50
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by Eger@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

Sikorski: Europe must urgently take more responsibility. Radosław Sikorski, a seasoned Polish politician and diplomat, has once again captured public attention as he actively participates in his party's primaries to select a candidate for the presidential election next year. For Sikorski, this campaign represents more than just another chapter in his career—it is a pursuit of his lifelong ambition to become the President of Poland. A victory would mark the crowning achievement of a career spanning decades, during which he held key roles such as Minister of Defence, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Speaker of the Sejm. Sikorski’s campaign is characterized by his emphasis on Poland's role in the European Union, a strong commitment to democratic values, and a firm stance on foreign policy, particularly regarding security in the face of Russian aggression. His eloquence, intellectual demeanor, and wealth of international experience make him a formidable contender. However, his candidacy is not without challenges. Critics have pointed to his wife, Anne Applebaum, as a potential image burden. A renowned journalist and historian, Applebaum is respected globally for her work on authoritarianism and history, but her outspoken views and foreign origins have occasionally drawn skepticism in Polish political discourse. Detractors argue that her presence might polarize certain voter groups, while supporters see her as an asset, highlighting their partnership as a symbol of Poland’s integration with Western democratic ideals. Sikorski recently addressed these issues and others in a candid interview published on YouTube, which has been widely discussed in political circles. In the interview, he presented himself as a pragmatic statesman capable of uniting a divided Poland. He tackled controversial topics with his characteristic sharpness, demonstrating his readiness to confront challenges head-on. As the primaries unfold, Sikorski’s ability to secure his party’s nomination—and ultimately the presidency—will depend on how effectively he can navigate these narratives, unite his base, and appeal to the broader electorate. For now, his campaign is a reminder of his enduring relevance in Polish politics and his determination to leave a lasting legacy.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Eger@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Yes, it is true that sometimes he turns out to be a foul-mouthed person and has made several controversial statements (probably the most famous one about the “negritude” of Polish foreign policy with US). On the other hand, his sharp retorts (for example to Vasily Alekseyevich Nebenzya) make it clear at the UN forum who is the aggressor and who is the attacked.

[-] BMTea@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

So what makes him special lol? Everyone and their grandmother is giving Russia "sharp retorts". Sikorski and his wife are both idiots.

[-] Eger@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

OK., You may dislike him (and indeed he has a large negative electorate), but you can’t simply say that he is an idiot. His big flaw is definitely his exuberant ego and difficult character. But compared to the current political class, R.S. appears to be quite an experienced and efficient diplomat. Just look at who has been conducting Polish foreign policy (and how 🫣 ) over the last decade. BTW in the US the political class is not at a higher level (many politicians confuse Holland <-> Poland) - aren't they idiots?? Apparently you haven't seen the interview I linked. The journalist is very substantive, and R.S. refers to his linguistic mistakes and stupid entries on X. He also mentions his stay in Afghanistan, confirming that war is a terrible thing.

[-] BMTea@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Yes, I do agree that European diplomats are generally more intelligent than US diplomats. But when you say stuff like "he also mentions his stay in Afghanistan, confirming that war is a terrible thing" I start to wonder if you don't work for him.

this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2024
50 points (98.1% liked)

politics

19246 readers
2779 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS