intention of ruining the valley either. It points to the urgent necessity of a by-pass around the town of Augustow, which has been beleaguered by the constant din of trucks passing through it from the Baltic States and Russia since the collapse of Communism led to a huge increase in trade between Europe and the former Soviet Union, which EU enlargement in 2004 did little to abate.

It is fair to say that the views of the EU and the ecologists have dominated coverage of the standoff in the international media, and for not entirely surprising reasons. Whereas they have well-worn PR tools at their disposal, the government – noted for its frequent clumsiness in its dealings with anything foreign - and the locals, more understandably cut-off from big-time media contacts, have struggled to present their case. Until recently, that is.

In early April, the ministry of the environment, which supports the locals’ stance, arranged a visit to the region for members of the international media, among whom were journalists from Japanese, British, Dutch and American news organisations.

I went along as one of the party and did so with the normal scepticism journalists should always take along with themselves on any such an arranged trip.

As we flew over the Rospuda Valley wetlands by helicopter, it was impossible not to be struck by the genuinely unspoiled landscape. On the ground, the sight was even more exquisite.

That the government would want to ruin this exemplar of natural beauty seemed the most heinous of crimes but the town of Augustow feels an even greater one is being perpetrated against it on a daily basis. Being there in person, however, you see that this happens by the second.

On the main road going through the town there is an unremitting stream of juggernauts and the noise has to be heard to be believed; it sends tremors throughout the whole town. Not surprisingly, the residents find it unbearable and they argue that the by-pass would rescue them from a predicament, which frequently involves people being killed in road accidents as well. Mention of the EU and the ecology groups that have thwarted the construction of the new road, is like spitting in their faces. One 85-year-old woman told me that she had moved to the town five years previously from Warsaw to seek a quieter life but now found living there a torment, adding that it was “an utter scandal” that work on the by-pass had not already begun.

“All we want is for the trucks to disappear from the town,” said Bogdan Dejuk, the leader of the Augustow residents’ committee, which is campaigning in favour of the road.

From the other side there is an equally strong case, because it argues that building a road there would create a precedent that Europe becomes just the same anti-environmental terrorist that the USA is often alleged to be. Once this road ploughs through the forest and disperses the wolves, birds and other animals hitherto living there to narrower corners of habitation, the argument goes, what is stop other initiatives turning beauty into the deadly and dull usefulness of concrete?

So the EU/ecologist coalition has devised an alternative road-plan that will go the other longer way round and avoid touching the Rospuda Valley, and the trucks will get to Germany and elsewhere without hurting any rare species of wildlife. But this will in turn collapse most of the villages that exist in its proposed wake into extinction, the government and the locals insist, making it impossible to cultivate the land they have fed themselves by for generations. The vitriol the mostly elderly locals aimed at Brussels during our conversations suggested a vitality they have regained in the light of the departure of so many younger through emigration, and they intend to fight.

The ecologists argue that they are being misled by the government, who have indulged in scare tactics to win their case.

“It is just not true that the alternative road will destroy as many houses as the ministry claims, because the total will only be 30,” said Anna Roggenbuck, of the Polish Green Network. “It is also false to say that people will be cut off from their farms, as the alternative plan includes a juncture that will prevent this from happening.”

In the end, it is difficult to imagine the locals winning, largely because their ideal is ultimately parochial, not universal and this latter perspective is by definition preferred by a body as large as the EU. In the villagers’ view, their families and way of life are under threat, something that is disputed by Brussels, though few, if any, of the bureaucrats have bothered to make the trip to the region to discuss these fears with the people, which goes to show that ‘universal’ can often be seen as high-handed and mean-spirited. On our visit, it was left to young Green activists to put the ecological case, which they did so bravely to the assorted ministers, mayors and other notables on hand and though there was little love lost between them, it was at least a moment – under the gaze of the international press – when both sides began to listen to one another.

Me and My Nationalities

The Worst/Best Countries to Write About

I work as a freelance journalist covering Central and Eastern Europe and this is my list of the most annoying nationalities I have ever dealt with. There is no political correctness in this at all.

1/  The Italians. I don’t generally cover southern Europe as such. My beat is the ex-Communist countries. But I did an article for Times Higher Education on Silvio Berlosconi’s idea to set up some egotistical university he had in mind and the people at his party Forza Italia said the comment would come “tomorrow, tomorrow, really. I promisa.” Forward to what exactly? Lazy bastards.

2/  The Spanish. They have had an investment or two in Poland a few times. But can you get them on the phone between 1pm and 2pm? Can you fuck.

3/  The Montenegrins. They do actually pride themselves on the fact that they are idle. They get away with it because their country is so small and wonderfully beautiful. But they exude futile promises that you’ll get your photos/comments by deadline with utter sincerity and they’ll never arrive on time. Tend to yawn when you complain.

4/  The Romanians. They seem to forget we’re on the same planet and that news matters as much to them as it does to me. I like their manner on the phone, just not when they put it down so easily.

5/ The Bulgarians. At least they have some astute commentators out there, they are just difficult to find. And when you do get hold of them, they’re generally on holiday.

6/ The Croatians. A cut above the rest in terms of wanting their message ‘out there’, mainly because they are almost in the EU but the Croatians are dangerously near the seaside, where there’s never “a signal”.

7/  The Baltic States – Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania – earnestly efficient and helpful. Gets on your tits a bit.

8/  The Poles. What a dramatic metamorphosis?  These days they are always very attentive when dealing with yours truly. But the act could have been cleaned up too much. There's little roughness around the edges. No conflict to get the blood rushing, which isn't really in their character. My only complaint. The Poles have been brilliant to me.

9/ The Russians. The maddest of them all. But they have turned things around stupendously. Even when dealing with obscure fishing industry contacts, where none of them speak English and there's often difficult terminology to deal with, they have been lovely.

10/ The Serbs. Because of the drastic change in such a short space of time. The PR people in Belgrade are generally hugely willing to assist and get you what you want quickly. One contact even did a telephone interview with me while he was pushing a trolley around a supermarket. Another time I got a call, just an hour after making my approach, the voice saying: "The governor [of the national bank] is now ready to talk to you." Class.

That's the top ten, in my humble and not so serious opinion.
 

.

Cameron and Hillsborough

Sorry is not the Hardest Word

In Britain, saying sorry is one of the things people find easiest to do, whatever Elton John thinks. Whether bumping into one another accidentally or stepping on one another’s toes those two contrite syllables trip off the tongue almost unconsciously.  But the sheer repetition of the word in daily life ultimately renders it meaningless.

In Russia, for instance, where I once lived, people would shoulder barge you in metro stations and let the doors whack you in the face without even the thought of an apology ever crossing their minds. As someone who arrived there from the UK it came as a genuine culture shock and, at least initially, struck me as utterly uncivilised. On reflection, however, the behaviour did contain a strong degree of logic. Why express such fleeting remorse to people you have never met and are unlikely to do so again in situations which recur millions of times a day?

Last week, the UK prime minister, David Cameron, apologised to the families of the 1989 Hillsborough disaster victims for the “double injustice” they were subjected to, in the fact that their loved ones had died so appallingly and that the circumstances of the loss of life had been covered up for 23 years. His words came across as genuine and heartfelt.

In June 2010, they did so as well when he spoke after the Saville enquiry into the Bloody Sunday massacre of 1972 found that British paratroopers had shot and killed 13 fleeing demonstrators, when earlier the official claim was that the soldiers had responded to fire from paramilitaries. Cameron’s remarks then came 38 years after the events themselves. One of his predecessors, Tony Blair, in 1997 also said sorry for the potato famine that happened in Ireland 150 years earlier. His comments that the catastrophe “had left deep scars” between Britain and Ireland were welcomed by many Irish people.

Some at the time, such as Jeremy Paxman, criticised Blair’s contrition as “moral vacuousness” given the number of years that had passed between Britain’s starvation of the Irish in the 19^th century and his statement. That can now be seen as a red herring after the carnage Blair bore much responsibility for, in Serbia, Iraq and Afghanistan, that truly made his apology look shallow.

Saying sorry implies that you will do your utmost not to repeat the action that you are guilty of, otherwise the gesture is worthless. And it obviously doesn’t work either that if you avoid repeatedly inflicting injustice on one person or group of people, that perpetrating exactly the same act on someone else entirely means you are off the moral hook.

This is one reason the British habit of apologising for minor infringements of others’ personal space appears as ridiculous as asking your host if you can use the toilet. On the surface both examples are marvellously humane. Think just a little about them and they really don’t amount to much. British politeness in many respects is a wonderful thing, though. Allowing others to enter or exit a shop before you do is an excellent habit as is the lack of jostling when boarding a bus. Saying “thank you” religiously when someone has done you a service, is also a fine thing indeed. Other cultures might pick up a few tips.

Having just watched the latest episode of BBC 2’s acerbic political satire series, The Thick of it, perhaps such quintessentially British etiquette stops at the doors of the corridors of power. But the tendency to say ‘sorry’ evidently doesn’t. 

Cameron’s apologies to both the Hillsborough families and those of the Bloody Sunday murdered were applauded by many but it remains to be seen whether he will be in charge when a similarly appalling episode occurs in the future. Little augurs well for him. The use by the police of ‘kettling’ during recent student demonstrations against the hike in university fees is particularly poignant. Then, young people were herded into confined spaces and found movement and sometimes breathing difficult. They were kept in these situations for hours. The parallels between the students’ experience and Hillsborough shouldn’t be difficult to draw. Many have warned about the perils of ‘kettling’, just as the writing was clearly on the wall due to other incidents before 96 Liverpool fans lost their lives in 1989.

The Hillsborough disaster, to my mind, was an act of class war. The evidence produced by the independent panel proves this. Liverpool football supporters were regarded by the authorities as subhuman. A few years before the South Yorkshire police, who had officiated at that fatal semi final, were also in action against striking miners at Orgreave. The precursors were all there, albeit with hindsight.

Some have dismissed the student protestors as rich kids with too much time on their hands, though this is in fact a lie. Many are working class and from ethnic minorities who see their chances of advancement blocked by a hostile Oxbridge-‘educated’ government. Both they and trade unionists will probably take to the streets against the flagrant cuts to their livelihoods soon enough, where they’ll be met with the full force of the law. And there’ll be no apology from Downing Street, whatever happens.

My Latest Piece in the Times Ed.

On Polish teachers and their fight to protect their conditions.

Teddy Bears vs Alexander Lukashenko

No Picnic for the ‘Last Dictator’

Family Guy creator Seth McFarland’s directorial debut, Ted, about a man whose boyhood wish that his teddy bear can speak comes to fruition, has met with mixed reviews since it opened but frankly I have found its detractors’ humourlessness aggravating, simply because the premise on its own is hilarious.

They share, in my view, something of the sensibility of Europe’s last dictator, the Belarusian president, Alexander Lukashenko, who, since July 4th, has been fulminating in all directions against a brilliant stunt by a pair of Swedish activists who flew a plane into Belarusia from neighbouring Lithuania and dropped hundreds of teddy bears bearing messages of support for the freedom of expression, something Minsk doesn’t favour much.

I wonder, when Lukashenko is engaged in his tirades against the sudden mass influx of the adorable toys from the air, how many of his population are absolutely cracked up in mirth at not only the thought but by the sight of these furry paratroopers ‘invading’ their land.

Knowing former Communist Europe as I do, I can imagine the hilarity practically rocking the apartment blocks of Minsk and elsewhere in the country, when their perennial president denounces Sweden and Lithuania, with his references to ‘teddy bears’.

Lukashenko’s sense of humour deficiency has never really been in doubt and he has been making some ludicrously violent threats against both Sweden and Lithuania, the latter apparently about to suffer ruinously from a diversion of Belarusian cargo, from that of the port of Klaipeda, towards others in the Baltic region. Lithuania is heavily reliant on its neighbour’s goods travelling over its land to be then transported over the sea. Lukashenko’s warnings against Vilnius would, however, damage Minsk more than Lithuania because his exports would probably dry up. 

The Belarusian’s bombast here is as ridiculous as is his aversion to foreign teddy bears dropping in. He has even threatened the interloping pilots with the KGB. Predictably, safe at home in Sweden, they aren’t in the least bit scared. Seth Macfarlane’s Ted would also undoubtedly stick one pudgy finger up to Lukashenko in response to his hot air.

Sometimes allies, sometimes foes, Lukashenko and his counterpart in Moscow, Vladimir Putin, are clearly of a kind, up to a point. But the latter has, by a whisker, more humanity about him, not least because he can allow himself to have it as head of a much larger nation. He has sung Fats Dominos songs to the delight of Hollywood stars and ridden in front of a preposterously contrived macho pack of bikers into the heart of Moscow, whereas Lukashenko is a complete square, hardly ever given to publicity-generating gimmicks. He clearly doesn’t see the need for them. The hard act will do and he will never be aware of the fact of his own absurdity.

As president of 10 million people, and with his desire to dominate them forever, Lukashenko views every intrusion into his country, whether from chubby-faced bouncing toys, perhaps into the arms of a delighted child - oblivious to the politics – or anybody or anything else as nothing to laugh about.

He’d have shot that light aircraft down if he could have done but he didn’t and there lies the power in the gesture. Lukashenko has sacked the military men concerned because they did not bring down an aeroplane of teddy-bear toting pilots.

The Swedish activists had a cause, which the West understandably supports. No one, least of all many Belarusians, wants Lukashenko. Vladimir Putin is also, by the day, with his awful and equivocal remarks on the Pussy Riot case, a pariah yet again. The Swedes can laugh their heads off at Lukashenko as much as they like, and good luck to them. The women in Moscow just had balaclavas, their anger and forty seconds in a church. It is much easier to protest from the clouds, if the local airforce is asleep and you get away with it. On the ground, you invariably can’t.

This all makes the West look superior but if a plane flew over London right now and emptied a cargo of teddy bears over the territory, it would not last long, I would guess. Those surface-to-air missiles, that gained notoriety prior to the Olympics, would soon come into play. Then the British would have to look at the current status of their civil liberties and much-vaunted sense of humour, as well.

The Olympics can lead to a good deal of self-deception. Back in 1980, the hosts the Soviet Union used a cutesy bear, Misha, as the games’ mascot and had a troupe of children-come-teddy-bears perform a loveable dance during the opening ceremony. I bet Lukashenko-the-throw-back won’t want reminding of that right now.

Raskolnikov: An Update, of Sorts

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Guest Blogger: Steve Porter on the Rangers' Debacle and Scottish Football

Part 2: The Revolution Will Be Televised

 “Football without fans is nothing.” – Jock Stein

The Scottish Premier League kicks off this weekend with a new look. Two fresh teams in the league for the first time in years, although Rangers absence from the top table has consequences for all concerned. It is not a decision that SPL chairmen would have taken were it not for the fact they were faced by a fan mutiny.

When asked what should be done about Rangers financial misconduct of recent years, over 95% of supporters of the other SPL clubs consistently said in surveys that they would not tolerate instant readmission to the SPL for the new Rangers. A fair number were threatening to stay away from the clubs they supported altogether if this happened. When it was suggested that Rangers only drop to Division One, many fans in that league followed suit. As we know, the Gers are now in Division Three and must work their way up.  

Dundee United’s Stephen Thompson summed it up nicely a few months back when he said the situation was “a lose-lose” one for chairmen. In other words, that had the choice of seeing more home supporters walk away or forego some of the financial benefits Rangers brought, such as a big away support and, more importantly nowadays, money generated from televised games.

One of the questions I considered when writing ‘Countries of the World’ was, what is a fan nowadays? Is it somebody who regularly goes to games or could it just as easily be someone sitting on their arse watching from the comfort of their own living room or the local pub? Traditionalists might argue with the semantics, but it is clear to me that the armchair supporter, whether considered a ‘real fan’ or not, has become more and more important – perhaps at the expense of those who actually attend games.

In my book I observed that the stadium can be half-empty and the club is not too concerned because they are still making money. But what if one day clubs were forced to choose? The current situation in Scotland has been something of a testing ground for this. It would seem that Jock Stein’s view, given that he was obviously talking about fans in the old-fashioned sense, has won out for now. The bottom line for Scotland’s clubs was that it made no sense to sacrifice their own loyal support in favour of outside forces. 

As it has turned out, Thompson’s Dundee United may be the SPL club least affected by Rangers’ demise. Their rivals Dundee, who play at Dens Park, literally a stone’s throw from Tannadice, were First Division runners-up and have taken Rangers' place in the SPL. The other week, a near capacity crowd filled Dens for a pre-season friendly between British football’s closest geographical neighbours. The unexpected renewed rivalry this season will have both chairmen rubbing their hands. St Johnstone, the other Tayside club in the SPL, should also be reasonably well-compensated by more local derbies with the old foe Dundee.

The new season will also see the first ever Highland derby in the top division, ensuring a few big gates for Inverness Caledonian Thistle and their rivals from across the Kessock Bridge – newcomers Ross County. This extra cash should cover for the loss of visits from Rangers, at least at the turnstiles.

It is the loss of money from the TV companies that is the biggest worry. Panic ensued when it became clear that Rangers would not be parachuted into Division One. SPL and SFA top brass could now see at least three years of football without the income Rangers generated and feared the plug could be pulled altogether on the TV deal.

The dust has settled now. Sky and ESPN have agreed terms to continue covering Scottish football for the next five years. The chaotic organisation of the game in Scotland, meant the SPL had to buy rights from the SFL for £1m to show some Rangers games in the Third Division, and then have discussions with the old and new Ibrox companies, before thrashing out a revised deal. Third Division clubs should cash in from the Gers’ presence, although many managers pointed out that it reduced their own hopes of promotion. 

One of the most interesting games could be the Glasgow derby between Rangers and those grand old Corinthians of the Scottish game – Queens Park. The latter of course, play at Hampden, so Rangers are still guaranteed a couple of visits to the national stadium. Queens Park have said they are hoping for a crowd of around 20,000 for the festive fixture. It’s impossible to predict but it will be fascinating to see how many turn up. 

The Daily Record has been instrumental in painting a very gloomy picture for Scottish football post-Old Firm (remember, they have to pacify their readership). The Record’s latest claim, made by Craig Swan on Wednesday, is that the loss of Rangers has cost the SPL £17m in TV money. But when you break that down, it’s over 5 years and split between 12 clubs, which doesn’t sound so apocalyptic. 

In fact, Hibernian and Dundee United have already sold more season tickets than last season, while Aberdeen, Motherwell, St. Mirren and even Kilmarnock (the only SPL club who did not vote to remove Rangers) are all reporting better sales than at this stage last year. 

What about Celtic you might ask? Fans of the Hoops have been as vociferous as anyone about sending Rangers down, even though it means one of the world’s most famous derbies disappearing from the calendar. Back in February, when Rangers first went into administration, Celtic chief executive Peter Lawwell said: “We look after ourselves; we don’t rely on any other club.” It remains to be seen how Celtic are affected without Rangers breathing down their necks. Will the lack of a serious challenge in the SPL have a detrimental effect? The club has kept a fairly low profile all through this affair, but they have admitted that qualifying for the group stages of the Champions League takes on even greater importance. But unless a new league challenger emerges, they look to be virtually guaranteed a crack at that every year for the foreseeable future. 

Whether Scottish football will survive has never seriously been in any doubt. News of its death has been greatly exaggerated. But the game north of the border has been badly in need of a shake up. It has come about through an unexpected series of events rather than imaginative leadership. More changes will have to take place over the next few seasons to avoid another mutiny. 

Steven Porter is the author of Countries of the World, a football-based novel that also deals with some of the major events of the 80’s: Thatcherism, the Falklands War, World Cups, military coups, dictatorships and disappearances.