Tusk questions the Kremlin’s “friendship”

Poland considers the draft report of the Russian Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC) on the reasons for the Smolensk catastrophe “unacceptable.” Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk, who is always deliberate in his speech and rarely makes critical statements, said this to journalists in Brussels. “The draft report of the IAC, in the state it was submitted by the Russian side, is unacceptable without a discussion. Some conclusions of Russian experts regarding the catastrophe of the Polish government plane are groundless altogether. I don’t say they are falsified, but our investigation doesn’t confirm them,” TVN24 cites the head of the government. The prime minister of Poland also pointed out that commentaries of Polish specialists, which, according to the media, take up 150 pages to the 210-page draft report of the IAC, are not alternative explanations for the catastrophe.

“We do not express this opinion regarding the whole report, we do not offer final conclusions, the Polish party only singles out specific places where Russians didn’t fulfill the requirements presupposed by the Chicago Convention,” said the Polish premier. In October the IAC submitted to Poland a draft project about the reasons for the Smolensk catastrophe, as a result of which 96 citizens of Poland, including ex-president Lech Kaczynski, died on April 10, 2010. According to Gazeta Wyborcza, the Russians first of all blamed the pilots of the plane Tu-154, who decided to land the aircraft in extremely foggy conditions. At the same time, some specialists suppose that the incorrect information, which a traffic controller of the Smolensk military airfield gave the crew, was the reason for the catastrophe. As a result the plane tried to land a kilometer from the landing strip. According to one of the versions, the outdated radar of the airfield, which was certified by the IAC, may have provided incorrect data. According to the Chicago Convention, the Polish party had 60 days to send their comments regarding the prepared document (by December 19). At this, the convention does not determine the terms when Russians are supposed to send a document about their reaction to the comments of the Poles.

COMMENTARIES

Andrzej SZEPTYCKI, analyst of the Institute for International Relations, Warsaw University:

“Tusk’s statement shows that the time of ‘friendship’ between Poland and Russia, which we witnessed after the Smolensk tragedy, is about to be over. I think Tusk and Moscow had the will to make this catastrophe an instrument of improving Polish-Russian relations. However, when the parties faced specific questions, we see that this friendship is impossible due to internal Polish problems and became a hostage of objectivity in the investigation of this catastrophe. It seems to me that for political and technical reasons Russians do not want to assume their responsibility openly. On the other hand, Poland does not want it to be the responsibility of the Polish party alone, and hence, proof of bad organization in the Polish army. Now that Poland presented its proposals regarding the Russian report, Russia has two possibilities. First, it can involve Polish proposals in this report, or it can write a new report using the Polish position as well. Secondly, it can ignore Polish suggestions and then prepare a separate report and separate Polish comments to the report. The first option is better for Polish-Russian relations. But it seems to me it is unrealistic because Poland has too many comments to this report. Since the Russian report takes 200 pages, and Polish comments – 150 pages. I think that in one or another way the differences in the positions of Poland and Russia will be voiced. Certainly, it does not mean the end of the cooperation between Warsaw and Moscow. But there will be one more issue in the long history of bilateral relations between them: the Smolensk catastrophe. There was a hope that Smolensk would become a factor in the rapprochement of Poland and Russia. Now, if the Russian party does not include the comments of the Polish side, this will be one more problem on the political level between the two countries. In view of the role of Poland in the EU and the wish of Russia to have good relations with Warsaw, the Smolensk catastrophe will be a minus in the balance of Polish-Russian relations.”

Lilia SHEVTSOVA, researcher at the Moscow Carnegie Center:

“This statement of Tusk was to be foreseen. In Poland, not only in the environment of the opposition but also in society, there is a feeling that there is a number of obscure questions regarding the catastrophe and its Russian explanation. He made this statement being guided by the sentiments prevailing in the Polish society. It is probable that the Russian side will try to answer the questions of the Poles. This fact alone gives rise to doubt that our new Russian-Polish partnership is stable. At the same time, I don’t see reasons for the Russian side to strike an attitude or try to accept the statements of Tusk and requirements of the Poles as a reason to give itself airs, demonstrate a new aggression or a tough position. The Kremlin and Russian leaders are interested in Poland becoming a Russian partner. Poland is to some extent the golden key by means of which the Russian government wants to open the hearts of Europe and improve its image there. Therefore, normal and productive state relations with Poland are very important for the Russian government. I do not expect any crisis or tension connected with it. However, Tusk’s statement will provoke discontent in Russian circles. Everyone understands that on the Russian part there were serious technical problems with the airport and with the safety level in the sphere of flights. However, at the same time, I see one thing among the major part of the elite of the Polish government and the European elite: the wish not to exacerbate relations with Russia now and attempts to prove that there are reasons for the ‘reset’ of relations with Russia. So far that is Europe’s attitude. But this is the Europe of executive governments. At the same time, on another European level, closer to the European public opinion, the parliamentary Europe, we see an absolutely different tendency. Look at what is happening in the European Parliament, or the PACE. The committee for international issues almost unanimously approved the resolution where it recommends that European states introduce a visa ban for those Russian officials who were involved in the Magnitsky case. This is also an indicator that the entire segment of the European public opinion is dissatisfied with the policy of connivance of Brussels’ Europe in relations with Russia.”