I sit down with Lech Walesa, the former leader of Solidarity, Poland’s first communist-era independent trade union. He won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1983 and played an instrumental role in Poland’s transition from communism to democracy, becoming the first post-communist president of Poland in 1990.
We discuss the end of communism in Poland, the Russia-Ukraine War, and the continued fight for freedom in Cuba, China, and beyond.
“Communism’s days are numbered wherever it exists,” Walesa says.
Interview trailer:
Watch the full interview:https://www.theepochtimes.com/lech-walesa-communisms-days-are-numbered-wherever-it-exists_4992555.html
FULL TRANSCRIPT
Jan Jekielek:
President Lech Walesa, such a pleasure to have you on American Thought Leaders.
President Lech Walesa:
It’s my pleasure, I look forward to speaking to your audience. My time here on earth is slowly coming to an end. I am 80 years old, and I want to share my experiences, pass on what’s interesting.
Mr. Jekielek:
Mr. President, I want to read you something you once wrote. In 2015, you said this: “Just like once God put me as head of a movement, which overthrew communism in Poland and Europe, the same today puts in front of me a task to support all those, whose fight is not yet finished.” Can you explain what you meant here?
President Walesa:
Well, I stand by that, of course. I tried to do well in this role. I [tried] to fulfill this role. And my trade union “Solidarity” helped end Soviet communism.
Mr. Jekielek:
OK. So I understand you’re motivated to help others who are in a similar situation to what Poland was in back in the day. Could you can tell me a little bit about that.
President Walesa:
That is, wherever I’m invited or asked, as soon as I have the opportunity, I respond, I get involved, because that’s what I am obliged to do by the [Nobel] prize. I participate in different events, in different places, at different times. Today I’m quite involved in Ukraine-Russia matters. Of course, I’m a little less engaged when it comes to Cuba. I used to work a lot more with Cuba but in Cuba the processes of fighting for freedom are moving forward at a slower pace.
Mr. Jekielek:
Let’s talk about Cuba. We can talk about Ukraine a little bit later. Let’s start by talking about Cuba. Over a year ago, there were pretty large protests in Cuba. And actually these protests have continued. I saw a video from just two weeks ago. There was a pretty large protest in Cuba happening and frankly, a lot of our society isn’t aware that these protests have continued. And that they might be even happening as we speak. Mr. Orlando Gutierrez-Boronat who invited you [here], he’s told me that this might actually be one of the best moments for Cubans to affect change to the system.
President Walesa:
I think so, too. Communism’s days are numbered wherever it exists, because it is ineffective. Some of its ideas aren’t too bad, but they’re impossible to implement. And so it will fail everywhere. I’ve always told Cubans that to end it is one thing, but then to fill the void after its collapse with new solutions, that’s another. And so I asked them to prepare by thinking through how to privatize, how to resolve conflicts. There will be a lot of conflicts there because this is a generation raised under communism and it will be necessary to privatize quite a bit in order to implement capitalism. So the resistance will be great. If they are unprepared, they will have a lot more troubles.
Mr. Jekielek:
When people’s formative years happen in a communist society, what would you say is the overall impact on that society?
President Walesa:
First and foremost, [communism] kills personal initiative and promotes collectivism. It’s a fundamentally different philosophy from capitalism, where individuals are responsible for themselves and have to fend for themselves. In communism, the state controls everything, which makes it hard to change such people’s way of thinking and doing things.
Mr. Jekielek:
So you’re saying that initiative is the most important element? What about others?
President Walesa:
Of course, there are many factors at play, but initiative is the most important. Capitalism thrives on initiative, ingenuity, and wisdom. … [Communism] fails because it stifles initiative and tries to do everything collectively. As a result, it has lost and will continue to lose. The question is how much it costs us and how long we will have to wait for this system to end.
Mr. Jekielek:
In preparation for this interview, I looked up a letter that you published back in 2015. I’m gonna read the quote and I just want to get your reaction. “Communism as a system deprived of human values is incompatible with the progress of civilization and from the beginning was fated sooner or later to bankruptcy.”
President Walesa:
I had no doubt [about it]. And in that part of the world we made it happen. Cuba is a bit behind. But it will also prevail. The communist system has exhausted its capacity.
Mr. Jekielek:
This protest movement in Cuba is still ongoing. And in fact, it might even be increasing by some accounts. But at the same time, there is money coming in from overseas strengthening the regime and quite significant money. And that’s actually from free countries. I’m curious what you think about that.
President Walesa:
The essence of capitalism is a free market and the pursuit of profit. From this perspective, communism seems more equitable than capitalism, which is focused on making money everywhere. But while communism cannot be implemented in a practical and fair way, capitalism is always feasible and practical. Therefore, communism fails because it is not realistic and is too idealistic.
Mr. Jekielek:
OK just so I have this straight: in what way is communism a fairer system?
President Walesa:
Just look at its underlying principles. I have examined the works of Lenin, Marx, and Engels. They were highly intelligent individuals, but were primarily theorists. They devised a system that is appealing in theory, but unfeasible in practice. It is, as I have stated, simplistic, vague, and leads to abuse of power. There is a lack of oversight in it. Capitalism, on the other hand, is self-regulating and controlled by the market. Therefore, despite its less favorable principles, it is more practical and superior in practice.
Mr. Jekielek:
Mr. President, do you have a message for the Cuban people?
President Walesa:
You will certainly win, but you will face more challenges after victory than before. This is because a whole generation has been raised under a different [communist] ideology and holds those attitudes. They will initially dislike capitalism, so it is important to have effective solutions and have people in place who can quickly address these problems and prove the benefits of capitalism. I remember the challenges we faced in Poland after defeating communism. I was at a rally where there were about 50,000 people and despite my victory, they wanted to lynch me. Someone shouted from the crowd: “Things were better under communism than now.”
Mr. Jekielek:
Difficult to believe.
President Walesa:
Yeah, but my mind was working quickly, and I responded to him: “Are you a driver? Do you have a driver’s license?” He said yes. “That’s good because communism was like driving a car at 5 km/h and going backwards, while capitalism allows us to move forward at 100 km/h. If you are a driver, you know that you cannot go backward and forward at the same time. You have to stop first before driving in the opposite direction. And we are stopping Poland right now to go faster and better.” And so the crowd changed, they cheered for me instead of trying to lynch me.
Mr. Jekielek:
So this was in what year? In 1989?
President Walesa:
This was at the beginning in 1980.
Mr. Jekielek:
Oh in 1980, OK.
President Walesa:
Yes, at the beginning. But then it happened again in 1989. Therefore, people [in government managing the transition] must be prepared to respond quickly because once the crowd surges, it’s hard to stop it. But it must be stopped right away. So it’s important to have good and persuasive answers to prevent conflicts from escalating.
Mr. Jekielek:
So let’s talk for a moment about Mikhail Gorbachev who recently passed away. There are many media in the US and Canada and elsewhere that are giving him a lot of credit for ending communism. And I just wanted to hear what you think about that.
President Walesa:
Gorbachev was my friend. I admired him. One of the greatest intellects of the time. And that’s the conclusion he drew from that fight. When he rose to power as the First Secretary, the battle was already so intense that he couldn’t save the Soviet Union from collapse. It was impossible to stop. And that is why he did not try to stop the Soviet Union, but tried to save as much of Russia as possible. He used to say: perestroika, glasnost. He spoke amicably with various leaders and these leaders drew the following conclusion. “There was Stalin, a thug. There was also Brezhnev. But Gorbachev is quite a decent man. So let’s leave Russia to him.” Because after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia had to be held accountable for the whole thing. But Gorbachev’s behavior led us to leave Russia in peace. But he predicted Russia would rise again and a leader like Stalin or Putin would come and he would make up for those losses of the Soviet Union. And now it’s happening. [Putin] saved Russia. Russia has become strong and is trying to reassert its old influence. He worked it all out very effectively, he executed this mission very capably.
Mr. Jekielek:
Mr. President, just to be clear, you’re saying that you believe it was Mikhail Gorbachev plan all along to manifest this resurgence over time.
President Walesa:
It was a very clever and far-sighted concept for Russia’s defense. Namely, to wait for it to get stronger and for a leader like Stalin or Putin to emerge, who would try to regain lost ground. I respect Gorbachev, as he played a positive role, even though it was under duress. The situation was forced upon him, and as a result, he bet on a far-sighted concept. He aligned himself and the whole operation in such a way that he was able to save much of Russia. Afterward, Putin came in and is now trying to make up for the losses suffered by the Soviet Union.
Mr. Jekielek:
So there are a number of people in the West who don’t really understand why Poles have such a passion for helping Ukraine, for helping Ukrainians at this point in time.
President Walesa:
Simple reasons. We know that Russia has not come to terms with the loss of the Soviet Union. Poland was able to break away from the Soviet Union, but Ukraine remained. As president, I wanted Poland, Ukraine, and Belarus to enter NATO and the European Union together. Behind the scenes I fought for Ukraine and Belarus [to join the EU and NATO], and I planned to pursue it further in my second presidential term. Unfortunately, I lost the presidency and everything fell apart. It was a bad thing that this happened. But we must save Ukraine. However, this problem must be viewed in two ways. First, we must address the consequences of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, which includes murder and starvation. We must help, fundraise, and supply weapons. But these are the consequences. The root cause is Russia and its bad political system. It is not Putin or Stalin who is to blame. It is the political system that is to blame. If Russia had a political system where the president could only serve two terms of five years each, he would never have been able to build up such a gang. And it’s not just him, he would not have had helpers. Every helper would have known that their influence would end after ten years and they would be held accountable. There would not be this banditry. We need to convince each and every Russian that they are also being murdered and will continue to be murdered, and that together we will help them change the system.
Russia is a beautiful country with wonderful people, only they have a terrible political system. If this does not succeed, we should know that Russia consists of more than 60 Ukraine-like nations, which were conquered much like Ukraine was. Russia has forever been appropriating various nations, countries, and Russifying them. In fact, the whole world has operated in much the same way, building itself up in a similar way. And now, since Russia is too big and its system is too dangerous, we should encourage these nations to reclaim their sovereignty. And then Russia will be left with 50 million or so, and it will not be so dangerous. Russia will be grateful to us if we help them change their political system. It will be safe for the whole world. So we are fighting on two levels. First, we try to influence them to change the political system, where the president only serves two terms of five years each, and that’s it, no exceptions. And if that doesn’t work, then we should encourage its nations to reclaim their statehood and their sovereignty.
Mr. Jekielek:
That’s just fascinating. Now, do you think that all of these nationalities in Russia are actually ready to take on this kind of action?
President Walesa:
I tried to do this, but I was stopped by the powerful nations of the world because it turned out that the most dangerous weapons were not in Russia, but in these republics. These republics are unaware that they possess such weapons, just as Poland was unaware that it had a large number of nuclear weapons. Today we’ve discovered silos and seen how many nuclear weapons were in Poland. Therefore, if those nations had regained their freedom, it would have been dangerous because they would not have controlled or maintained those [weapons] storage facilities and it could have even led to an explosion. That’s why it was necessary to wait. Today, Putin made a terrible mistake, almost the entire world has rallied against him, and now we can do what I tried to do back then, but couldn’t. So, we can help them change their political system or encourage those nations to reclaim their freedom.
Mr. Jekielek:
OK, you mean just at one point it did?
President Walesa:
The world has always been divided, but as things progressed and intellect advanced, it ran up against the limitations [of nation-states]. When we invented bicycles and a few other technologies, we organized around the nation-state. This continued until the end of the 20th century. At that time, we invented the Internet, airplanes, and now we ran into the pandemic, among other things. These developments tell us that we need larger structures, as nation-states are no longer sufficient. Now, there are two concepts for expansion: the West is doing it through NATO, the European Union, and the UN, and we become part of these structures through the desire for democracy. This is one concept. But the Russian and Chinese concept is, as in the case of Ukraine, to resort to tyranny. To take away territory by force and increase their influence that way. Which concept will prevail? The peaceful one through NATO, the European Union, and democracy, where anyone can join, or the Russian-Chinese concept of annexation by force, and Russification?
Mr. Jekielek:
So would you say that this is what Poland is afraid of? Of being pulled into this Russian structure for lack of a better term?
President Walesa:
Of course. For nearly 50 years we had enough of it. And this system, as I said, has some interesting assumptions, but it is impossible to implement it. Nowhere in the world has communism been successfully implemented, because it is not possible. However, capitalism is worse in its assumptions because it’s based on competition. It is worse but it is practically feasible and it works, because people perform well when they’re free. Therefore, communism has to lose because it can’t keep up with the pace of development.
Mr. Jekielek:
So at this point in time, the US and some other countries are mobilizing huge amounts of money to support Ukraine. Do you feel there should be any limits on that?
President Walesa:
As I said earlier, here you have to consider two tracks of opposition. One is to help with weapons, food, etc. But remember that even if Ukraine wins, in a maximum of 10 years Russia will rise again and will do what it is doing now, because the system allows it to do so. That’s why one way we can help is by raising money and providing weapons. But at the same time, we need to fight to change the system so that Russia will not be a threat in 10 years, so that the next Stalin or Putin will not repeat this again when Russia rises. So, we have the dual task of counteracting the immediate impacts and also addressing the long-term cause. And that cause is a bad system that leads to the emergence of leaders like Stalin, Putin and others.
Mr. Jekielek:
OK, Mr. President, you were just speaking about Russia and China and that you see them as having a kind of similar outlook.
President Walesa:
China is doing it more cleverly. They are expanding their influence to Africa, other countries, they’re expanding their influence in other ways. And while this could be a good thing because they are growing stronger, but the problem is that their system is dangerous. It allows for actions similar to what Putin is now doing. If there were limits on the number of presidential terms, such as no more than two terms, and each term could not last longer than five years, then no one would be able to build a powerful political gang. The system itself encourages evil and is dangerous. It is not just Putin or Stalin, it is the system that allows them to act as they did.
Mr. Jekielek:
So I’m going to read you another quote from this letter that you wrote back in 2015. And you wrote this letter to a forum that was actually being held in Ukraine about 200 million people having quit the Communist Party. This was the Quit the CCP movement or the Tuidang movement [as it’s] also called. Today as it would happen or right around this time, it’s actually 400 million people that have quit the Chinese Communist Party. Here’s what you wrote. “This movement, this history’s tsunami as I deeply believe, nothing is able to stop it anymore. No one can stop a spirit of freedom and truth.”
President Walesa:
Yes, as the level of technical and intellectual development increases, individuals need more freedom and through that freedom, they become more creative. When the level of technology and development was low, there was widespread use of force, say a gun, to make people do something. For example, they could say “if you don’t dig out a 10 meter ditch, I’ll kill you.” And people complied. However, today, if someone were to stand beside me with a gun while I’m working on a computer, they can point it at the keyboard but it’s impossible to coerce creativity under the threat of violence. So, those methods might have been effective in the past, but they are not effective for today’s level of development. Therefore, those methods must not be used because they will fail. The only question is how long they will last and what price will we pay for their failure.
Mr. Jekielek:
So for people who are engaged themselves in this Quit the Chinese Communist Party movement, what is your message to them?
President Walesa:
Do it. But it won’t be easy. But do it also by showing people other solutions. Communism may even have been necessary at one point in history, when the first factories were established and factory owners were dishonest. Mass movements were needed to correct their behavior. However, today, with many capitalists and a free market in place, we have learned a lot and the system of communism is absolutely no longer suitable. There was a time in history when that system was suitable, but today it isn’t. It is not creative, it is utopian, and that is why we need to move away from it.
Mr. Jekielek:
OK, but at this moment, the Chinese President Xi Jinping, actually the dictator, he is actively promoting communism in China across society. He’s pushing the ideals of communism onto the populace as we speak.
President Walesa:
He doesn’t know how to do anything else. He was raised and spent his entire life under communism. Where can he go now? The only place he can go now is to the great beyond, so I don’t blame him. But the younger generation of Chinese, on the other hand, they see the world, they know there is the Internet. So, they will sooner or later reject it because it is utopian, it’s not realistic. It has to go away, but it will take some time.
Mr. Jekielek:
OK, so when it comes to contemporary Communist China, there’s a couple of things that are, I would say, foundationally different from what we saw back in the 80s and 90s in the Soviet Union. One is that there’s huge sums of money coming from the West and being funneled into China, supporting the regime. And the second thing is that there’s technocratic type technology, which is available the social credit system, I’ll give you an example. Right? On your phone, you have to have a green COVID badge, OK? If it’s a red COVID badge, you can’t take the train, you’re basically restricted from working, you’re restricted from all sorts of things and of course, this can and is being used for political purposes. This is rather different.
President Walesa:
That’s right. We are currently experiencing a shift in the way the world operates. Up until the end of the 20th century, the concept of the nation-state was prevalent, particularly in Europe. People worked for the state and country. However, now we have technology that requires a larger scope than just the nation-state. It is not enough to handle issues such as the current pandemic. This is why it is important for two major countries to come together and work on solutions for these problems. The United States should do it on a global scale, while Germany should do it on a European scale, with a few other countries to assist. They should gather a group of intelligent individuals and give them the task of developing a list of topics that need solutions on a larger level than just the national level, such as pandemics, airplanes, and the internet. Once the list is created, divide the topics into those that can be solved on the continental level and those that need to be solved globally. Then, consider what structures, programs, and funding are needed for these issues. For example, for global issues such as pandemics and migration, we are currently unprepared. If another pandemic were to occur, it could be devastating. As we open up to countries like China and India, migration will become a larger issue, and we are not prepared for it at all. The United States should work on developing global solutions, while Germany, with the help of a few other countries, should work on developing solutions for Europe. These are not difficult problems, but two possible solutions should always be prepared for such big issues.
President Walesa:
One solution is to reform existing structures. For example, if it is possible to reform the European Union or NATO, then let’s do it. If it is not possible, then let countries like Hungary or Czech Republic break up the European Union or its structures. Retain individual agencies or departments and propose new overarching bodies for a Union, new structures. Allow anyone who wants to join to do so, but make sure to place two boards at the entrance. On one board, write “If you come to join the union [or other organizations], you get certain rights.” On the second board, write “If you join the union, we welcome you, but you also have responsibilities.” Set laws and responsibilities so that issues like the ones we see today will not occur. It’s not that hard. Similarly, in economics. We should look at Europe or the world to see what resources each country has and let them focus on utilizing those resources. For example, France has beautiful grapes and should focus on making wine. Italy has beautiful historical objects and should focus on tourism. And Ukraine has beautiful croplands and should focus on feeding all of Europe. As for other countries, we should help them rearrange so that everyone has a place, but focusing on doing things that we all need. In the past, we used to build airports and other things based on strategic or political needs, but today we use economic criteria instead. For example, it is better to build an airport in Gdansk than in Berlin or vice versa, because it makes more economic sense from a continental or global perspective. We need these types of programs today. Currently, we have no leaders, neither Germany leads Europe nor the United States leads the world. Therefore, it is a very dangerous moment because there are no responsible leaders who are preparing solutions.
Mr. Jekielek:
Okay, so I have a question. So let’s talk about Germany. Germany for some reason believed that it could basically create a dependency for natural gas with Russia, right, but right now Nord Stream 2 is closed, has not been opened and Nord Stream 1, the taps have actually been closed and you know, there’s some discussion about why. They’re saying that there was some kind of accident or something like this. But this is a dire situation for Germany. Meanwhile, Poland I’ll just add, actually has provided for its energy needs from other sources. So what are your thoughts here? What was Germany thinking?
President Walesa:
I told you before that Gorbachev misled us. We left Russia alone, believing that Gorbachev and others would follow the right path because they had started on it. It was already going well under Yeltsin and under Gorbachev as well. However, what Gorbachev did was to save Russia and Russia rose again. Then Putin came and is ruining it all. So it’s important to understand the processes that have occurred and are still happening. We believed, and the Germans believed, that Russia would act logically and democratically because Gorbachev started on the right path. But it turned out that he waited, built up Russia, knowing that someone like Putin and like Stalin would come and make up for the Soviet Union’s losses. And that’s what happened.
Mr. Jekielek:
So there’s this phenomenon, I guess, throughout human history, when a small group of people amasses considerable power, they’re not often too eager to give it up. And, you know, I guess my question is, are you at all concerned as we have these even in free countries these power structures, like for example, the European Union, you know, increased concentration of power in the hands of unelected bureaucrats, and especially augmented by these various new technologies that we’ve been discussing. Are you at all concerned that this could become a problem for the world?
President Walesa:
You are right, only you have to situate it a little differently. We have come to live in a new epoch. The prior epoch of states, countries, divisions, blocs has ended and a new epoch of intellect, information, globalization has begun. But these are empty concepts which we need to fill with content. So this one epoch has fallen during our lifetime. A new one has emerged, and we are in the middle. I call this middle [part] an epoch of words and an epoch of discussion on how this world is supposed to look. Pretty much nothing from the old epoch fits with the new one. Look, today left-wing parties are further to the right than right-wing ones and vice versa. See, Christian parties say they are Christian, but there is not a single believer there. In the past things might have looked like that, but today we need to start putting [things] in order. Today the situation is not bad only on one area: traffic regulations. Imagine what today’s world would look like if all traffic signs and traffic regulations were removed from the streets. Can you imagine what would happen if there were no traffic signs and regulation? But that’s the way the world is today. Because the old ones don’t fit, and there are no new ones. There cannot be any, because this is a new epoch and the previous one was dirty, with wars and deception, and where no one trusts anyone. So that’s why we call it the epoch of words. You have to convince me and I have to convince you and only then will the construction begin. Three big problems have emerged. The first problem is that you can see the new epoch but what foundation do you propose for this new era? Each country has a different foundation and even different religions and faiths. When you formulate the problem like this, then two issues emerge. Half the world wants to build a future based on all kinds of freedoms, in a free market, and rule of law.
President Walesa:
The other half says that’s not good. First, let’s agree on values such as the 10 secular commandments, and only then can we have the free market and rule of law. We cannot jump out of this division. If we can handle this, we will face a second problem. What economic system should we have? There are two big ideas: capitalism and communism. Communism didn’t work anywhere, so we can discard it. But capitalism was good when there were states and countries, when there was competition. However, capitalism led many to fail in this competition and go on unemployment. This new capitalism aims to find all the unemployed and put them to work. So the free market will be kept from capitalism, but we need to set up everything else not for nation-states, but for continents and globalization. This is the second problem. And there is the third problem of how to deal with the demagoguery, populism, and deception of politicians within these larger structures. We need to note that until the end of the twentieth century, we had God. Each country, quietly in the background, there was God operating somewhere in the back of peoples’ minds. But we have shifted away from that. At that time, we were afraid of communism and the Soviet Union, and we dealt with it. But how do we maintain nations today that have no restraints and no fears? Our generation faces three problems at the start of this new epoch. We have to discuss everything. You must convince me, and I must convince you, and then construction will begin. Many say we won’t make it, there have already been civilizations like ours a few times in this world, on this earth. They even built pyramids, which we are not able to build. And someone destroyed these civilizations. So we are in the moment that either we destroy our lives as they did, or we save ourselves.
Mr. Jekielek:
So a number of people that I’ve been speaking with are actually quite concerned that you know, if the world does go in this globalist direction or internationalist direction, that the end result will be something like a totalitarianism à la communist China.
President Walesa:
So throw away your phone, because first of all, globalism is smartphones all around the world, throw away satellite TV, airplanes – this is globalism. Globalism – it depends on what we put into it and how we arrange it. For now, these are empty or inaccurate concepts. And that’s where the concerns come from because it’s not refined. Globalization is needed to fight pandemics because without globalization, we can’t handle pandemics. So globalization is needed. Airplanes, internet, cell phones, all need it. This is globalization. People are afraid, because they don’t understand globalization. I find the anti-globalists the funniest. They hold big meetings at which they denounce us, and then take a cell phone and tell the press how they denounced us. But they should use carrier pigeons to communicate, not the phone, because the cell phone is globalization.
Mr. Jekielek:
So it’s perfectly within the realm of imagination that you could have nation-states based on or rooted in certain faiths and certain ideologies and then functioning together in this connected structure like you’re describing, having to negotiate, having to debate, having to trade. What do you think?
President Walesa:
Of course, let’s only do what is necessary. But for airplanes, there must be a global connection. Cell phones also have to be global, so let’s do what must be done, what is convenient, and what we need. And let’s keep what we want to keep. It’s just a matter of wisely determining what is required more and what isn’t.
Mr. Jekielek:
So what do you think the role of the United States should be in the world at this point in time?
President Walesa:
As I said, America should take responsibility for the world. And I don’t mean hand out dollars or fight for us, but organize us to meet the needs as they arise, to address the issues that appear. America should act as a great world organizer. After that, there should also be continental organizers. Since Germany has the greatest power in Europe, it should select 2 or 3 countries and prepare positive solutions for all relevant issues. And only then, as you reform these old structures and see how some things work and some don’t, you come up with new solutions and implement them. Germany is feared from the old era. But that epoch was a time of wars for nation-states. And today there is an era of continents and globalization. So, a different role for Germany, not one of rivalry or war.
Mr. Jekielek:
Of course, I guess this is what I’m trying to get at. The US at the moment has quite a few of its own problems that it has to deal with. Some pretty significant challenges.
President Walesa:
In that case the simplest thing is for America to entrust its capabilities to Poland, and we will take responsibility.
Mr. Jekielek:
So jumping back to China for a moment, right now, there’s a lot of military activity across the Taiwan Strait. There’s some people that believe that China is actually going to make a move on Taiwan imminently. What are your thoughts about this?
President Walesa:
Well, Taiwan is better off. People live better there than in China. Let them choose a China that is better and richer, not a China that is worse off. The key issue is whether mainland China can achieve the potential and output and wealth like Taiwan has. If it can, then go ahead, but it’s just not able to. China thinks it will take Taiwan to help the mainland out of poverty. But that’s not fair, it’s not honest. Furthermore, expansion of territory should be through freedom and democracy, on a voluntary basis, not through the forced annexation like with Russia and Ukraine.
Mr. Jekielek:
Okay, so what would you say is the biggest threat to the world as we speak?
President Walesa:
Lack of common ground, lack of understanding. In the old epoch, we respected rights without obligations, freedom without responsibility. We need to correct that now. You have a right, you have an obligation, freedom and responsibility, because this is a different epoch. Previously, there were nation-states, so there were different needs, and we set the world up differently. Today we have to do it differently. So, agreements, talks, discussions and in this way we should solve problems. The question for me, for revolutionaries, is how many hits we have to take, how much blood will be spilled in order to follow the right, wise path.
Mr. Jekielek:
Mr. President, it’s been a pleasure. Any final thoughts as we finish up?
President Walesa:
Our generation happens to live at a time when epochs are shifting. The era of nation-states and blocs is over and the age of intellect, information, and globalization has begun. We, who are in the middle, must figure out through discussions how this world should look, identify opportunities for development, and assess potential dangers. Through discussion, we will develop programs and structures to implement them. If we do not take action as I propose, we risk destroying our lives on this planet.
Mr. Jekielek:
Mr. President, Lech Walesa. I am very pleased to talk to you.
President Walesa:
It was nice talking with you. I always like to express my gratitude at the end, so thank you very much.
-
The Real Story of January 6 | Documentary BUY Jan 6 DVD: https://www.epochtv.shop/product-page/dvd-the-real-story-of-january-6, Promo Code “Jan” for 20% off.
-
Follow American Thought Leaders on social media:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AmThoughtLeader
Truth Social: https://truthsocial.com/@AmThoughtLeader
Gettr: https://gettr.com/user/amthoughtleader Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AmericanThoughtLeaders Gab: https://gab.com/AmThoughtLeader Telegram: https://t.me/AmThoughtLeader
Opmerkingen