Marek J. Chodakiewicz, Ph.D.

Marek J. Chodakiewicz, Ph.D., is among the most renowned American historians of Polish heritage and the Dean of the Institute of the World Politics in Washington, D.C. In a conversation with Andrzej Mikołajczyk he discusses Polish-American relations, his research projects and teaching.

Marek J. Chodakiewicz works currently as the Academic Dean and Professor of History at the Institute of the World Politics: A Graduate School of National Security and International Affairs in Washington, DC.

He has written numerous scientific articles and books about history of Central and the Eastern Europe. He has done extensive research on Polish-Jewish relations, which resulted in many publications, including The Massacre in Jedwabne, July 10, 1941: Before, During, After (2005), Between Nazis and Soviets: Occupation Politics in Poland, 1939-1947 (2004) and After the Holocaust: Polish-Jewish Conflict in the Wake of World War Two (2003).

Involvement with Polish-American and Polish issues

- Let's talk about foreign policy. What do you think about current US-Poland relations, especially in the context of the current discussion about anti-ballistic missiles located in Poland?
Marek J. Chodakiewicz: US-Polish relations are currently all right. They are not, however, anchored on any permanent platform. It is not a strategic relationship. Warsaw's post-Communists gave Washington whatever the White House wanted and did not ask for anything in return. Hence, there are no visas for non-Communist Poles, for the regular folks. The Polish army still awaits a US grant to modernize itself technologically and educationally. I am a great fan of Polish-US cooperation but the Poles must learn how to capitalize on America's demand for their assistance. That's tactics. Strategically, the Poles need to figure out whether the Missile Shield enhances their security. I do not think that Warsaw has really thought everything through properly. It looks like the Poles would like to have their cake and eat it too. On the one hand, they bank on the United States to defend Poland. On the other, they are members of the European Union. What happens if, God forbid, the EU allies itself with China and Russia and becomes antagonistic vs. the United States?

- Russian President Vladimir Putin fiercely criticized the American plan to build an anti-missile system in Eastern Europe and accused the United States of attempts to establish a military hegemony. Will Poland's opposition to Russia and its solidarity with the American plan have a negative impact on Polish-Russian relations and ultimately lead to a split within NATO?
M.J.C.: The deployment of the anti-missile system will definitely have a negative impact on Polish-Russian relations. They have been pretty shabby since the Kremlin began reasserting itself on the world stage. But if the US sticks by Poland, Russia will have to get used to the situation. And please remember that Polish economic exchange and investments in Russia have steadily increased in the past few years. Overall, on the economic level, the cooperation is good as, incidentally, was also the case before the Second World War. This apparent contradiction reflects the cunning penchant of Moscow of conducting a multi-tiered foreign policy. The rule is that Russians simply do whatever is in their best interest. But short term economic gain will never obscure for them the long term geo-strategic objective, which is to assert itself in the post-Soviet sphere at least. Polish-Russian tension causing split within NATO is a different story. It is possible but it would not be the only factor. If NATO split, that would signal a major crisis between the EU and the US. Poland could serve as a convenient excuse to execute a serious geo-strategic reorientation, a reversal of alliances. That would be tragic and could have shocking consequences for the West.

- Ambassador Ed Rowny has just published a Polish edition of his book It Takes One to Tango (1992) (Tango z Niedzwiedziem). What do you think about Ambassador Rowny and his role that he played in arms negotiations and in his service to the United States and Polonia?
M.J.C.: General Ed Rowny is simply fantastic. He is a superb American patriot. He is also an outspoke Polish-American. He is a long-standing friend of the Institute of World Politics. He lectured here. General Rowny has never forgotten his Polish heritage. He has rooted for Poland for well over half a century. He was even an exchange student at the Jagiellonian University in Cracow in the 1930s. As far as his service to the United States is concerned, it was simply superb. He was the best person to have been appointed as nuclear arms negotiator with the Soviets when the objective was to be tough. Unlike his State Department counterparts, who believed in compromise for the sake of compromise, General Rowny stuck to his guns. And so did his boss, Ronald Reagan. Consequently, America and the Free World came up on top. The Soviet Union disintegrated. The general's role was quite important in all this.

- What is your opinion about the future of US-Polish relations?
M.J.C.: It all depends whether the Poles develop strategic thinking and whether a consensus emerges among Poland's political parties as far as national security is concerned. As long as the post-Communists remain important players, that will be very hard to accomplish.

Involvement in Research Projects

- You have spent years on doing research on Central and Eastern European historical issues. I know that you are a devout student of history.
M.J.C.: That I am.

- How did you become involved in research?
M.J.C.: Pace post-modernists, there is no study of history without research. If one is curious, one searches for answers. In history, that usually involves archival research. I researched before I was formally trained as a historian in graduate school and I've only redoubled my efforts since.

- You deal with some very sensitive issues related to Polish-Jewish affairs like Jedwabne.
M.J.C.: They are only sensitive so far as political correctness prevents some people from applying the scientific method to seek for the truth in this field. I consider myself an icebreaker. I go when none else wishes to pursue a lead. I think that academic freedom dramatically circumscribed the realm of the unknown in history. Therefore my interests are in topics which scholars generally avoid because of the terror of political correctness. And that also concerns Polish-Jewish relations.

- What is your opinion on Polish-Jewish affairs?
M.J.C.: Things are much better than they were before 1989 when the Polish Christian side was almost completely silent and unable to present its point of view. Now, with freedom in Poland to research and publish and with the internet to exchange views openly, one can present the Polish side of the issue. Or, more precisely, one can now present freely the results of one's research even if they are politically incorrect.

- President Bush nominated you to serve in the US Holocaust Memorial Council in 2005. What do you do?
M.J.C.: I was nominated and sworn in by the President of the United States to be on the board of the United States Holocaust Memorial Council. The Council advises about everything that concerns commemorating the Holocaust at the federal level, in particular as far as the US Holocaust Memorial Museum is concerned. I am on the Acquisitions Committee. That means I opine about items acquired by the Museum. I also participate in the general work on the Council, for example approving the Museum's budget. It is very educational to participate in this enormous enterprise of commemorating a terrible genocide. It teaches one that an ethnic group of American citizens can organize itself to prevail on the Congress and the federal government to fund and propagate the teaching of the greatest tragedy that befell upon this particular ethno-religious minority thousands of miles away from the United States. I'm curious to see how long it will take the Polonia to realize that American Poles can also organize themselves to such a commendable end.

- How do you feel as the Polish American researcher in mainstream American academia?
M.J.C.: Fine, thank you. What's a difference between a Polish American and non-Polish American scholar? The only difference is whether one's a conservative or a leftist. Ethnicity does not matter. And non-leftist scholars in contemporary mainstream academia are not welcome, in the humanities in particular. Fortunately, the Institute of World Politics is an exception to the rule. We are very openminded here. All are welcome, except Nazis, Communists, and the like.

- You have been traveling extensively with your lectures. How do you make choices regarding attending so many different events, conferences and keeping up with your academic work?

M.J.C.: That's easy. You set your priorities and then choose and pick. Generally, I bundle. That means, if I elect to accept an invitation to a lecture, it has to coincide with fundraising, recruiting, and networking. All expenses are covered by the party inviting me and there is a speaker's fee. I simply cannot afford time-wise to come out to, say, Toronto and hang out with friends. I'd love to, but I can't. What makes it difficult is that I have to tell friends that I have a job, which keeps me very busy, and that I get paid lecturing and writing. Most of them seem to think that because I love what I do, I should do it for free. Well, one needs to make a living, doesn't one. History research and writing is for the independently wealthy. And if you are not a filthy rich aristocrat, you'd better make sure your work pays your bills. That is virtually the only way to assure professionalism.

Academic and Administrative Work At the Institute of World Politics

- You are serving as the Academic Dean of Institute of World Politics in Washington, DC. What does your work involve?
M.J.C.: If you take a job description of an academic dean of any graduate school, that would be me. The only difference is that we are a boutique institution. Hence, there is less bureaucracy. The Dean's tasks are executed at two levels: internal and external. Internally, my job is to ascertain our academic offerings remain on the highest intellectual level and that the students, faculty, and staff are happy. Externally, I represent the Institute before the outside world, which includes lecturing, fundraising, and student recruiting.

- I understand that you are teaching several courses as well. What courses do you teach?
M.J.C.: I teach Geography and Strategy which is a combination of geopolitical theory, integrated strategy, conflict resolution, and the nitty-gritty of the battlefield. It is a core curriculum class, which means every student has to take it to graduate. Further, I conduct several seminars: Russian Politics and Foreign Policy; Genocide and Genocide Prevention, Advanced Writing and Research Seminar for National Security; and Poland and East Central Europe from 1914 to the Present. I also offer directed studies, which are one-on-one tutorials, Oxford-style, where the student reads extensively, meets with me to discuss the reading, and writes a substantial term paper on the topic of his choice. There are several directed studies one can take with me, including Poland: Past and Present, Extremist Movements in History, Western Civilization and Intellectual Tradition, The Ottoman Empire, and Revolution and Counter-revolution.

- How did it happen that you have been nominated to serve as the Academic Dean of such unique institution?
M.J.C.: (laughs) I am the youngest of all professors, so the President and the Board decided to punish me. Well, seriously, I'm resident faculty and also I am the only one who is strictly an academic. All other professors are scholars-practitioners. That is they practice, or used to practice, their art with the government.

- You teach future diplomats, spies, dignitaries. How do you recruit the students? Where are they going to find future employment? Do you accept international students at your school?
M.J.C.: We teach not only future but current diplomats, military and civilian defense specialists, and intelligence officers. Half of the student body consists of mid-career professionals of middle and upper middle rank. They are already employed with the State Department, the Pentagon, the Homeland Security Office, the FBI, the CIA, Defense Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency, National Counterintelligence Executive, and so on. They attend the Institute to enhance their skills with our educational offerings. We used to recruit pretty much by word of mouth. Now and then, we'd place a strategic ad in The Washington Post. Generally, we are looking for the exceptional individual. We do not believe that quantity translates into quality. Nonetheless, lately we have started to recruit college students. Many find us on the internet because they want to be James Bond. But we also organize open houses at the Institute frequently and visit other schools with lectures periodically. For example, I went to nine universities in a week or so when I was in Florida last January. As far as international students are concerned, of course we accept them. We have had a fair number of them, including more than a few who achieved prominence in their nations: a deputy chief of South Korean military intelligence, two co-directors of the office of national security of Rwanda (a Tutsi and a Hutu, who became friends at IWP), or the minister of internal affairs of Afghanistan.

- You are dealing with very sensitive issues. How do you define boundaries between classified and not classified information/issues?
M.J.C.: Well, classified information does not exist outside of the intelligence community until it becomes declassified. I don't have a security clearance. Some of our professors and students do. I do not get involved with that. The professors enjoy full autonomy in their classes and if they wish to declassify certain information for class use, that's what they do. As far as my research is concerned, I am also a beneficiary of the system here. For example, I have a formerly top secret FBI memorandum of June 23, 1952, based upon British intelligence sources, describing, among others, Oskar Lange as a Soviet agent. The memorandum was naturally declassified but, in all likelihood, I would not have it if I were not working here. Simply, a professor who knows that I am very interested in Polish history gave it to me.

- What is the percentage of the Polish-American students/graduates from your program?
M.J.C.: Wow! I do not believe we maintain statistics on that. We are completely color blind. True, more than a few American Poles teach here. As far as our student body, We've had a number of Americans of Polish extraction and even a few Poles from Poland. We encourage young people in general to seek internships with us. But there are precious few spots open. We reserve them for the best. For example, currently Lucie Adamski from Chicago interns with us. A couple of years ago we had Martina Pospieszalski, who's now with the Department of Justice. Two summers ago we hosted a post-doctoral fellow from Warsaw who became one of the top people at the Institute of National Remembrance. Once again: quality and not quantity.

- Professors in your institution serve also as experts for national media. How do you feel in such a role as an expert on sensitive national and international issues? Are you free to express your own views?
M.J.C.: Sure; we are free to say whatever we want. We are neither the Communist party nor the Prussian army. There is a real diversity of opinion here. And one always takes responsibility for what one says. But we don't salivate to be on TV. Integrity is much more important. For example, I was invited to come on a major TV cable news show to bash France. The producers of the show wanted me to comment about an alleged meeting between French diplomats and Palestinian activists connected to some terrorists. I asked the producers where they got that from. From the Haaretz, a liberal Israeli paper, they responded. "And where did the Haaretz get it from?" They did not know. I told them to check. And I told them at least to ask the French whether the meeting had really taken place. If they denied it, they would be on the record. It turned out that the Haaretz learned about the alleged meeting from a Palestinian propaganda web-site. This was just an unconfirmed rumor. There was no need for me to go and criticize the French. Besides, as I told the producers, the French intelligence continues to work very closely with our operatives. The French spooks are not the same as the Quai d'Orsay, the French Foreign Ministry.