So far as Moscow was concerned, however, the Ninth PUWP Congress failed to go according to plan. Faced with a blatant Soviet attempt to unseat Kania, the congress rallied round him. But, taking seriously the threat of Soviet invasion, the congress also retained among the leadership some of the chief supporters of the Soviet campaign of intimidation. And though it gave loud applause to Rakowski’s speech, it dared not antagonize the Kremlin by electing him to the Politburo. The main consequence of the contradictory outcome of the congress was a near paralysis of government. Women and children marched through Polish cities banging empty pans to protest against food shortages. Encouraged by Solidarity, industrial workers elected factory councils which claimed the right to choose their managers.37
The worsening crisis of central government seems to have convinced Jaruzelski that martial law would soon become inevitable. Detailed plans were agreed with Kulikov early in August. At a meeting with Jaruzelski and senior Polish generals on August 12, Kulikov demanded “firmness and still more firmness.”38 On August 21 the new hardline interior minister, General Czeslaw Kiszczak, formerly head of military intelligence, visited Moscow to report personally to Andropov on secret preparations by the SB and police for the introduction of martial law. Hitherto, he acknowledged, “The Polish leadership has handled Solidarity as if it were an egg which it was afraid to break. We must put a stop to this.”39
Kiszczak and the SB no longer saw Wałęsa as the main problem. During the previous six months Wałęsa’s leadership had become somewhat lackluster as he struggled to recover a clear sense of direction. Solidarity ultimately had to choose between two strategic options: either it had to become a truly revolutionary body capable of overthrowing the Communist one-party state, or it had to accommodate itself to the system and be content with winning a few concessions. Wałęsa found himself unable to opt clearly for either option. He had backed away from a general strike in March when most other leading figures in Solidarity believed the time had come for a showdown. Zbigniew Bujak, chairman of Solidarity in the Warsaw region, concluded that Wałęsa had made a fatal mistake:
General strikes are like swords—once you take them out of the scabbard and fail to use them, they are no more use than useless hunks of iron. Wałęsa in effect demobilized the union… It deprived us of our basic weapon and thus became the source of our subsequent defeat. The authorities counted on this when they prepared the martial law operation of December 13.40
Kiszczak told Andropov that, though Wałęsa might use aggressive language to appeal to Solidarity “extremists,” his thinking was relatively moderate. The main danger now came from Bujak, who was both “anti-Socialist and anti-Soviet:” “He is cleverer than Wałęsa and is closely linked with [the KOR leaders] Kurón and Michnik. The task of the [SB] agencies is to discredit him.”
“AT THE PRESENT time,” Kiszczak told Andropov, “the Roman Catholic Church does not represent a threat to the PUWP.” Milewski had devoted “immense efforts” to the agent penetration of the Church, and the SB was now well-informed about its mood and intentions: “Out of seventy bishops, good contacts are maintained with fifty. This makes it possible to bring influence to bear on the Catholic Church and to prevent undesirable moves.”41 The recent death of the 80-year-old Primate, Cardinal Wyszýnski, a friend of Solidarity and for over a generation a courageous defender of religious freedom, had come as an immense relief to the SB (and doubtless to the KGB):
The new Primate, [Cardinal Józef] Glemp, is not as anti-Soviet as his predecessor. Wyszyński enjoyed immense authority; his word was law. He was the object of a personality cult and his cult exceeded anything imaginable. Glemp is a different kind of man and there are undoubtedly possibilities of exerting influence on him.
Two problems, however, remained in Church-state relations. The first was the Pope, who—according to Kiszczak—was cleverly exploiting the situation in Poland to advance his anti-Communist policies in eastern Europe. The second problem was the moral authority of the Polish Church. The people looked on the Church, not the Party, as the “standard-bearer of morality.” “In the immediate future,” Kiszczak admitted, “the Party will not be able to change the attitude towards the Catholic Church.”
Andropov seems to have hectored Kiszczak rather less than most other Polish leaders he had met over the previous few years. But he ended their meeting in somber mood:
The class enemy has repeatedly tried to challenge the people’s power in the Socialist countries… But the Polish crisis is the most long drawn out, and perhaps the most dangerous. The adversary’s creeping counter-revolution has long been preparing for the struggle with Socialism.42
Solidarity’s first national congress (held in two sessions from September 5 to 10 and from September 26 to October 7) provided further evidence of “creeping counter-revolution.” Its appeal on September 8 “to the working people of eastern Europe… who have entered the difficult road to struggle for a free trade union movement” was denounced by the SB as “a brazen attempt to interfere in the internal affairs of Socialist countries.”43
Pavlov now seemed satisfied that Jaruzelski was prepared for “decisive measures” to end “the threat from Solidarity.” On September 29 he reported to the Centre that he had “advised” Jaruzelski on the line to follow at the plenary meeting of the Central Committee on October 18.44 The first priority was to get rid of Kania, who, Pavlov reported, continued to pursue “a policy of conciliation” towards Solidarity. Having failed to secure Kania’s dismissal at the July Party congress, Moscow was determined to succeed at the October Central Committee plenum. The Centre must have been particularly outraged by Pavlov’s account of a secret briefing on Kania’s policy given by his supporter, Deputy Prime Minister Kazimierz Barcikowski, on October 2, 1981. According to Barcikowski, Kania was “disenchanted with the Soviet model of Socialism”:
The Soviet system of Socialism had failed the test. The fact that the USSR was systematically buying grain in the West was an indication of serious errors in the management of agriculture… The power of the Soviet regime was maintained only through the army and other agencies of coercion. However, in the last two or three years, the situation had begun to change to the Soviet Union’s disadvantage. China was significantly strengthening its military power; its military and economic contacts with the USA were a serious threat to the USSR, and pinned down a large number of troops on the far eastern borders. In the last few months, the situation in Afghanistan had sharply deteriorated. It was now clear that it would be impossible to win this conflict politically without the use of mass repressive measures similar to those used by the Americans in Vietnam. If at the present time the USSR still had some strategic advantage over the USA, within three or four years it would lose it, as the Soviet economy would no longer be able to meet the additional expense of developing and producing new types of armaments.
The imposition of the Soviet model of socialism had, Kania believed, “bureaucratized the PUWP” and distorted Leninist principles:
He regarded it as his main task to do everything to protect the positive processes taking place in Poland, including the Solidarity movement, in order to create a basis for genuine Socialism which, with certain variations, could also find a place in other Socialist countries.45
Even Dubček during the Prague Spring had never made such a devastating indictment of the Soviet system.
Pavlov’s detailed reports on Kania indicate either that his home had been bugged or that there was an informer in his immediate family. He informed the Centre that on October 5, “Kania came home in a very agitated state and told a narrow circle of his family that the Russian comrades are again plotting to remove him from the post of First Secretary.” Kania claimed not to understand why his Soviet “friends” did not tell him frankly that he must resign. If they did so, he would go “without causing a fuss.” According to the KGB, Kania’s wife was deeply disturbed by his state of mind and anxious for him to resign so that he could recover his health and cease to
be “a persecuted politician.” But Pavlov did not believe that Kania really intended to go quietly. He reported on October 7 that Kania had instructed Kiszczak to take action against a number of Party members who, he believed (no doubt correctly), were plotting against him.46 Kiszczak, however, sided with Jaruzelski and the plotters.
Kania’s fate was sealed at a stormy confrontation with Jaruzelski, Kiszczak, Milewski (now secretary of the PUWP central committee) and two other Polish generals. Jaruzelski told him that, unless he agreed to preparations for martial law, they would go ahead behind his back—and “decisive” (but unspecified) action would be taken against him personally.47 On the morning of October 18, just before the opening of the plenary meeting of the central committee, Aristov informed Kania that it was the “unanimous view” in Moscow that he should be replaced as first secretary by Jaruzelski.48 The central committee duly did Moscow’s bidding, and Kania gave way without a struggle. According to KGB reports, Kania said after his dismissal that he was still haunted by memories of the shooting of strikers in 1970. If he had remained first secretary, he would never have been able to give the order to open fire again.49
Next day, October 19, Brezhnev telephoned Jaruzelski to congratulate him on his appointment as first secretary, while keeping his existing posts as prime minister and defense minister. “Hello, Wojciech,” Brezhnev began. “Hello, my dear, deeply esteemed Leonid Ilyich!” Jaruzelski replied. He maintained the same sycophantic tone throughout the conversation:
Thank you very much, dear Leonid Ilyich, for the greeting and above all for the confidence you have in me. I want to tell you frankly that I had some inner misgivings about accepting this post and agreed to do so only because I knew that you support me and that you were in favor of this decision. If this had not been so, I would never have agreed to it.
Jaruzelski added that, later in the day, he would be meeting Aristov to discuss the situation in detail and would “be asking for your suggestions on some questions which he, no doubt, will convey to you.” Lying effortlessly, Brezhnev told Jaruzelski that the CPSU Politburo had realized long ago that he was the right man for the job.50 Predictably, he made no mention of the fact that in the course of the summer the KGB had recommended sacking Jaruzelski as well as Kania. In the end, however, the Politburo had reluctantly concluded that only Jaruzelski possessed the authority to declare martial law.51
Soviet doubts about Jaruzelski, however, continued. On November 4 Jaruzelski began talks with Wałęsa and Archbishop Glemp at which he proposed their participation in a Front of National Accord which, while it would have no decision-making powers, would keep open dialogue between the state, Church and unions.52 Though Pavlov and Aristov were in favor of tactics designed to damp down any suspicion by Wałęsa and Glemp that martial law was imminent, they feared that Jaruzelski would end by making real concessions. On November 13 they sent a joint telegram to the Politburo condemning Jaruzelski’s indecisiveness and his attempt to conciliate Wałęsa, and urging that he be pressed yet again to declare martial law without further delay.53 On november 21 the Politburo approved the text of a personal message from Brezhnev to Jaruzelski, berating him for his inaction:
The anti-Socialist forces are not only gaining sway in many large industrial enterprises, but are also continuing to spread their influence among ever wider segments of the population. Worse still, the leaders of Solidarity and the counter-revolutionaries are still appearing before various audiences and making openly inflammatory speeches aimed at stirring up nationalist passions and directed against the PUWP and against Socialism. The direct consequence of this is the dangerous growth of anti-Sovietism in Poland.
…The leaders of the anti-Socialist forces… are placing great store by the fact that a new group of recruits will be entering the army who have been worked on by Solidarity. Doesn’t this suggest to you that a failure to take harsh measures against the counter-revolutionaries right away will cost you valuable time?54
Jaruzelski seems finally to have given way to Soviet pressure at the beginning of December. He told a meeting of the PUWP Politburo on December 5 that, after thirty-six years of the “people’s power” in Poland, there sadly seemed no alternative to using “police methods” against the working class. The Politburo unanimously accepted the need to declare martial law.55 The main details of its implementation were worked out under the supervision of Kiszczak,56 who briefed Pavlov on December 7. One hundred and fifty-seven SB and other interior ministry personnel had been sent around the provinces in groups of up to five to ensure that preparations had been made to isolate and arrest Solidarity leaders and other “extremists.” Pavlov reported to the Centre that the SB had agents “at all levels of Solidarity,” and intended that, where possible, these agents should step into the shoes of the arrested activists. Their main task after the declaration of martial law would be to prevent workers from going on strike or taking to the streets.57 Suspect members of the government and Party leadership were placed under close SB surveillance. Kania’s former supporter, Barcikowski, told his friends that the SB followed him wherever he went and recorded all his telephone calls.58
On the night of December 8-9 Jaruzelski briefed Marshal Kulikov on the timetable for martial law. Approximately 80,000 personnel had been selected to arrest 6,000 Solidarity activists on the night of either December 11-12 or 12-13. Troops would begin moving from their barracks at 6 a.m. on the morning after the arrests. Though the plans appeared resolute, however, Jaruzelski did not. “During our discussions,” Kulikov reported, “W. Jaruzelski’s indecisiveness and wavering and his apprehension about the successful implementation of the plan to impose martial law were palpable.” The PUWP, Jaruzelski complained, had little authority left. Six to seven hundred thousand of its members were associated with Solidarity, and it was compromised by numerous instances of theft, bribery and other abuses of the people’s trust. For martial law to succeed, it might be necessary for him to appeal for assistance from Warsaw Pact forces—though he asked for East German troops not to be used. “I can assure you that you have no need for concern on that score,” Kulikov told him. “The question of assisting you in the event that your own resources become exhausted is being addressed at General Staff level.”59
On December 9 Milewski brought Pavlov further evidence of Jaruzelski’s anxious state of mind. Jaruzelski had still not set a date for the introduction of martial law. If the Church opposed martial law, Jaruzelski had told him, Glemp would turn into “a second Khomeini.”60 Next day the CPSU Politburo met in emergency session to discuss the Polish crisis. It began by hearing a report from Nikolai Baibakov of Gosplan, just returned from a visit to Warsaw to discuss Poland’s appeal for economic assistance. Jaruzelski, Baibakov reported, had become an “extremely neurotic” wreck, terrified that Glemp would declare a holy war. Though all the Politburo members who spoke after Baibakov made scathing criticisms of Jaruzelski, none suggested trying to replace him. It was plainly too late for that. There was general agreement, too, that Soviet forces must not intervene. Andropov declared bluntly:
If Comrade Kulikov actually did speak about the introduction of troops, then I believe he did this incorrectly. We can’t risk such a step. We don’t intend to introduce troops into Poland. That is the proper position, and we must adhere to it until the end. I don’t know how things will turn out in Poland, but even if Poland falls under the control of Solidarity, that’s the way it will be.61
Jaruzelski complained to Milewski and others that, by refusing to allow Warsaw Pact military intervention if Polish security forces proved unable to cope, the Soviet Politburo had let him down:
They pressed us to take firm and decisive action, and the Soviet leaders promised to provide all the assistance and support needed. But now, when we have made a firm decision to take action and we would like to discuss it with the Soviet leaders, we cannot get a concrete answer from the Soviet comrades.
Jaruzelski was gloomy about the prospects for martial law without Soviet military
support. “We’re about to go on the offensive,” he told Milewski, “but I’m afraid that later on we’ll be branded as conspirators and hanged.” Milewski rang Andropov to report what Jaruzelski had said.62
Until the very last moment Moscow continued to fear that Jaruzelski’s nerve would crack. On December 11 Aristov, Kulikov and Pavlov jointly reported to the Politburo that all the preparations for “operation X” (the enforcement of martial law) had been completed. But:
In view of W. Jaruzelski’s inclination toward vacillation and doubt, we can’t exclude the possibility that, under pressure from the episcopate and other forces, he may refuse to take the final decision and will pursue the line of making concessions and agreements. In the light of the current situation, such a step could prove fatal for the PUWP and for the future of Socialism in Poland.63
On Saturday December 12 Jaruzelski telephoned Brezhnev and Suslov, asked for and received their approval for operation X to begin that evening.64 The KGB mission in Warsaw, however, was still not convinced that Jaruzelski would go ahead. He continued to agonize over whether the loss of life which might be necessary to prevent Solidarity turning Poland into “a bourgeois state” could possibly be justified. And if martial law failed, he was convinced that all those responsible for declaring it would be “physically eliminated.” “If we fail,” said Jaruzelski, “there will be nothing left for me to do but to put a bullet in my head.”65 Pavlov also reported that if Jaruzelski’s nerve failed, Olszowski was prepared to stage a coup—provided he had the backing of Moscow. Olszowski’s plan of action included the immediate arrest of Solidarity leaders; the prohibition of strikes and protests; the confiscation of food supplies in the countryside; close “economic cooperation” with the Soviet Union; the enforcement of martial law throughout the country; and the sealing of Polish borders.66
The Sword and the Shield Page 90
