A Cold War Hero: Colonel Ryszard Kuklinski
cia.gov
cia.gov
As for Kukliński, being a Pole myself, I have mixed feelings. I very much prefer that my country is in the American sphere of influence (and not the Soviet as it used to for almost 50 years). However, if WW3 had happened, we would've been be on the Soviet side. Zbigniew Brzeziński said that Kuklinski’s information had permitted them to make counterplans to disrupt command-and-control facilities rather than only relying on a massive counterattack on forward positions, which would have hit Poland. However, I have no dellusions that anybody in the US would have any doubts about turning Poland into a radioactive wasteland if that served the American interests of the moment...
Also, the Polish government after the fall of Communism wasn't very eager to pardon Kukliński. That happened only after Clinton's administration threatened to block Poland's NATO accession if he weren't exonerated.
Operational plans of the Soviets against NATO foresaw the first wave of attack led by troops from Warsaw pact nations (East Germany, Poland, etc.) - which would have been completely wiped out by NATO defenses, but depleting their arsenals. The second wave would have consisted of fresh Russian troops which then would have swept through the rubble of Europe.
These plans have been made public a few years ago and here in Austria they were part of a exhibtion. Austria would have suffered a similar fate, some plans seeing Soviet tank troops advancing along the Danube, some plans ignoring it but in both cases seeing nuclear weapons (tactical) be deployed by both sides. NATO would have nuked bridges instantly, the WP denied NATO Vienna as a bridgehead.
As a Pole myself it is pretty clear that if you're caught between two power blocks (Germans, Russia, NATO, Soviets, whatever) you're always fucked whatever "side" you're on. You're collateral damage in their power struggle.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/books/6127193/learning-to-live-wi...
I submitted this mainly for the quote:
"And he did so for the noblest of reason — to advance the sacred causes of liberty and peace in his homeland and throughout the world."
For me it means from the view of the CIA liberty and peace are a legitimation for spying and is highly appreciated.
"Polish Colonel Ryszard Kuklinski was a patriot who showed his love for his country in a very courageous act. He risked his life and the safety of his family to protect Poland from the Soviets during the Cold War by spying for the United States."
Oh such delicious double-speak...you spy on us, you are a traitor. You spy on your country for us, you are a patriot of your country.
There's much more of a case for Italy being a US satellite state than Poland being and independent state under foreign occupation. There was no independent Poland in the century before World War I. Only the two decades of upheaval between World War I and II allowed for some Polish independence.
US troops occupied Italy and are still in Italy today. Not that those who ran the US economy disapproved of what Mussolini had been doing. As Fortune magazine memorably said in 1934: "The wops are unwopping themselves". Plenty of US investor money went to Italy, and Mussolini even had some support in US liberal circles. Then World War II happens. Northern Italy, which the fascists had to work to keep down, mostly liberated itself in the days and weeks before Allied troops even arrived there. Then in 1948 the US very openly rigged elections so the Christian Democrats would win. Gladio was set up as a secret government in case the left was voted to power. As late as 1976, Italian voters voted 34.4% for the communists, 9.6% for the socialists (who still had the hammer and sickle emblem), 1.5% for the ultra-left Proletarian Democracy etc. Secret P2 lodges pulled strings at high levels, strategia della tensione was put into effect with bombings by the far right blamed on the left, with leads back to the highest levels of government. US intelligence had a massive involvement in Italy. It was no less a "satellite state" than any eastern European country.
Hungary was called a satellite state of the USSR even though it had had an independent communist revolution after World War I, put down by foreign intervention. Hungary was independent of the USSR until 1956, when the right took over and announced its desire to join NATO. England and France were invading Egypt around this time.
Between 1945 and 1989 if you asked Poles whether they want to be occupied by USA instead of being "independent Warsaw Pact member" 90% or more would instantly agree.
Say what you want, but for most Poles Kukliński did good.
This was a military man WAY ahead of his time. There were not a lot like him in the 60's.
A bit off-topic, but just as an indication of this guy's background, we were taught about his role on K-19 as well as B-59. Sangfroid like this is what you hope to have in a crisis.
truth being told, USA, like always, bullied Poland into withdrawing the charges ( and that "helped" them join the structures of NATO) which is quite well described for example in the latest book by Leszek Miller, who dealt with the case as a prime minister after 1989.
( I don't have a personal opinion about Kuklinski's choice - it was treason, it was patriotism, it was many things - everybody lives by their own ethical backbone ).
Well, that's one way to explain it.