Passenger name regulation could destroy cross-border rail

[Fat Controller]

2013. Maybe my memory is at fault that I didn't show my passport at all at in the UK, but I'm sure there was no need for advance information and if there was a check it certainly wasn't rigorous.

 

Anyway my point about security still holds - airline security for "foot passengers" and not even a cursory peek in the boot for cars.

Much has happened since 2013; both Kent police/UK Border Force and ET check outward -bound traffic from the UK, whilst vehicle identities are checked against an active database via cameras (some of which you'll have seen and others you won't). On vehicles that are pulled in for tests, swabs are taken, and any suspicious traces mean further and much more detailed examination; something you don't get as a foot-passenger.

[Coryton]

oh, that's the easy one. Poland doesn't regard Germany as a friend or ally in any shape or form, and there's no reason they should. They DO regard Germany as the driving force controlling the funds which they need, though; Poland is the biggest single beneficiary of the EU by a considerable margin. Likewise they have no 

 

 

Now going off-off topic, but I was not impressed this summer to find dual pricing still going on in Poland (that will be 50% extra for a tour with a guide who speaks a bit of English, yes you can have a child ticket on the train - just show proof your children attend a school in Poland, etc.)

 

Given how much Poland has gained from the EU, this seems a bit churlish.

 

(On the other hand, for anyone planning on taking their family to Slovakia, children of all nationalities get child fares and can also get a (free) railcard giving free travel...)

[Bernard Lamb]

2013. Maybe my memory is at fault that I didn't show my passport at all at in the UK, but I'm sure there was no need for advance information and if there was a check it certainly wasn't rigorous.

 

Anyway my point about security still holds - airline security for "foot passengers" and not even a cursory peek in the boot for cars.

See post 29 from Brian.

Got the chemistry check last time I used the shuttle.

I can assure you that all boots are checked and all unusual vehicles are diverted into the sheds for further checks.

Things have changed since 2013. and your point certainly is no longer valid given the current climate.

I can assure you that the vehicle checks are more robust than those at most airports.

Bernard

[jjb1970]

Now going off-off topic, but I was not impressed this summer to find dual pricing still going on in Poland (that will be 50% extra for a tour with a guide who speaks a bit of English, yes you can have a child ticket on the train - just show proof your children attend a school in Poland, etc.)

 

Given how much Poland has gained from the EU, this seems a bit churlish.

 

(On the other hand, for anyone planning on taking their family to Slovakia, children of all nationalities get child fares and can also get a (free) railcard giving free travel...)

The Brexit fallout (supported by the fact that East European politics rarely makes the news here) has obscured the fact that Poland has been in quite a bitter dispute with the EU over constitutional changes and the rule of law. Hungary has also been in quite a confrontational relationship with the EU. Both countries have rather nationalistic governments.

[rockershovel]

The Brexit fallout (supported by the fact that East European politics rarely makes the news here) has obscured the fact that Poland has been in quite a bitter dispute with the EU over constitutional changes and the rule of law. Hungary has also been in quite a confrontational relationship with the EU. Both countries have rather nationalistic governments.[/quote

Now going off-off topic, but I was not impressed this summer to find dual pricing still going on in Poland (that will be 50% extra for a tour with a guide who speaks a bit of English, yes you can have a child ticket on the train - just show proof your children attend a school in Poland, etc.)

 

Given how much Poland has gained from the EU, this seems a bit churlish.

 

(On the other hand, for anyone planning on taking their family to Slovakia, children of all nationalities get child fares and can also get a (free) railcard giving free travel...)

 

I've visited Poland (Gdansk) a couple of times and can't say it was a heartening experience

[Derekstuart]

I think you will find that whilst Poland is still a net beneficiary of the eu, it is dramatically decreasing as the eu has been looking to Poland for its 'subscriptions'.

 

Very much like a drug dealer that gives you free heroin until you are addicted.

 

Don't forget there are many Poles who aren't happy about what happened to their sugar and more importantly, salt, industries at the hands of the eu. I work very closely with Poles and whilst the West are still relatively close to Germany, those in the East are starting to speak quite highly of Russia.

[rockershovel]

Re #35, this is a general comment on FSU countries, with the notable exception if East Germany, which was in many ways treated as a "showcase to the West", being one of the very few places having an identifiable Western population and a major land border with a Western nation.

 

Much of the trouble in Ukraine and the Crimea revolves around the imported Russian population, who regard themselves as Russian. It's also common to meet people who hanker for the USSR, which is understandable; it was a place where it was someone's job to make sure there was a roof over your head and something on the table, where you got free education and a defined status in life. Considering the chaos of the 1990s and early 2000s, their current situation and the undoubted fact that the people you meet, tend to be professionals of various sorts, this is understandable)

 

Regarding the German/Polish border, don't forget also that Germsny did not exist as a unified nation until the First World War, and Poland was an Imperial power in the Baltic region before that. Poland also has a long tradition of regarding the Muslim Ottomans as enemies (Google "winged lancers" or "gates of Vienna" for more on this).

 

Polish history in the 20th century mostly consists of being either over-run by Germany (who also operated a military "protectorate" there in World War 1), over-run by the USSR, or betrayed, in their view, by anyone else they came into contact with. The older ones don't actually think much of Britain either, on the grounds that their treaty with the British proved of no practical value in 1939 and the Soviets would shape their experience post-1945. Interestingly enough, they were probably ahead of any other nation in ENIGMA research in 1939.

[jjb1970]

Regarding the German/Polish border, don't forget also that Germsny did not exist as a unified nation until the First World War, and Poland was an Imperial power in the Baltic region before that. Poland also has a long tradition of regarding the Muslim Ottomans as enemies (Google "winged lancers" or "gates of Vienna" for more on this).

I'd agree with much of your post, but Germany came into existence following the Franco-Prussian war and existed for the best part of half a century prior to WW1. One of Bismarck's final predictions was to date the end of the Reich with uncanny accuracy.

Something generally forgotten (although probably not by Czech's) is that Poland was a partner in the dismemberment of Czeckoslovakia, taking Teschen. Prior to the immediate crises in 1939 Hitler was open to a friendly alliance with Poland and the two countries had been on cordial terms, it was catastrophically bad diplomacy by Poland and German overconfidence born out of earlier triumphs combined with a final acceptance by Western powers that appeasement had failed that really led to a disaster in September 1939.

[Bernard Lamb]

Sadly, it's not just Poland, so are the Baltic states. Stalin transplanted a large number of ethnic Russians to these territories to the extend it's actually considered ethnic cleansing. These groups don't speak the local language (and fervently defy doing so, insisting local staff speak Russian) and do not watch the local news either. All they watch is Russian TV propaganda and therefore think very highly of their president

 

As for failed eastern european businesses, one needs to understand that communism was effectively competed to death by the capitalists.  Wasteful and inefficient heavy industries where seen by the Kremlin as key to their promise of "jobs for everyone, for life". It doesn't work like that in the real world

 

It's also worth considering that the Western parts of Poland belonged to the German empire, some areas even up to 1945! Stalin effectively

shifted Poland a few 100 miles further west, taking the land as "war trophy" and "repayment of war damage to the USSR". In fact, the German empire stretched along the Baltic coast all the way to the current city of Kleipeda (Lithuania). A considerable part of East-Prusia is now Kaliningrad, a Russian enclave on the ice-free part of the Baltic coast. Polish cities like Krakow, Lodz and Poznan had German names, like Danzig for Gdansk.

 

FYI: I have family living in the Baltic, who know about this and coincidently I've spoken to them last weekend on this very subject.

As well as sending Russians into Memel Stalin kicked out the long standing German population. At least he kicked out those he did not have killed. That was ethnic cleansing.

I know people who's families originated from that region who, even many years after the fall of communism, were too frightened to go back.

I love the description that some Poles apply to their country. Christ between two thieves.

Back on a railway topic. Reading the history of the Russians and Germans advancing and retreating in that area in WW2 makes fascinating reading. Especially regarding changing the track gauge several times in certain places.

Bernard

[roythebus]

Back to the OP, I've read enough about the the EU on the 48% Group on FB, does the SNCB/NMBS propose to check all passengers on local services too? I understand there's quite a frequent service between Liege and Maastricht, as well as a frequent service between Luxembourg and several Belgian destinations.

 

Passengers may be driven onto local international bus services, will they be checked too?

[jjb1970]

As well as sending Russians into Memel Stalin kicked out the long standing German population. At least he kicked out those he did not have killed. That was ethnic cleansing.

I know people who's families originated from that region who, even many years after the fall of communism, were too frightened to go back.

I love the description that some Poles apply to their country. Christ between two thieves.

Back on a railway topic. Reading the history of the Russians and Germans advancing and retreating in that area in WW2 makes fascinating reading. Especially regarding changing the track gauge several times in certain places.

Bernard

The Rape of East Prussia is a German tragedy which has tended to be ignored by the rest of the world. There has always been a sense that given what Germany did in the lands they occupied then they got what was coming to them in 1944 – 45. That is quite a troubling stance as for one it applies a blanket collective responsibility for the crimes of the Third Reich to an entire people, and secondly it undermines the right of the rest of the world to judge German crimes. The degree to which ordinary German’s were complicit in the crimes committed in their name is quite a hot potato, whilst the old idea of a “good” German army and an ignorant populace being separated from the crimes of the Party and SS was discredited long ago, it is also incorrect to accuse an entire people of collective guilt in the way some have done. And although I believe knowledge of the holocaust, forced labour, mass killings in the East was widespread, that is not the same as saying those who know supported such actions. That said, it is disturbing to consider the degree in which German’s and their allies from Romania, Hungary, Croatia etc did participate in unspeakable crimes. That does not render the actions of the Soviet Army in any way acceptable and the continuation of the strategic bombing offensive after the RAF and USAAF had ran out of real targets can’t really be defended in my view. The closing months of the war from the winter of 1944 tend to be remembered as almost an anti-climax by Western countries yet those months saw a hideous loss of lives in Germany and some of the remaining occupied territories. The fighting on both the Eastern and Western fronts (and in the Balkans which merged into the Eastern front as the Soviets advanced) was savage and particularly in the East human losses were staggering right up to the end of the war. The final war winter in the Netherlands saw mass starvation. German’s do have a right to consider that the German people were victims in those months however I also think that German efforts to make a moral equivalence between the Rape of East Prussia and other episodes and the actions of the German armed forces and security services in the USSR, Poland etc is also incorrect and cannot be defended IMO. The suffering of Germany in that period cannot be compared to the heinous crimes committed by their own forces.

[olivegreen]

All that history is interesting, but what has it to do with the OP - the Belgians possibly voting for passenger controls?

[jjb1970]

All that history is interesting, but what has it to do with the OP - the Belgians possibly voting for passenger controls?

That depends, in a sense not a lot, in another sense an understanding of where Europe came from is rather important to trying to understand where it is now.

[Derekstuart]

Rockershovel is quite right that many Poles do not like Britain for PERCEIVED failures in 1939, but are completely forgiving over REAL failures in 1945.

 

In 1939, Mr Chamberlain (a much mis-understood man, I might add) maintained his promise and declared war on Germany to protect Poland. The reality is that Britain TRIED to push Germany back and failed. Of course it is desirable that the BEF didn't end up captured or evacuated via Dunkirk, but there was no betrayal or dishonour there.

 

But what happened to Poland in 1945 following the Yalta conference was unforgivable. However, communist era schools in Poland could hardly say "Britain and America abandoned us to the evil stalin"- when stalin was in charge of the communist system. So instead they taught about the evil West in 1939.

 

I really like the Poles- I employ many of them, I speak a reasonable amount of Polish, I am familiar with their history going back Centuries, but when I find their official Embassy here in Britain has a website with sections devoted to how Britain abandoned them I do get a bit irritated.

[rockershovel]

Looping back towards the OP, the political and social history of Eastern Europe is very complex and mostly, a closed book to the British.

 

There is a fundamental problem though, regarding border controls. I've never known a time when trust and goodwill were at a lower level. The fault lines within the EU were never more visible and this is one of the ways they appear.

[rockershovel]

Re #43, strictly speaking the French were the principal culprits, launching an offensive in the Saar region which was abandoned within days, having never really begun. Without French participation, the British component of the operation was never begun.

 

So the Polish view that the French and British failed to honour their commitments in 1939 is at least, entirely understandable.

[Bon Accord]

It's also worth remembering just how the UK (amongst others) effectively abandoned those brave Poles in Warsaw to firstly the Germans and then the Russians after the uprising there in '44, all in the name of political expediency.

If I was a Pole, I'd be damned bitter about that.

[jjb1970]

I'm not really sure what other choice the Western Allies had. Any real assistance to the Pole's could only have been delivered with the assistance of the USSR, which was not forthcoming. The Soviet Army stopped on the Vistula within spitting difference of Warsaw and failed to provide air support or much of anything else, it is hard not to conclude that Stalin wanted the German's to wipe out the non-Communist Polish resistance to save him the effort.In 1945 the Soviet Army had occupied Central and Eastern Europe and with possession being 9/10 of the law there wasn't a lot that could be done to shift the Soviet's short of another war which very few would have supported.

In 1939 the UK and France didn't really go to war to save Poland, they went to war because they belatedly realised the German threat to their own security could not be countered by continued appeasement. They gave Poland a cheque which they were not in a position to cash, but the most cursory evaluation by the Polish government should have figured that out and their own diplomacy was a whole series of catastrophic blunders based on a gross over estimate of their own position.

[Derekstuart]

I'm not really sure how you come to that conclusion, but the 340,000 British and Allied troops that were evacuated out of Dunkirk might have had a few choice words about that- but probably not as many words as the 70,000 who were either captured or killed.

 

The best part of half a million blokes went to try and relieve Poland. There is NO justification for the Polish state making its claims about the 'phoney war'.

Re #43, strictly speaking the French were the principal culprits, launching an offensive in the Saar region which was abandoned within days, having never really begun. Without French participation, the British component of the operation was never begun.

So the Polish view that the French and British failed to honour their commitments in 1939 is at least, entirely understandable.

 

Jim, I think you might be getting a little mixed up here. The Western Allies (ie Britain, America, Canada, the Empire and Free European Forces) were fighting from the West and were in no position whatsoever to do anything about Warsaw.

 

The reason the Polish underground in Warsaw started the uprising was the expectation of being relieved by the Russians who were (IIRC) around 50KM from the City. However, the Russians did not relieve the City and the rebellion failed. The Russians are entirely to blame for that.

It's also worth remembering just how the UK (amongst others) effectively abandoned those brave Poles in Warsaw to firstly the Germans and then the Russians after the uprising there in '44, all in the name of political expediency.

If I was a Pole, I'd be damned bitter about that.

 

As a point of note, the rebellion in Warsawa is generally described as happening in August, but the Polish had been fighting the Germans very substantially since D Day and had it not been for their actions holding off 50,000 German Wermacht from the front then D Day might well have failed.

 

It must be noted also that Churchill was in favour of carrying on Eastwards and pushing Stalin out of Europe entirely, but that was vetoed by our "special ally" and by 1945 it was not in a position to do it on its own. It is speculated by some that Churchill had wanted to use the nuclear bomb if Russia refused to leave Europe, but that is disputed; as is the claim that America renaged on its agreement to share the technology that Britain, Empire and Europeans had been working on (the idea that America alone developed the bomb is the work of hollywood).

[Bon Accord]

Jim, I think you might be getting a little mixed up here. The Western Allies (ie Britain, America, Canada, the Empire and Free European Forces) were fighting from the West and were in no position whatsoever to do anything about Warsaw.

 

The reason the Polish underground in Warsaw started the uprising was the expectation of being relieved by the Russians who were (IIRC) around 50KM from the City. However, the Russians did not relieve the City and the rebellion failed. The Russians are entirely to blame for that.

 

They were in a position to drop aid by air, which had been requested (and was possible), but which didn't happen until late on and then either what was dropped was of little value or indeed was dropped in German held areas. Then there was the whole farce of dropping equipment cannisters without parachutes.

Of course none of them wanted to upset Stalin at the upcoming Yalta conference.

I found it interesting that there's an entire segment at the Warsaw Uprising museum about reaction/assistance from the allies.

[EddieB]

It's also worth remembering just how the UK (amongst others) effectively abandoned those brave Poles in Warsaw to firstly the Germans and then the Russians after the uprising there in '44, all in the name of political expediency.

If I was a Pole, I'd be damned bitter about that.

We probably all have a bias from the way we are taught history, but I suggest the Poles might like to cast around a bit before condemning Britain.

 

Did Britain have the means to have intervened in Poland at that stage of the war?  Should not the USA share at least some of the opprobrium?

 

As I understand it, after D-Day Churchill and Montgomery were all for advancing across Western Europe as an army of liberation.  Eisenhower, the senior general, held back to allow Zhukov to reach Berlin first.  History has been kind to FDR (the "New Deal" and all that), but he prevaricated at the start of the war, then was duped by Stalin.  In other words, by 1944 the USA was calling the shots (literally) in the Western Theatre and appeasing Stalin as far as the Eastern Front was concerned.

 

Churchill did his best to liberate as many Poles as he could from the Soviet hegemony in the immediate aftermath of the war.

 

It's also worth remembering that there was a Jewish pogrom in the city of Kielce, carried out by Poles, after the war (1946).

[rockershovel]

Re #48 and #49, the French offensive in the Saar took place in 1939, not 1944. The French abandoned the operation within a matter of days, having made no effective contact with the German forces opposite them. Without French participation, the BEF plans could not be pursued (certainly the BEF was nowhere near strong enough to confront the main German force in being) and both armies retreated to spend the next 8 months entrenched in France, leaving the initiative with the Germans.

[rockershovel]

American isolationism as a result of war casualties long predates World War 1 (where American casualties were actually quite small).

 

The American Civil War was still at the limits of living memory (a much publicised national reunion of veterans had taken place at Gettysburg in 1938 to mark the 75th anniversary of the battle). American casualties in that conflict outnumbered ALL American casualties in ALL subsequent conflicts, including Viet Nam; the economic and demographic after effects were still clearly visible in areas of the South (the "share cropping" system was not new, but had hugely expanded following the collapse of the plantation economy; much of US life, including the Armed Forces, was still racially segregated).

 

Although that also explains American enthusiasm for the post-WW2 EU project. The Americans had been ignored in the last stages of WW1 (when, based on their experiences in the Civil War, they had advocated fighting on to achieve the destruction and military occupation of Germany, as in 1945). They did not intend to be ignored again. They also had considerable experience if building, as they saw it, the greatest nation on Earth from a primarily European populus, using European and English revolutionary thinking as its basis.

[rockershovel]

Re #47 and #48, Churchill DID carry out an assessment of continuing the war against the USSR under the name "Unthinkable". The conclusion was that the population would not support it, that resources would not permit it, American participation could not be relied upon and the outcome would be catastrophic.

 

In a still little-known period during the last weeks of the war and its immediate aftermath, British troops were deployed in a series of acts of brinkmanship along the Baltic coastal region. Churchill anticipated that the USSR would extend its reach as far along the Baltic as possible, up to and including Denmark and the Skaggerak - but would not precipitate a shooting war against its notional allies for that reason alone.

 

Churchill's judgement would be vindicated, in both respects.

[olivegreen]

…all of which is, of course, highly relevant to the title of this thread….?