Lots of terrible & misinformed takes on Poland tonight, proving once again how shallow the coverage of Poland by most international media is: this time based on an out of context misreading of Tusk’s remark on nuclear & a misunderstanding of his comments on military training. 🫠 - ThreadSky

jakubkrupa.bsky.social • 2 days ago

Lots of terrible & misinformed takes on Poland tonight, proving once again how shallow the coverage of Poland by most international media is: this time based on an out of context misreading of Tusk’s remark on nuclear & a misunderstanding of his comments on military training. 🫠

Comments

jakubkrupa.bsky.social•2 days ago

No, Tusk didn’t announce plans for a Polish nuclear programme; it appeared to be a response to Macron’s words about extending the French umbrella, with Tusk confirming “serious talks” about it.

Some people should think twice before misreading things and tweeting for engagement.

jakubkrupa.bsky.social•2 days ago

Relevant bit from the speech, translated, below.

Very clear he talks about it mostly theoretically, as part of a bigger rethink of Polish defence policy and need to rearm.

And then he was also asked about it *VERY SPECIFICALLY* in the press huddle after the speech (follows in next post).

jakubkrupa.bsky.social•2 days ago

Here's the press huddle afterwards: a clear reference to Macron, acknowledgment of the (obvious) lesson from Ukraine, but also no decisions made, list of things to consider, and a caveat that it's "a very long road", wd need a consensus etc.

jakubkrupa.bsky.social•2 days ago

And then the best thing about frenzied reports about Poland’s “plans” to “put in place system of compulsory military training for all adult men” is that Tusk literally said it wouldn’t be compulsory.

And that he would have said conscription if that’s what he meant.

But he didn’t.

jakubkrupa.bsky.social•2 days ago

And yet, that’s what you are reading in your feeds, because Poland is so poorly covered, often with people who don’t know the context or speak the language, but just take a DeepL translation and come up with any random stuff to get engagement in this frenzied environment.

Depressing.

maxkwiek.bsky.social•2 days ago

But Tusk is not a newbie and knows how this will resonate. He tailored his message to this info landscape and he achieved the effect that he desired.

uli-sander.bsky.social•2 days ago

Often it's not the bad translation, but the urge to report negatively.

d-cym.bsky.social•2 days ago

To be fair though, that is what most happens in most social media, and even regular media, even when there is no language or cultural issues. Statements by political leaders are twisted and misrepresented to meet the political agenda of the person writing.

boaj.bsky.social•2 days ago

Just FYI the British absolutely can use nukes without the US being involved. The US maintains them and provides the missiles for our warheads.

jvogt.bsky.social•2 days ago

Well, it certainly references Macron, but the "in our own hands" suggests he was, in fact, talking about Poland having its own capabilities.

jakubkrupa.bsky.social•2 days ago

He meant control of it, and if/how Poland would have influence over when/how they are used - not physical possession.

jvogt.bsky.social•2 days ago

Maybe, although it’s not clear. He could have simply answered the question by saying “No: Poland does not need its own nukes.” But he did not say that. Instead he said he wanted to take a close look at the French proposal, in a way that suggested he had doubts it would be sufficient.

ianpkearns.bsky.social•2 days ago

I’m sorry, but I’ve read this and the other statements very carefully. He specifically mentions nuclear will be considered. He indicated maybe the French system could make it not necessary but only perhaps, if Poland had some say in their use. That is very unlikely.

ianpkearns.bsky.social•2 days ago

He also does not say no to when asked, and indicates he’d like there to be a national debate with nuclear considered as part of that. The fact that it would a long, expensive road is irrelevant. We all know that. It is still a seismic statement unlike one by any other European leader in decades.

ianpkearns.bsky.social•2 days ago

Is this a fake comms account from PM’s office or genuine? If genuine, it also seems to be clear on the message he wanted to convey.

drmichaelflannery.bsky.social•2 days ago

We might be needing to rethink the policy on ‘warning’ in the light of the current climate, Berry head today with a ROC underground monitoring bunker post WW2 in the foreground, and a WW2 aircraft identifying and tracking post in the background , the shape of things to come? @shashj.bsky.social

whiterabbbit.bsky.social•2 days ago

AND - why could't it be the Polish nuclear program as well??

kaymau.bsky.social•1 day ago

"Some people should think twice before misreading things and tweeting for engagement."
🤯✅

vreij.bsky.social•2 days ago

It would certainly help if the English-language service of PAP news agency were up-to-date. I just looked, the newest article is dated 7 March... https://www.pap.pl/en

joshtpm.bsky.social•2 days ago

Completely agree w the overall point but didn’t a lot of the misread start with the English language translation/summary put out by the foreign ministry?

jakubkrupa.bsky.social•2 days ago

Sure for a twitter/x/bluesky storm but proper “legacy” media should have checked it properly before running

garvanwalshe.org•2 days ago

True, and I checked with Polish speakers - but is this a real account or a fake one?

jakubkrupa.bsky.social•2 days ago

Real - but it’s tweeted out of context by someone who didn’t realise how it made it sound.

studentka40.bsky.social•2 days ago

That in itself is disappointing. That an official gov account should be tweeting rashly, without regard for potential interpretation, on a matter of such importance, where « how it sounds » could mean everything.

benstanley.eu•2 days ago

It's also badly translated. What Tusk said would be better translated as "Poland must avail itself of possibilities associated with nuclear weapons and modern non-conventional weapons."

benstanley.eu•2 days ago

"Pursue" makes it sound more like an intention to acquire the weapons themselves, rather than benefit from the protections afforded by the French nuclear umbrella.

garvanwalshe.org•2 days ago

Was that automatic translation by a user or by someone inside?

benstanley.eu•2 days ago

I would hope that a real person did this, although I fear they did not spend long on it.

tpo-asd.bsky.social•2 days ago

📌

lostineu.bsky.social•1 day ago

https://www.ft.com/content/c2845e81-befa-4b97-bb46-34037368d9f2

hiniker.bsky.social•1 day ago

Nice to see you on here, Jakub! Did Duda say Poland was considering leaving the "Dublin Convention"? Because that makes no sense.

https://bsky.app/profile/hiniker.bsky.social/post/3ljvt3xjusc2q

beerbergman.bsky.social•1 day ago

Thank you for your coverage. I think I read something as you recontextualise it, but do not remember where. Still, thank you!

snabbkassa.bsky.social•1 day ago

Did he say it in English or Polish? Translation introduces changes in nuance, and then condensing it into "tweet length" changes apparent meaning again.

lmt7.bsky.social•2 days ago

It's too partly fault of KPRM english account, which published a mistranslation.

lmt7.bsky.social•2 days ago

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply