Recently, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba made a statement at a school in Poland regarding Operation Vistula. He intended to use the issue to address Polish grievances over the Volhynia massacre, but his remarks instead provoked even greater anger among the Polish people. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk expressed an “unequivocally negative assessment" of Kuleba’s comments. He stated that if Ukraine does not resolve its historical issues with Poland, Poland does not consider Ukraine to meet the standards for EU membership. In other words, without addressing this issue, Ukraine should not expect to join the EU. " We need to settle this history if we want to build a common future”, he said.
Kuleba’s remarks effectively reopened old wounds in the historical relationship between Poland and Ukraine. While Kyiv attempted to clarify and downplay the statement, news almost immediately emerged suggesting that Kuleba might be dismissed.
Poles are particularly concerned with the Volhynia massacre, while Ukrainians focus on Operation Vistula. The historical relationship between Poland and Ukraine is complex, with numerous grievances on both sides. This issue is rooted in geographical and geopolitical factors. Landlocked or semi-landlocked countries, i.e. those with limited access to the ocean, have often found themselves as contested areas. Unlike maritime nations that typically face threats from fewer directions, landlocked and semi-landlocked countries are exposed to risks from multiple fronts and are often caught in the geopolitical rivalry of major powers. This is a challenge faced not only by Poland but also by other countries such as Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Landlocked and semi-landlocked countries often find themselves caught in the crossfire of major powers seeking to create strategic buffers and mitigate threats from various directions. This geopolitical struggle frequently leads to wars and conflicts originating in these regions, which can sometimes escalate into larger-scale wars. Poland's history illustrates this dynamic, as the Second World War, a devastating global conflict, began with the invasion of Poland.
Such countries often become war-torn and devastated. This situation prompts reflection on whether it is possible for geographically determined nations, whose tragic circumstances cannot be changed, to avoid the occurrence of wars.
Realism, as a strategic theory, is fundamentally flawed, and John Mearsheimer's offensive realism is an even more problematic variant due to its aggressive stance and widespread adherence. This perspective contributes to global instability. Major powers not only seek confrontation but also continuously pursue strategic buffers and expand their spheres of influence, which often leads to conflict. Poland during World War II serves as an example of a nation that collapsed and was occupied as a result of Germany and the Soviet Union's attempts to establish buffers. Similarly, the ongoing conflict in Ukraine reflects Russia's efforts to create strategic buffers.
Research in historical realism suggests that whether Poland chooses neutrality or militarization will determine the true future of peace in Europe. The key to breaking the vicious cycle from Poland to Europe and then to world wars lies in Poland's neutrality. This means that Poland must actively position itself as a strategic buffer in Europe, becoming a benign yet strong presence.
In fact, Europe has always been a precarious entity. Civilization and warfare have long coexisted in Europe, both in the past and present. For a long time, European intellectuals, for reasons unknown, have tended to overlook the evident issue that European peace remains uncertain. To address this problem and achieve genuine peace in Western Europe, only a strong Poland can make a difference. By choosing neutrality, much like Switzerland, Poland can become a powerful yet neutral buffer, actively serving as a buffer zone for all countries in Western Europe.
While Poland is currently a member of both NATO and the European Union, from a geopolitical perspective, these affiliations are essentially diplomatic formalities. Should there be a sincere commitment to resolving the underlying issue, various solutions could be implemented, such as leveraging mechanisms like NATO's third-country Partnership for Peace, to achieve a state of neutrality while maintaining a formidable military presence. Such a strategy could also provide a foundation for addressing numerous historical grievances between Poland and Ukraine. Additionally, should President Volodymyr Zelenskyy contemplate this direction, Ukraine might similarly consider the feasibility of pursuing neutrality in the future.
