Primary Sources
Minutes of the Meeting of the Polish Citizens' Parliamentary Club
Description
Poland's first semi-free elections in early June 1989 indicated Poles' strongly anti-Communist and pro-Solidarity sentiments, as evidenced by the solid defeat of Communism. Following this historic election, the newly elected pro-Solidarity parliamentary leaders formed the Citizens' Parliamentary Club, in which they debated about the future of Poland's political system. At a meeting of this group on August 1, 1989, members discussed (and disagreed on) who should become the next prime minister as well as whether or not the group should form a coalition with another political party. In particular, they focused their attention on General Czeslaw Kiszczak, a long-time Communist Party leader and army officer; Kiszczak eventually served as prime minister for a couple of weeks in August 1989, after which he was succeeded by Tadeusz Mazowiecki, a Solidarity activist, who became the first non-Communist prime minister in Eastern Europe since the 1940s. As this document so clearly reveals, the process of creating a new form of governing in a time of uncertainty was fraught with tension, compromise, and swift change.
Source
Citizens' Parliamentary Club, "Minutes of a Meeting of the Presidium of the Citizens' Parliamentary Club," 1 August 1989, trans. Jan Chowaniec, Archives of the Bureau of Senate Information and Documentation, Cold War International History Project, Documents and Papers, CWIHP (accessed May 14, 2008).
Primary Source—Excerpt
...B. Geremek:...I had a meeting with Gen. Kiszczak at 2 p.m. It turns out that, at a Politburo meeting, out of four candidates submitted for the position of prime minister only one is left—Rakowski.... Kiszczak is not willing either, but he thinks it's his duty. He asked about the position of our Club....
ZSL [United People's Party, affiliated with the Communist Party under Communism] has come up with a proposal to form a government with the OKP [Citizens' Parliamentary Club].
...A. Stelmachowski: To sum it up, the situation is as follows:
-some consensus is emerging to vote against Kiszczak.
-are we to vote negatively against each PUWP [Polish United Workers' Party, i.e., Communist Party] candidate?
-do we see the possibility of forming our own government with small concessions?
T. Mazowiecki: My position is known to all of you....
-I think that the Club's decision to vote against Kiszczak is not good. I do not share the position of our Chairman....
-My political assessment is the following: if such a strong man is being proposed, then the power is being shifted toward the line of the parliament-government. It's going to be a strong government.... There is no need for the Club to vote against, it may abstain....
-As far as the ZSL proposal is concerned, one ought to remember that the ZSL doesn't have access to the proper centers of power.....
But if we were faced with a situation of the state crisis, then some talks about a great coalition might be possible, but not us in coalition with the ZSL.
...J. M. Rokita: I get the impression that a Kiszczak government, after all, would not be strong in a situation where it wouldn't have support of a strong majority in the Sejm. It would be a government in which we would constantly have to be hypocrites. In the long run it would be a trap for us.
...J. Kuron:... The government should be ours, i.e., formed by us. We should vote against all of Kiszczak's candidates.
...J. Slisz: We need to form a government that is a great coalition—in which we should be the dominant force....
J. Stelmachowski:... We need to be against Kiszczak; a strong PUWP government is not in our interest. It would be ill-perceived abroad—two generals in top positions....
A. Michnik:... [I]f Kiszczak doesn't get through—I propose Mazowiecki, Stelmachowski and others....
B. Geremek:... In justifying our position we will argue that we are against the continuation of the present rule.... We reject a government [of] General Kiszczak plus Solidarity...
B. Geremek: I told Kiszczak that his candidacy is not good, that someone else would be better. He has recognized this argument....