Poland and Ireland share similar political systems, religions, and histories. The two countries, however, do differ a bit in terms of economic history. Both countries have, at one time, been partitioned as a result of war and outside influence. Ireland was a British colony for centuries and had many rebellions in its history, including the Easter Rebellion of 1916 and the Anglo-Irish War of 1919-1921 which led the partition separating Northern Ireland from the Republic of Ireland. Poland, on the other hand, was divided between Austria, Prussia, and Russia in 1795. After WWI, Poland was granted its independence by Woodrow Wilson. However, Poland again was divided in two by the Germans and the Soviets during WWII as part of the Warsaw Pact. Following the war, Poland was dominated by Soviet rule until the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. Throughout these eras of Polish colonization, the Polish people too had rebellions including the Warsaw uprising against the Nazis in 1944 and the worker’s Solidarity Movement of the 1980s which demanded of the Soviet communist government the rights to unionize.
Since the collapse of the communist government in Poland, it has made attempts to westernize itself by aligning itself politically and militarily with the U.S., EU, and NATO. Ireland is also now a member of NATO after years of political and military neutrality in world affairs. Both Poland and Ireland are majority Catholic and their Catholic populations share a similar history of oppression. While Ireland’s Catholics, prior to their independence, were persecuted by the Protestant British, Catholicism in Poland was suppressed by both the Nazis and the Soviets. Both Ireland and Poland transitioned to democratic constitutional bi-cameral parliamentary multi-party system subsequent to their respective independences. Despite these myriad similarities between the two countries, Ireland and Poland do differ economically both historically (Ireland has no history with communism) and presently (as Poland seems to be thriving relative to Ireland).
Poland and Ireland share many political similarities on paper. Both countries are Republics (Ireland is a Parliamentary Republic). Both countries are guided, politically, by a constitution (Ireland’s constitution was created in 1937 and Poland’s in 1997). Both countries are democratic (however, Poland’s democracy is much younger, as it transitioned from communism around the time of the falling of the Berlin Wall). Both countries run a democratic bi-cameral parliamentary multi-party system. As such, both countries’ branches of government are similarly structured. Both countries have a president representing the executive branch and a prime minister representing the head of government/state. Poland has a bicameral National Assembly with an upper house and a lower house representing its legislative branch while Ireland has a bicameral national parliament with a House of Representatives and a Senate representing its legislative branch. Both countries have a Supreme Court with a series of smaller municipal courts representing its judicial branch. Poland has multiple political parties: Civic Platform, Law and Justice, Palikot Movement, Polish People’s Party, and Democratic Left Alliance. Ireland also has multiple political parties: Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, Labour, Green Party, and Sinn Fein. Both Ireland and Poland grant universal suffrage to citizens at age 18.
Although Poland and Ireland are both members of the European Union, their respective experiences within the Union have been markedly different. While Ireland has been a member of the EU since 1973, Poland did not join until 2004. After the communist government collapsed in Poland in 1989, the country experienced a period of severe inflation and was unable to pay on its international loans. The new Mazowiecki government responded with the Balcerowicz Plan, which “freed most prices, dramatically reduced state control over the Polish economy, and clamped down on runaway inflation” (state.gov). The Balcerowicz Plan was met with international economic confidence and spurred new international loans and debt restructuring. With this international confidence Poland was able to promote Foreign Direct Investment and tariff-free trading within the European Union. The Balcerowicz Plan was a significant piece of legislation which helped to stabilize Poland’s economy as it transitioned from communism to a free market.
The success of the Balcerowicz Plan allowed for Poland’s continued economic growth into the 21st century. Continued Foreign Direct Investment has “driven the growth of Poland’s technology sectors…motor vehicle, electric machinery, and service center sectors” (state.gov). Poland’s economy was also able to withstand the global economic meltdown of 2008, growing its GDP 15.8% from 2008-2011 (state.gov). Economic experts attribute this success to Poland’s, “a well-timed fiscal stimulus at the outset of the crisis, effective use of EU transfer funds, low financial exposure of the well-managed banking sector to the sovereign debt of troubled countries, and the insulation Poland enjoys through its floating currency and its relatively small traded sector” (state.gov). Clearly, Poland has both benefitted from its central position in the EU by way of low tariffs and high Foreign Investment. However, Poland’s late arrival to the EU and its relative insulation in relation to other EU countries and their debts has also greatly benefitted the economic situation of Poland and allowed it to weather the global economic meltdown of 2008.
Poland’s relative economic success compared to other EU countries during the period of global economic crisis stands in stark contrast to the economic experience of Ireland during the same period. In the 1990s, Ireland’s economy was thriving – achieving “several years of double-digit GDP growth” (state.gov). This period in Irish economic history is known as the “Celtic Tiger” period. The success of the Celtic Tiger was, “driven by a progressive industrial policy that boosted large-scale foreign direct investment and exports” (state.gov). This growth slowed after the September, 11th attack, yet Ireland was still performing well economically compared to most of their EU counterparts. The post-9/11 success of Ireland’s economy was mostly due to the success of the housing market and the complimentary construction industry, as nearly 25% of Irish jobs were in the construction sector (state.gov). However, the collapse of the housing market in 2008 quickly caused a collapse of Irish banks and government finance, as great deals of Irish loans were tied-up in the housing market leading to mass-defaults on housing loans (state.gov).
Ireland has yet to recover from the economic collapse of 2008. In 2010, “the Irish economy experienced double-digit unemployment, deflation, a virtual standstill in credit availability, and a widening government budget deficit” (state.gov). The collapse of the housing and construction industries in Ireland have ensured continued unemployment. As the government maintains a budget deficit (spending on stimulus programs to reinvigorate the economy while experiencing a drastic decrease in tax revenues as people are out of work and building permits are non-existent), it is forced to make critical decisions about where government will be allotted. Ireland received a 67.5 billion euro bailout from the EU Stabilization Fund in late 2011 (state.gov). In exchange for the bailout, Ireland has committed to austerity measures, “designed to reduce its deficit to 3% of GDP in 4 years” (state.gov).
Much like in the U.S, Irish social programs have been the first items of consideration for cuts to the government budget. As our study abroad group visited Ireland in the summer of 2012, political signs and graffiti either protesting or supporting the austerity measures were ubiquitous on the streets of Dublin. A public referendum to decide which aspects of the government budget will receive cuts is on the horizon and the debates are heated. Young people are concerned with paying for college, adults are concerned with unemployment, and the elderly are concerned with social security. Citizens who have grown to expect their government to supplement certain costs are frightened by the prospect of having to provide for themselves, especially amid such harsh economic conditions. Personally observing the heated political signs and graffiti in Dublin and speaking to locals in the pubs angry at the prospect of having to vote on referendums with diluted and ambiguous language was an experience which would be virtually inaccessible to a political scientist who has not visited Ireland. I imagine walking the streets of Warsaw would also provide opportunities for similar observations.
The major political divisions in each country have to do with economics and class issues. As aforementioned, the current political debate in Ireland has to do with austerity measures and determining which programs experience budget cuts. In Poland, despite its overall economic success, the wage gap separating the classes is quite high, leading to labor unrest similar to the Occupy Wall Street Movement in the U.S. These are the key differences we miss in the two countries if we focus solely on differences in their electoral laws and political institutions. The two countries are being forced to reconsider their political-economic system as a result of the global recession. Indeed, both countries have similar political institutions in place to address such issues. However, Ireland, unlike Poland, does not have a recent history with communism. The Polish people are only now seeing firsthand the economic stratification which often results from a capitalist economic system. It should be interesting to see how the Polish people handle the ill-by-products of capitalism in a democratic way. It is very much uncharted territory for them. Poland and Ireland’s political-economic structures could look drastically different in a few years depending on how the economic issues are resolved in each country.
No comments:
Post a Comment