Joanna Mosiej

Joanna Mosiej: I would like to begin our conversation with your family history, because on many levels it serves as a metaphor for our Polish-Ukrainian relations. I am referring to your ancestors, the Szeptycki brothers. Roman (Andrey Sheptytsky - head of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, Metropolitan of Galicia, Archbishop of Lviv (1901–1944) - Edit.) converted to the Greek Catholic faith, entered a monastery, and later became Metropolitan. Another brother, Stanisław, first served in the Austrian army, and after the war became a general in the Polish army. Both were patriots, individuals deeply devoted to the countries they served. And they maintained a fraternal bond.

Professor Andrzej Szeptycki: Of the five Szeptycki brothers, two identified themselves as Ukrainians - Metropolitan Andrey Sheptytsky and Blessed Father Klymentiy - and three were Poles. I am referring to General Stanisław Szeptycki and also his brothers, Aleksander and my great-grandfather Leon. Metropolitan Andrey and Father Klymentiy regularly came on holiday to rest at the family home in Prylbichi in the Yavoriv district, where my great-grandfather Leon Szeptycki later lived. Despite their national differences, they maintained good relations with each other until the end of their lives.

They proved to us that different national identities can coexist without excluding one another.

I believe it was also very important that in the case of each of them, national identity was a significant element of life, but not the only one. In the case of Metropolitan Andrey and Father Klymentiy, their vocation and religious choices were primary as clergy. General Stanisław Szeptycki, as a soldier of that time, first served in the Austro-Hungarian and then in the Polish army and sought to serve his country well. They were certainly patriots - of each nation with which they identified. On the other hand, it is very important that they were certainly not nationalists. And this allowed them to respect different views while remaining close to one another.

Was such a legacy, a borderland identity, a value or a curse for your family? How does it define you?

During the communist period, it was somewhat of a challenge, a burden. The communist authorities viewed representatives of the former noble class negatively. In the case of the Szeptycki family, this was further combined with a very strong propaganda narrative directed against Ukrainians in Poland. And, of course, directed personally against Metropolitan Andrey, who was portrayed as a Ukrainian nationalist and spiritual father of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army. During the communist period, and even in the 1990s, relatives quite regularly heard that Szeptycki is a Banderite». Nowadays, this has practically disappeared. I experienced this myself in 2023 when I was running an election campaign. The few voter reactions to my name were generally positive. In this sense, it is a significant change.

Apart from comments on social media, of course.

Yes, there I am often called Szeptycki - a Ukrainian, a Banderite. And surely there is a portion of society that will always react in this way. Returning to how it defines me, ever since our student years, my cousins and I have quite often travelled around Ukraine.

Some of us needed only one trip, while others stayed longer, for life. My cousin moved to Lviv a few years ago at the age of 50. Another cousin established the Szeptycki Family Foundation, which became actively involved in supporting Ukraine after February 24th 2022.

How do you explain this outburst of solidarity among us in 2022?

I believe there are three important factors. Firstly, the simple human need to help. Altruism which arises when we witness the suffering of others and react without much consideration.

Secondly, the shared experience of Russian imperialism. This has always resonated with Polish society. It is worth recalling the Polish response to the war in Chechnya - the reception of refugees, the clear sympathies. Or the year 2008 and the war in Georgia. Poland does not have strong cultural or geographical ties with Georgia, yet the reaction was vivid. We remember President Lech Kaczyński’s visit to Tbilisi and his prophetic words: today Georgia, tomorrow Ukraine, the day after, perhaps the Baltic states, and then Poland. But most importantly - and in my opinion decisively - is the fact that none of this arose in a vacuum. This solidarity did not suddenly sprout in a desert, but on rather fertile ground which Poles and Ukrainians had been cultivating together over the past three decades.

From the 1990s, both sides carried out considerable work to develop interpersonal contacts. In 2022, many Poles were not helping «refugees». We were, for the most part, simply helping friends

Keeping in mind the great importance of the prior presence of Ukrainian refugees who had arrived in Poland since 2014, economic migrants from Ukraine, and the Ukrainian minority, primarily descendants of the victims of Operation Vistula.

Of course. Since the beginning of the war, that is, since 2014, or even since 2004, the Ukrainian minority in Poland has played an important role in supporting Ukraine - collecting funds, purchasing equipment, sending that equipment to the frontline. And receiving Ukrainian military refugees after February 24th 2022. Undoubtedly, the role of this community cannot be overestimated.

Precisely. You have been researching Polish-Ukrainian relations for many years. How have they changed? How has the Poles’ perception of Ukrainians changed?

It has been a long process. From the establishment of mutual contacts in the 1990s, through the Orange Revolution, the Revolution of Dignity - up to 2022. And, on the other hand, through the long-term presence in Poland of a significant group of economic migrants from Ukraine. Let us not forget that none of this would have been possible without the consistency of Poland’s Eastern policy and the legacy of the thought of the Paris-based «Kultura» and Jerzy Giedroyc personally. This belief in the importance of Ukraine, the importance of good relations, the necessity of support.

We were the first country to recognise Ukraine’s independence.

And it is worth mentioning a very important, albeit little-known, moment in Polish-Ukrainian relations on the eve of the USSR’s collapse, namely the participation of the Polish delegation of civic committees in the 1st Congress of the People’s Movement in Kyiv in 1989. The presence of representatives of the Polish civic committees, including Adam Michnik and Bogdan Borusewicz, was a symbolic gesture of support for Ukraine from Polish «Solidarity» at a time when Poland was still part of the Warsaw Pact and Ukraine still within the USSR.

And what were the subsequent milestones of our cooperation?

First and foremost, the three key events of the past two decades, which I have already mentioned: the Orange Revolution, the Revolution of Dignity, and the full-scale Russian invasion in 2022. Each of these was met in Poland with clear public interest and a broad response of solidarity.

A sense of shared destiny, the legacy of Solidarity and the struggle for independence played an important role. At times, analogies were even drawn: it was said that Ukrainians in 2022 found themselves in a situation similar to that faced by Poles during the Second World War. The exhibition «Warsaw - Mariupol: cities of ruins, cities of struggle, cities of hope» was one such attempt to draw this symbolic parallel: cities levelled to the ground, the suffering of civilians, resistance. But it was also accompanied by another, no less important conviction: that Ukrainians today are facing something we, fortunately, are not experiencing - a classic violent conflict with Russian imperialism. And this solidarity manifested itself in Polish assistance.

What can we do to ensure this unprecedented solidarity seen in 2022 is not wasted? Today, in addition to the demons of the past, such as Volyn’ and the issue of exhumations, there are pressing social and economic problems.

Firstly, it is important to realise that no surge of solidarity lasts forever. The enthusiasm for Ukrainians that erupted after the beginning of the Russian invasion has gradually waned, and we are now in a phase where tension and fatigue are beginning to accumulate.

For most of its recent history, Poland has been a country of emigration - people left in search of work, bread, a better life. The issue of immigration was virtually absent from public debate. Today, the situation has changed. Around two million Ukrainians live in Poland - both economic migrants and people who fled the war. This is an entirely new social reality and a challenge to which we must respond consciously. Other challenges, including economic ones, must also be taken into account.

The pandemic, war and inflation - all of these influence the public sentiment. When people start running out of money, their willingness to show solidarity with «new neighbours» may weaken

Especially since they are constantly exposed to populist narratives claiming that immigrants take away our social benefits and our places in the queue for doctors. And that Ukraine does not agree to exhumations.

Yes, this is precisely why Polish-Ukrainian relations are no longer merely a matter of the past, but one of the key challenges for the future of Central and Eastern Europe. It is therefore important to defuse historical disputes, such as those concerning exhumations. It is very good that an agreement has recently been reached on this issue. Even if discussions on exhumations in the short term revive the Volyn’ issue, in the long term they will help resolve it. However, it is important to recognise - and I say this quite often to both Polish and Ukrainian partners - that at present, the key issue is not history. A major challenge lies in the broad economic matters related to Ukraine’s accession to the European Union.

We must recognise that Ukraine is not a failed state from which only unskilled workers or refugees come to Poland.

Despite the war, Ukraine has advantages in many areas that will pose a challenge to Poland when it joins the EU single market

Of course, Ukraine's accession to the EU is in Poland’s strategic interest. However, these are developments that we must be aware of, which we must closely observe and take action to prevent conflicts in these areas.

Therefore, at present, the real challenge is not the issue of the Volyn’ massacre, but rather how to adapt the common agricultural policy to the potential of Ukrainian agriculture. Naturally, it is also essential to prevent the escalation of social antagonism.

How does Polish-Ukrainian academic cooperation appear against this background?

Today, around 9% of students at Polish universities are international, almost half of whom are Ukrainian. The academic world, in line with its longstanding European tradition, is multinational. Universities have always been places of openness and tolerance; today, they develop programmes for support, equality and diversity. These are initiatives and responsibilities undertaken by the universities themselves.

Of course, there are always areas that can be improved. I am thinking, for example, of efforts to achieve better integration within the university. It often happens that we have two or three student communities living separately – students from Poland, English-speaking students and students from the East, mainly Ukrainians and Belarusians. We are working to ensure that these two or three communities come closer together.

You are responsible for international cooperation. In Ukraine, claims are heard that Poland is «draining» its intellectual capital. This is a well-known phenomenon here too - for years, it has been said that the best Polish academics leave for the West. What does this circulation between Poland and Ukraine look like?

Before February 24th 2022, around 500 Ukrainian academics worked in Polish universities. After the outbreak of war, this number doubled. Initially, there were special support measures - help with finding housing, work, a safe place - but quite quickly we realised that a change of perspective was needed.

Our goal is not a brain drain, but a brain circulation - a circulation of knowledge, ideas and experience

This is precisely why today, as a ministry, we support projects involving researchers and institutions from both countries. Those that build a joint research space.

A concrete example of such cooperation is the project of Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University in Ivano-Frankivsk, which, together with the Centre for East European Studies, rebuilt the pre-war university observatory «White Elephant» on Mount Pip Ivan. A functioning research station was created from ruins. Now the two universities are seeking funding for a telescope, the third stage of the project. This is an example of concrete cooperation based on partnership, not asymmetry.

Another example is Mykulychyn, a village in the Ukrainian Carpathians, where a Polish-Ukrainian youth meeting centre is being built. During my recent visit there, the first meeting took place with the participation of students from several Ukrainian universities and the University of Warsaw. It is in such places - in conversations, debates, joint projects - that the next generation of mutual understanding is born.

There is a real chance that this generation will get to know each other not through stereotypes, but through experience and culture.

Yes, but much work still lies ahead. I remember a study conducted, I believe, in 2021. Poles were asked which Ukrainian authors they knew, and Ukrainians were asked which Polish authors they knew. It turned out that 95% of Poles had never read a book by a Ukrainian author - and vice versa. What followed was even more interesting. Ukrainians associated Polish authors with Sienkiewicz and Sapkowski, while Poles named Gogol and Oksana Zabuzhko among Ukrainian authors. In terms of getting to know one another, including through culture, we still have much work to do.

But it is also important not to reduce each other to a kind of ethno-folklore, because we have much more to offer one another. We are united by common aspirations and hopes. And commonality does not always arise from similarity. It also arises from the desire to coexist despite differences and wounds.

Joanna Mosiej: You have said that your greatest dream is for the world to wake up and for us to have a future. Are we truly at the point of the Weimar Republic's decline? Is there no hope or way back for us? Must history repeat itself?

Agnieszka Holland: I fear it will be difficult to turn back from this path unless there is genuine will. Of course, hope dies last, but it must be a collective hope, not just that of individuals. At present, those who determine our fate lack both ideas and will. And they lack courage. At the moment, all right-liberal-centrist governments are decisively shifting towards reactivity in the face of what they perceive as an inevitable wave of brown populism. When nothing but even greater populism stands against this wave, the game of world destiny cannot be won. At least, not in the coming decade. At the same time, I do not see the diligence, determination or charisma that could persuade people that certain values are worth fighting for. This applies to all dimensions - in the way Ukrainians are fighting and in the way they forgo certain comforts for the sake of a better future and the expansion of rights for others.

At the same time, more and more people who were previously engaged are retreating into internal exile due to fatigue, disappointment and loss of hope.

Yes, they are withdrawing into a kind of oblivion and passivity, which is why the crisis of hope seems to me the deepest and most dangerous crisis. It manifests in many ways, such as the reluctance to have children in wealthier countries, which stems precisely from a lack of hope, from a lack of belief that the future has meaning. That it is good enough to project oneself into. And such immense disappointment, a sense of meaninglessness, and the desire to remove young or sensitive, idealistic people from politics - this is a phenomenon that is deadly dangerous to any attempt to preserve democracy.

We are also living in such a sombre time. In one way or another, what is happening in Poland is, to some extent, a reflection of what is happening in the world. What Donald Trump is doing, how quickly various authoritarian regimes are rising - it is all so bleak. One can react to this with fatalism, succumb to it and try to go with the flow, as most of the political class is doing.

This is an approach of peculiar, narcissistic selfishness that politicians like Donald Trump are very attuned to. They build upon it. They give hope to those who are so uncritical that they mistake any glitter for gold and are very easily tempted. They are not equipped with the tools of elementary criticism to resist modern means of communication.

In the era of the internet revolution, artificial intelligence, and social media with their algorithms, manipulating public opinion is trivially easy and hellishly effective

These monsters have absolutely incredible tools at their disposal. This is a great failing of the entire education system, as well as the media, which have succumbed so much to the pressure of clickability that they have essentially ceased to be an authority for anyone.

I have the impression that Ukraine's tragedy also lies in its attempt to join a world that no longer exists - the world of liberal democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. A world that is melting away like precious ore.

To some extent, that is exactly the case. Donald Trump's recent actions, particularly the freezing of USAID funds, directly harm their means of existence. They take away hope not only for a better future but even for the present. These funds financed the work of many NGOs and provided concrete humanitarian aid. Replacing these funds will be difficult. That is why we must rebuild independent NGOs and media on some other foundation. It will be a tremendous effort because the money is mostly on the side which all millionaires and great technologists belong to.

Trump and his surrogates, like some sort of sorcerer's apprentice, can be astonishingly effective precisely because they have no restraints. Until now, we were accustomed to the idea that there are certain rules and boundaries that must not be crossed.

We are undoubtedly on the defensive.

How will this end?

I think we more or less know. It will end in some kind of apocalyptic catastrophe, after which we will, hopefully, find our way home again

If we survive, we will return to some sense of meaning, but for now, things do not look very good.

How then can we provide hope?

I can only express my astonishment, because, to be honest, offering hope in a situation where I do not know where to find it would be highly irresponsible.

You are the conscience of Polish cinema, but whom would you consider a hero of our time - a kind of Citizen Jones?

Citizen Jones, the brave whistleblower, has always been my hero. Activists are also heroes - those who go against the tide, who are always guided by the most fundamental values. For me, they are the heroes of our time. It is difficult for them because they are a great minority. Just as there was a great minority of democratic opposition in communist countries, or as there was a great minority of early Christians. But I believe that this world is constantly being rebuilt, and that with each such upheaval, these liberties expand. Therefore, I hope that it will happen now as well.

In your film «Europa, Europa», there is a surreal scene in which Hitler dances in the arms of Stalin. I think today you could create a similar scene where Putin dances with…

Well, yes, I think you could form quite a large circle of dancing, deranged authoritarian narcissists who disregard any values other than their own immediate and grand victories.

«Europa, Europa», which was in a way a warning, becomes relevant again, as do all films or stories in moments like these, when it is about what happens to a person faced with the simplest choice - to save themselves.

And everything else ceases to matter.

We filmed it in 1989, and it appeared in cinemas at the turn of 1990-91. It was a time of great hopes, of great changes in our part of Europe. I was often asked why the double title. I replied that I was intrigued by Europe's duality, a kind of dichotomy reflected in the fate of the boy - the film's main character.

On one hand, Europe is the cradle of the greatest values - democracy, human rights, equality, fraternity, solidarity, and great culture. On the other hand, it is the cradle of the greatest crimes against humanity and the utmost cruelty

That is the duality. And now, once again, it is beginning to lean towards its dark side. We are entering darkness, and for now, there is no light at the end of the tunnel. But that does not mean we should not move towards that light.

We need to form a coalition against what is happening. We need to encourage those who resist. There are still many people of goodwill, and it is on their resistance that we must build the future.

At last, some hope.

And to my Ukrainian friends and acquaintances, I would like to say that light will appear. For now, we see darkness around us and feel as though there is no light at all. But that light exists. It is within us. We are the bearers of that light, and those fighting in Ukraine are, more than anyone, the bearers of that light. There are many forces around that wish to extinguish this light. We must protect them. All I can express is my admiration for their strength and solidarity.

Thank you very much. That was beautifully said. Lately, we have been telling ourselves that hope lies within us. Because when it seems there is nowhere else to find it, we must seek it within ourselves.

Exactly, you are right. That is precisely what I wanted to say - that the light, or hope, is within us.

What is «feminist foreign policy»?

Feminist foreign policy originated in Sweden. Sweden has long been a global leader in gender equality within political institutions, with women comprising 46 per cent of their parliament. In 2014, Sweden decided it was time to broaden its approach. It became the first country to base its international activities on feminist values - specifically, the pursuit of gender equality and the empowerment of women worldwide. Today, the term has taken on a much broader meaning, encompassing the representation of all social groups at risk of discrimination based on gender, age, skin colour, sexual orientation, or disability. Countries that adopt this approach view it as essential to achieving lasting peace and sustainable development on Earth.

What does this mean in practice?

For instance, it means ensuring the rights of both men and women in countries where those rights are not protected. A strong example was seen in Poland when the united right-wing government strengthened abortion laws. In response, the governments of Belgium and the Netherlands decided to support Polish women by providing access to abortion, despite the restrictive ban imposed by Polish authorities. These governments prioritised the interests of citizens over those of the Polish state or its ruling party.

Similarly, support was extended to girls in Afghanistan, despite Donald Trump’s agreement with the Taliban, and to women protesters in Iran.

Since we are part of the Western, civilised world and believe in its values - such as democracy, the rule of law and human rights - we should feel obligated to seek ways to help these persecuted groups, whether they are women, children, or ethnic minorities.

This is the essence of feminist foreign policy.

It has now been 10 years since Sweden announced this approach, followed by Canada and France. More recently, Germany has joined. It is remarkable how this traditionally conservative country is breaking the ice for women's rights.

Indeed, Angela Merkel became the first female chancellor and held the position longer than anyone before her. Ursula von der Leyen was the first female defence minister and went on to become the first woman to lead the European Commission.

At the moment, Europe is not in the best shape when it comes to the strength of progressive parties. In Sweden, despite being the founding country of feminist foreign policy, the new right-wing government has officially abandoned the term. While colleagues from the Swedish embassy assure us that little has changed in practice, it is clear that the name bothered someone. The same is happening in the Netherlands, where the new right-wing government is also moving away from this policy.

The influence of conservative, right-wing parties is visible everywhere. For the first time in decades, we are seeing a decline in women's representation in the European Parliament - 39 per cent in this term compared to 41 per cent in the previous one.

This makes the European Union's gender equality strategy all the more important. For far too long, we associated foreign policy mainly with gentlemen deciding the fate of the world over cigars and whiskey.

When Angela Merkel stepped down, Germans often shared a joke that perfectly illustrates the shift: a little boy asks his mother: «Mom, can a man be chancellor?»

This shows just how powerful examples are in changing perceptions about what women and men «can» do. The child had only ever known a female chancellor, and for him, it seemed natural.

‍Yes, but the few names we often cite as examples are still not enough. The reality is more like a photo from the G20 Summit: Angela Merkel surrounded by a sea of men in suits. In Poland, we are at a point where there is not a single woman on the list of presidential candidates.

First and foremost, the representation at the top depends on who is in the so-called «base» - how many women are at lower levels from which future candidates can emerge. That is why striving for equality in everyday life is so important. Whether I am meeting with local activists or political scientists from the University of Warsaw, the common theme in these discussions is always the issue of equal distribution of household responsibilities, especially childcare.

Is this still the case?

‍Unfortunately, yes. This is still something we must fight for. Otherwise, experts predict that real change will not happen for another hundred years or more. That means none of us, nor any girls born today, will live to see it. This is why the «base» matters so much - how we raise our daughters, and even more importantly, how we raise our sons.

Because in the end, as long as we do not impose stereotypical roles, children naturally think in terms of equality.

And when it comes to childcare, aside from breastfeeding, there are no limitations that prevent a man from taking care of a child just as well as a woman. These barriers only exist in our minds, rooted in cultural patterns and social norms

If we do not change this, we will keep hearing degrading arguments like «a woman can not be president in a country near the frontlines» or questioning whether a man with a medical background can be the Minister of Defense during wartime. Yet, we have such a minister in Poland [Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz, Minister of National Defence, is a medical doctor].

And no one questions his qualifications. No man needs to explain to another that he is both a doctor and the Minister of National Defense in a country near the frontlines.

Rebecca Solnit's quote fits perfectly here: «A novel without women is often considered a book about all humanity, while a book with women at the forefront is categorised as women’s literature».

The system is flawed because it was created by men and for men. It is no surprise that this change is difficult for those who benefit from the current structure, the ones who make the rules.

A woman can fly to space just as a man can. She can be president, prime minister, or anything she chooses to be, and she can make her own decisions. It is about ensuring equal access to education, power, politics and the labour market, while also creating conditions that allow her to become a mother if she chooses.

Feminist foreign policy is not about excluding men, on the contrary - it advocates for equal treatment of everyone. That is why one of the tools for change includes the implementation of quotas and parity, depending on the institution and context. This is a step toward normalising what is still seen today as revolutionary.

In Poland, we certainly have a long way to go. Women make up only 30 per cent of all parliamentarians, one of the lowest rates in Europe. However, regardless of the country - except perhaps Sweden - women pay a higher personal price for a political career than men do. They are constantly asked how they balance their careers and motherhood.

And if they do not have children, like Kamala Harris or Angela Merkel, it becomes another source of criticism. Women who reach the top pay a steep price or have already paid it on the way there. New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern stepped down from politics for personal reasons. Ursula von der Leyen started her political career at 40 after raising her children, yet she still faced years of ridicule for supposedly advancing her career at her children's expense. Men are not held to the same scrutiny. Von der Leyen was criticised for almost everything, «pursued» in ways few politicians in Germany have experienced.

A striking example is Magdalena Filiks. It is no coincidence that the intense bullying campaign, which ultimately led to her teenage son's suicide, targeted a divorced woman and single mother. Similarly, Minister Joanna Mucha admitted she almost gave up when she saw how the harassment impacted her children. This kind of targeted bullying happens to women in politics far more often than it does to men.

However, we have no choice but to endure it, to push through until real change happens. Yes, there will be moments when we’ll face malicious comments and condescending attitudes, but change will come, and the system will eventually adapt.

The creation of the FemGlobal Association is another step towards increasing the presence of women in international politics and the public sphere.

It is clear that the visibility of women in public spaces - as experts in panel discussions or commentators on television - is crucial for shifting public consciousness.

According to the most recent available data, female experts make up only 23 per cent of those featured in Polish media. That is why in our association, we have created a database of female experts in international politics, and we work hard to ensure they are represented in the media. For example, when the Taliban took over Afghanistan, I watched perhaps the fifth program on a particular TV channel covering the situation, and it only featured male commentators. I reached out to the editor and suggested some of our female experts, and it worked. I closely monitor this phenomenon of increasing women’s invitations to TV. It happens twice a year: first on March 8th, and then on October 20th, when they are invited to comment on the Constitutional Court's ruling on abortion. After that, it fades, and we return to the norm, where men are the first to be chosen. Recently, during a meeting at the Mexican embassy, I explained why Poland still hosts debates with only male participants, while in Mexico, such debates are no longer acceptable.

In the report you and Iwona Reichardt co-authored in 2020 «Will Women Save the World? Feminist Foreign Policy», you mentioned war as a threat to the development of feminist foreign policy. Defence and security remain highly masculinised fields.

Of course, security, understood in the traditional sense as armed action and military struggle, typically requires endurance and strength and is primarily associated with men. However, this too is changing; for instance, more than 67 thousand women currently serve in the Ukrainian Armed Forces. There is no other army in the world with such a number of women.

What about Israel?

In Ukraine, there are over 5 thousand active female soldiers fighting on the frontlines. This is truly a unique phenomenon that the entire world is observing. It is an experience from which others will also learn. Although, of course, it is immensely tragic, as is any war. Yet these women are showing other women, in other places and in other armies, that it is possible. Others need not wait for war to create the necessary conditions, career paths, uniforms, and body armour that allow women to be fully-fledged soldiers. The United Nations' agenda on «Women, Peace and Security» also encompasses gender equality in the armed forces.

But security is not just about military action.

Exactly, I believe the time has come to broaden the concept of national security and introduce a feminist perspective, as this is an even more male-dominated area than foreign policy, where men also predominate. Security is not solely about purchasing Abrams tanks or F-35 aircraft. A feminist perspective involves the participation of women in decision-making, mediation and negotiations.

At the same time, in conflict situations, the feminist perspective becomes particularly significant, as it is precisely in such times that women and children require special protection.

The importance of this was aptly highlighted by the German Foreign Minister, Annalena Baerbock, who said: «The question is whether families, children in the heart of Europe, in the centre of our Europe, can be safe and grow up in peace. Only when women are safe will everyone be safe».

For our own security, it is also crucial that we know where the nearest shelter is, which medicines to prepare, and how to act in an emergency. The state must allocate resources to equip us, as women, with this knowledge and these skills

The issue of security also includes ensuring access to fast, legal and safe abortion services. This is because we know that rape is now regarded as a method of warfare.

You are also an expert on migration policy. Given the current situation following the war in Ukraine, it is arguably one of the biggest challenges facing the European Union. I am not sure if feminists will save the world, but I fear that migration policy, or rather its absence, might well bring Europe to its knees.

Firstly, migration has always existed and will continue to do so.

However, there has been a noticeable increase in recent years.

Indeed, because the global population has grown, and for some, we have become a destination country. But let us take a look at our families, at our immediate surroundings. Each of us has someone who has emigrated abroad.

So the problem is not migration itself, but the lack of discussion around it. The greatest failing is that politicians, from the centre to the left, are afraid to speak about it, thereby leaving the issue to the right and far-right politicians. They exploit this silence, this ignorance, and this fear.

People have a right to be afraid, to feel uncomfortable. If we do not discuss these concerns and relieve this tension, discomfort will evolve into hostility.

But what should we be talking about?

First and foremost, we should inform. We need to show that migration is a phenomenon that has always existed and will continue to exist. Furthermore, that we, Poles, have also migrated and live in various parts of the world.

Secondly, I believe that schools should be places of integration. They provide a space where both sides can meet. All children in Poland are entitled to compulsory education, so schools can serve as a venue for fostering integration and teaching openness. Moreover, this should be a mission of public television as well: education, combating stereotypes, and social campaigns. Without this, we fall victim to populists and disinformation.

I feel as though that has already happened.

Perhaps things are not as dire as they seem. Hostility towards foreigners must be dismantled through education and experience. The more direct contact one has with foreigners, the less one fears them. Interestingly, the greatest fear of immigrants is found in eastern Germany, where there are the fewest. This is because it is easiest to manipulate perceptions and prejudices in such areas, where disinformation thrives.

Business must also serve as a platform for a positive narrative. Businesses need foreign workers due to a shortage of labour in the market

In Poland, an impressive 62 per cent of Ukrainians found employment within their first year after arriving. This is a phenomenal result on the international stage.

What is the usual situation?

On average, it is estimated that around 30 per cent of migrants find employment within their first year. Another 30 per cent enter the labour market within two to three years, needing time to retrain, learn the language, and adapt. The remaining 30 per cent never secure employment, either because they had not worked in their home country, or they are elderly, ill, traumatised, or otherwise unable to work.

How can such a result be explained? Is it due to a lack of social programmes or low welfare payments?

Firstly, Poland already had a relatively large Ukrainian community, which has helped newcomers access the job market. Secondly, it is a matter of the social group. Many of those who arrived in Poland are highly educated, middle-class individuals with in-demand professions, such as doctors or IT specialists. And, of course, language plays a role, as Ukrainians find it considerably easier to learn Polish than German or French.

It is precisely this narrative - that Ukrainians contribute to our GDP - that should permeate public opinion, rather than the notion that they are living solely off benefits.

Exactly. People just need help adjusting to this, because it is a new experience of this scale, and it is natural for it to be challenging. In such circumstances, we often look for someone to blame, typically targeting those perceived to be lower on the social ladder. Migrants are always viewed as being lower - lower than those from the so-called Poland «B» (a term symbolising the less developed areas of the country, as opposed to Poland «A», the more developed regions), lower than those from rural areas. This is why we need a wise state policy.

We must ensure that Poles feel comfortable and secure in Poland because this helps them accept that others can also feel comfortable here.

This is where feminist policy comes in, advocating for equality, inclusivity and social justice.