（华沙5月8日综合电）波兰首都华沙周六有超过24万民众上街示威，向右翼法律与公义党领导的政府表示不满，这是该党自去年上台以来，最大规模的示威。
示威由政党公民议坛及民间组织保卫民主委员会（KOD）发起，由于执政党属疑欧派，今次反政府示威正正发生在波兰加入欧盟12周年前夕，主题是“我们会继续留在欧洲”。参与的民众认为当局一旦脱离欧盟，便会破坏国家民主。
KOD自执政党去年11月上台后才成立，并得到国内其他反对党支持。
随着英国脱欧持续发酵，有分析师指无论6月23日的公投结果如何，英国脱欧这件事本身将对欧盟内部造成无法磨灭的创伤，并可能引发骨牌效应，更多成员加入到脱欧公投行列。
捷克总理索博特卡2月份曾透露，若英国退出欧盟，那么捷克也将就是否退出欧盟展开讨论。波兰总统杜达是个疑欧派，他去年在竞选时就明确表示，反对波兰跟着欧盟政策随波逐流，认为波兰应拥有更多主权。
?
华沙有大批民众上街示威表达不满。
波兰政府称欧洲议会涉波决议是“政治游戏”
2016年04月14日11:16 来源：新华社
波兰政府发言人拉法尔·博赫内克13日表示，欧洲议会关于波兰宪法法院问题的决议是一场“政治游戏”，是波兰反对党在欧洲议会活动的结果。
欧洲议会当天就波兰政治形势形成决议并发表声明，称对波兰宪法法院目前事实上的瘫痪表示严重不安，认为这一状况威胁到波兰的民主、人权和法制，呼吁波兰政府遵守欧洲委员会顾问机构“威尼斯委员会”对波兰宪法法院改革问题的评估，全面落实委员会的建议。
博赫内克说，从欧洲议会的决议内容中可以发现许多来自波兰反对党的观点，这些观点已经超越了“威尼斯委员会”的评价范围，该决议“仅仅是一场政治游戏”。
本月初，欧盟委员会第一副主席蒂默曼斯、欧洲委员会秘书长亚格兰分别访问波兰，敦促解决该国因宪法法院改革而引发的纷争。
波兰法律与公正党去年10月赢得议会选举后，推动议会通过宪法法院改革法案，将宪法法院通过决定的“门槛”由现行的“简单多数”提升至“三分之二”。
“威尼斯委员会”认为，波兰宪法法院改革法案将弱化波兰宪法法院职能，破坏民主、人权和法制。
欧盟委员会今年1月起对波兰宪法法院改革法案展开全面调查，以确定是否有违法治原则。如果确定违反，欧盟委员会有权对波兰实施惩罚措施，甚至剥夺其在欧盟内一些决议机构的表决权。
CAN POLAND RESIST RETURNING TO ONE-PARTY OPPRESSION?
BY JUDY DEMPSEY 5/11/2016
First, the good news. Tens of thousands of Poles took to the streets in Warsaw on May 7. Their slogan: We are and will remain in Europe. The huge crowds were protesting against the policies of the Law and Justice party, which swept to power with a parliamentary majority in October 2015.
The protesters hate the fact that Law and Justice wants to promote a nationalist and patriotic agenda through appointing judges, changing the way the constitutional court works and choosing directors of state-run radio and television who will do the party’s bidding. And much more besides. The protesters were challenging Poland’s future direction.
Pro-government supporters held a smaller counterdemonstration. Their slogan: Poland, have courage. They told Law and Justice not to give in to “cliques” around the center-right Civic Platform party, which they said hadn’t come to terms with losing the 2015 election after governing Poland for nine years.
Despite the big differences in size, the two demonstrations showed that civil society is alive and well in Poland. This is important not only for Poland but also in the wider context of Europe and Eastern Europe.
Civil society activists in Ukraine have been crucial in trying to curb the insidious influence of the oligarchs who have embedded themselves deep in the state institutions.
In Romania, civil society movements fed up with corruption helped elect Klaus Iohannis as president in 2014. The corruption continues, but the courts, belatedly, are beginning to mete out sentences to those abusing public office. The shift shows that civil society can change the political culture.
In the case of Poland, the latest anti-government demonstrations consisted of not only the parliamentary opposition but also a wide range of independent movements that do not want the state to encroach on their daily lives.
It was women, after all, who forced Polish Prime Minister Beata Szyd?o to back down on her plans to make the country’s tight abortion laws even more restrictive. She was bombarded with criticism and sarcasm via social media.
But now for the bad news about Poland. What is taking place in the EU’s fifth-largest member state is the politics of revenge.
Law and Justice, led by Jaros?aw Kaczyński, has justified its battery of political and personnel changes by saying that the party is only undoing what its predecessor, Civil Platform, did during its stint in power from 2007 to 2015. Yet before that, Law and Justice had tried to steer the country in a conservative, Euroskeptic direction during its previous term in office, between 2005 and 2007—a direction that Civic Platform reversed.
This polarizing politics of revenge has its roots in the Solidarity movement, which in 1989 succeeded in bringing Poland’s Communist regime to its knees. Then, both sides agreed to hold roundtable talks to pave the way for a peaceful transition to democracy. The very essence of those roundtable talks exposed the deep ideological splits in Solidarity.
One wing was dominated by liberal, secular intellectuals. They believed in inclusive politics during the transition period. Their shock-therapy economic policies were aimed at modernizing Poland as quickly as possible to end the influence of the old Communist nomenklatura.
The other wing, led by conservatives and anti-Communists, wanted a clean break with the past in a way that would amount to the politics of exclusion. These two wings have since continued to compete for Poland’s future—and for Poland’s past—regardless of the fact that the Communists are a relic and Solidarity as a movement no longer exists.
Fundamentally, more than a quarter of a century since the demise of the Communist regime, the differences are now over the direction and reach of the EU, particularly when it comes to values. For Law and Justice, the EU’s values—such as gender equality and a secularism that plays down Europe’s Christian traditions—are intrusive and damaging for Europe’s and particularly Poland’s identity.
The onslaught of globalization is another issue. It has left Law and Justice supporters, especially conservative, rural communities, without anchors—save for the Catholic Church. These parts of society were generally ignored by Civic Platform. Law and Justice now wants to rectify this.
But there is something else that perpetuates this kind of politics of revenge. It is the absence of an independent civil service culture. Professional and competent officials from the foreign and other ministries in Warsaw are being replaced or demoted. (The same thing happened in Hungary.) This robs ministries of continuity, of an institutional memory and of loyalty. It robs them of ambition and independence.
Maybe it’s time for civil society—especially Modern, orNowoczesna, a new and fast-growing political party led by Ryszard Petru—to begin campaigning for something that has eluded Polish politics since 1989: a well-paid, independent civil service free from the politics of revenge.
This is something that civil society activists are in a position to do. They are the younger generation—free, hopefully, of Solidarity’s bitter, polarizing ideological disputes.
(Judy Dempsey is a nonresident senior associate at Carnegie Europeand editor in chief of Strategic Europe.)
选择“Disable on www.wenxuecity.com”
选择“don't run on pages on this domain”
