History of the Solidarity Movement

Chapter 1: Introduction

Solidarity, to most people at present time, is just a word signifying unity, cohesion and harmony but taking that word back, to 1980, would give it a significantly different meaning. Towards the end of the twentieth century, this word would become associated with ‘the greatest political movement of modern history’[1]. The importance of this movement has been cemented deeply not only in Poland’s history, giving Poles a new geo-political identity ,but also emphasizing Poland in global history, often linking it to histories of Cold War.
A number of historians have debated this topic as of recent, especially after the collapse of communism. It opened a number of doors for historians to try, literally, due to opening of archives which were not available to anyone ever before. Because this topic is very recent there are a number of advantages and disadvantages. Even though this topic is a recent part of our history, and there are mounts of available sources, no clear conclusions can be made as more evidence emerges as the years go on. Alongside that, due to emerging documents new truths are being found out. Additionally to this, even though we have access to those who were involved in the movement and it allows for a more coherent analysis of events, due to the factor above it is hard to analyse those factors fully.
In order to analyse the factors that led to Solidarity being ‘the most impressive and significant working-class movement of our period’[2], it is essential to explicate how this movement came to be, and one way of doing this is by looking at the events prior to 1980.
Solidarity was born out of a long standing worker-government discontent, with its origins being characterised by strikes, protests and general tensions which could be attributed to post World War Two and the Yalta conference, during which a Soviet backed Provisional Government of National Unity was formed, disregarding the London based Polish government-in-exile. Such politics were seen as a stab in the back by the West to many Poles. Failure of the Soviet economic policy across the Eastern Bloc is the favourable argument amongst scholars for the directive for the birth of Solidarity and according to Touraine, ‘nowhere else in Communist Central Europe was the failure of a government industrial and agricultural policy so obvious’.[3]
In mid-70’s the economy ‘slipped deeper into an irreversible economic decline, as production levels plummeted, real wages stagnated, shortages increased and foreign debt mounted, reaching $18 billion by 1980’.[4] The year of 1980 is what brought the government’s new economic policy, which saw the rise of food prices across Poland, and this was met with a wave of protests across the country, which unlike the protests in the 70’s, could no longer be silenced by the government. The first ever strike started in the Aviation Works in Lublin, which led to the creation of a well-known phrase, ‘it all started over a burger’, and before long protests spread like wildfire. Upsurge of protests and strikes, and the inability of the state to put the strikes out had led to the Gdansk Agreement being drafted.
This thesis will highlight the importance of the Solidarity movement to Poland’s freedom from the communist grip as well as analyse the key components which allowed the movement to flourish. Through critical assessment of key areas which I have chosen, the chapters will review important figures, the church as well as the international responses to the movement’s emergence. I will look at the way in which those events have successfully managed to contribute to the rise of the movement and securing its future in the new Free Poland. Through careful analysis of primary and secondary sources I will be able to prove the usefulness of these factors in establishing the movement in Poland as well as highlighting the factors based on their importance of strengthening the movement. Use of key texts in each section will also provide me with the correct set of conclusions.

Chapter 2: Against the Odds: How far can the actions of the ‘heroes’ of the Solidarity movement, be attributed to rise of the movement and establishment of Solidarity as a trade union?

This chapter is fundamental in analysing the way in which the movement had arisen and in particular looks at the cause and effect aspect of the movement through analysis of the key figures and their actions. It provides evidence for their aims and goals for the movement. Just like with most conflicts, the upsurge in the cause is never an overnight affair. The bubbling away, caused by the mistreatment of the repressed working classes in their everyday life by the state is what contributed to a number of key figures to emerge and support the movement. When looking at previous movements with similar goals and for similar causes, a number of people have already tried and have been defeated in fighting for the cause of the working class. An example of this was crushing of the 1970 movements in Poland during which 30 workers have died.
What makes it difficult for a number of working class movements to succeed, especially in authoritarian communist states, is the fact that the aspect of class does not exist, as it goes against the Marx ideology. Historians believe that what made 1980’s a success was the fact that the movement was not area specific and speed in which the movement had spread. It grew faster than the authorities were able to contain it.
In order to analyse the key figures, a number of key personalities was chosen. Judgement on which personality counted as an important figure was decided on how active they were in the movement and how responsible they were for its growth as well as how relevant they stayed after the success of the movement in achieving Polish independence from the communist regime.
This chapter will focus on the extent in which Lech Walesa, Anna Walentynowicz and Alina Pienkowska, have contributed to the rise for the popularity and will also assess how far their actions contributed to the establishment of the movement.
It will firstly investigate why did Walesa became such an icon for the movement, as well as the events with which he was involved with that led to the signing of the Gdansk Agreement. It will further asses the movement’s fight and reasoning for wanting to reinstate Anna Walentynowicz, as well as Walentynowicz’s perpetual attempt at mobilisation of the working groups for the movement and her dedication to try and make the movement successful. Lastly, it will examine the way in which Alina Pienkowska joined forces of the movement and just like Walentynowicz continued to fight for the success of the movement. This chapter will conclude with the notion, that the involvement of these figures was essential for the success of the movement and that it was their continuous motivation alongside of other factors which enabled for the movement to flourish.

2.1 Lech Walesa:
In order to analyze how Walesa contributed to the movement it is essential to investigate the factors that put his in the front line of the events in 1980. By the end of 1980, the name of Lech Walesa was just as famous as the movement itself and ran in parallel and more often was a representation of hope. The fame of Walesa’s name however dates back pre-1970. His political concerns beginning his main involvement in politics started in 1968, with an attempt of mobilising support at the shipyards for the recently condemned student strikes. From that point on, it was also Walesa who helped to organise the widely illegal protests of 1970, when workers protested for similar reasons in 1970. With failure of achieving the aims in those strikes, Walesa was convinced further change needed to happen.
In 1976, Walesa was dismissed due to his continuous involvement in trade union activities, which, at the time were considered as illegal as well as for attempting to commemorate the deaths of the 1970 strikers.’The 1970s were extremely challenging and painful for Lech Walesa and his family. He lived under constant surveillance of the State Security Service. His home and his workplace were tapped, and Lech Walesa was incessantly spied upon and repressed’.[5] Involvement in those activities had led him to become arrested several times over the decade.
With such experience, this factor enables to identify it as an important aspect of the rise of the movement which continued to provide fruitful results even in free Poland. His multiple arrests have established him as an important leader with the authorities trying to downplay his achievements due to the threat he was posing to them and calling him a ‘former leader of a former union’.[6] This gave Walesa an advantage over their authorities as his prolonged activities and constant involvement with the authorities means that he also gained the experience of how to deal with them, which was beneficial to the evolution of the movement.
Since Walesa had planned the failed uprising of the 1970’s, it meant that he knew inside out what would work and what would not, once again based on his experience. ‘He who puts out his hand to stop the wheel of history will have his fingers crushed’ is one of Walesa’s commonly used phrases.[7] With such view in mind as well as a good organisational structure, Walesa was able to contribute to the movement greatly.
Furthermore, the type of character that Walesa embodies is also a great benefit which enabled Solidarity to flourish. ‘Walesa’s ability to earn the trust of the people ensured that they never lost faith, regardless of how severe the backlash from the regime was’.[8] This is supported further by a letter which Walesa received from one of the Solidarity members, which states that Walesa has ‘shown us that we mustn’t be frightened off by police truncheons, nor by ridicule, nor lack of faith. The other thing that really impresses me is your profound faith.’[9] It was Walesa’s character which also managed to earn him The New York Times Man of the Year award which featured a hand drawn caricature of Walesa on the front cover[10] and the Nobel Peace Prize the following year for his work on human rights.[11] This acclaimed him international attention as well as a personal visit from Margaret Thatcher on her state visit in 1988. During her dinner with Walesa she exclaimed that ‘Personal Freedom and Economic Freedom go hand in hand. It produces both: dignity of the individual and prosperity’.[12] A Clear sign of encouragement, which meant that Thatcher agreed with the policies Solidarity was pursuing. With The Times branding Walesa as ‘a man of emotion, not of logic or analysis’[13], also aligning with the idea that Walesa was a man of the people, who can get things done.
What also shows how important he was to the movement can be judged from the way in which he became the leading figure of the movement. Not any average person can jump over a fence of the place of strike and assume the responsibility as the leader, which is exactly what happen in the case of Walesa. It therefore means that it was not a case of right place at the right time, but instead gives a clear judgment that he must have been a credible contributor to the rise of the movement.
Another important factor which Walesa managed to contribute to the rise of the profile of Solidarity as well as the birth of the movement into a legal trade union was in what was seen by the authorities as dissemination of anti-communist propaganda. Through travelling all over the country to mobilise support as well as spreading the messages of Solidarity and the progress which the movement had achieved, Walesa, of course not single headedly, managed to lead to a successful 10 million membership of the working class and not only, all across the country. In an interview with his wife, when questioned about spending time with her husband as well as his activities, Danuta states that ‘Lech often spends many days away from home campaigning, sometimes up to a week, so we do not get to spend much time together’.[14] This can be sustained with Walesa’s schedule, which consisted of providing information and interviews. Walesa’s input was essential to the development of the movement and often contributed to articles in propaganda newsletters as well as other weekly publications such as the ‘Coastal Worker’ and the official ‘Informative Strike Bulletin’. As propaganda was greatly essential in order to make the movement successful, it can also therefore be concluded that the person disseminating the literature is also important in raising the profile of the movement and therefore being an important part of the birth of the movement.

2.2 Anna Walentynowicz:
Anna Walentynowicz became a symbol of hope for many Poles just like Walesa. Unlike many of the women taking part in the movement, Walentynowicz was greatly recognised for the efforts which she contributed towards the movement, and is often referred to as an essential part of the movement. She also took active part in politics until her death in the Smolensk plane crash in 2010, which killed half of the Polish Parliament, going to pay respect to the victims of genocide.
Part of the reason why the strikes have started was because of her. Walentynowicz was fired in 1980 from her crane operating job, due to participation in illegal trade union activities five months prior to her retirement, which was undertaken by her due to her disillusionment with the communist system.
This enraged many workers, who thought that if such an exemplary employee could be fired so easily, it could happen to anyone of them.  Transcripts about the strikes which aimed at reinstating Walentynowicz back to work, which by the authorities were named ‘Operation Gate’, were recently published in 2007 by Lech Walesa. Over two hundred pages of from the National Polish Archives were published.[15]
The fact that Walentynowicz has been nicknamed in those documents as ‘Wala’ and with her name being detectable frequently, it can therefore be prominently agreed that she played a big role in making the movement a success with her presence alone.

Walentynowicz also can be accredited with benefiting the movement in transforming from a strike of bread and butter, into a strike of compassion and sympathy with other establishments. She exclaimed that ‘our aim should not be to secure a somewhat thicker slice of bread today, even if this would make us happy; we must not forget what our real aim is. Our main duty is to consider the needs of others. If we become alive to this duty, there will be no unjustly treated people in our midst, and we, in turn, shall not be treated unjustly’.[16] Once the Gdansk Agreement was signed, Walesa took on a more political role, and according to Walentynowicz, he forgot the true meaning of the movement. Her fight for equality was supported by her stating that ‘we must extend our friendship and strengthen our solidarity’.[17] By taking on a mother-like role in the movement, and continuing on taking a more of an activist role, after Lech Walesa’s more political turn, she continued to support the movement’s profile and led to a steady increase in memberships, thus once again confirming that she was of great benefit to the movement.
Furthermore, she just like Walesa manager to earn herself a Woman of the Year Award in Holland once again gaining the recognition of the international community[18].In an interview at a radio station, Walentynowicz exclaimed that the shipyard workers wanted her to stand as the front woman of the strikes, but she told them that the rank of the movement would fall lower, if a woman was the leader’. [19] Such selflessness and sacrifice towards the movement can be what could be one of the most important reasons as to why she can be considered one of the  most important, if not the most important key figure of the movement. Walentynowicz could have easily tried to over-take Walesa in the leadership, since the protests have technically started because of her, however through recognition of what was best for the movement, she helped as much as she could, which is why the movement benefited from her presence and actions.
Walentynowicz’s other great achievement which managed to contribute greatly to the rise of the movement was through her written and spoken word. Being an active member of the Inter-Strike Committee as well as an editor of a samizdat called the ‘Coastline Worker’, she kept on distributing newssheets as part of a clandestine movement, even after the Martial Law was introduced. She often let meetings to be organised in her flat, something that many did not dare do.
There are also numerous examples of her taking control of the movement when things were spiralling out of control. A famous example of this was described in Cienciekiewicz’s book. ‘Walentynowicz ran to gate number 1, opening onto the Old Town. There she met a disorientated Walesa, and pulled him by the sleeve. She tried to get through to him. She stood on a wagon and spoke to the workers’.[20] Such dedication to the success of the movement and embodiment of the movement as it was trying to rise to success is one of the reasons as to why she was one of the key figures of the movement and as to why the movement succeeded.

2.3 Alina Pienkowska:
One of the less talked about heroines of Solidarity was Alina Pienkowska. Just like most women who took part in the movement, after the collapse of the regime, she managed to earn herself a place in new Poland’s politics until her death in 2005 at the age of 50. Pienkowska can be attributed to many of the successes of the movement’s rise. Often working alongside of Anna Walentynowicz, the shipyard nurses’ first mention is as one of the founders of the Free Trade Unions of the Coast in the 1970’s. Pienkowska’s greatest contribution to the movement was most certainly, similarly to Walentynowicz, her power of the written word. She was an active writer in the edited by Walentynowicz clandestine journal, the Coastal Worker, in which she wrote many articles to do with health and safety in the shipyards as well as the alarming rise in the accident rate in the shipyards. Furthermore, she also made numerous features in western press articles. An example of that was an article titled, ‘We Want Decent Lives’ in The Times Magazine in 1980.[21]
Another way in which she managed to be an asset to the movement was through her and Walentynowicz’s joint decision to shut the gates of the shipyard in order to start the strikes. During the strikes all phone in the shipyard were cut except for her nurse line. She was the one who was the main communicator to the outside world, and relayed that information to the rest of the world. As already mentioned, her perspective as well as judgment in the release of information on the strike was fundamental for the increased popularity of the movement as well as its success and establishment.
Some women took on daring missions because of their ability to escape interior security forces, who always suspected men of carrying out rebellious undertakings. Pienkowska was one of those heroines, often carrying secret documents and brochures as well as newsletters in and out of the shipyards, often distributing them amongst the workers. Just like the other two key figures already mentioned, Pienkowska contributed to disseminating anti-communist propaganda, which is a great way of contributing to the movements desire to succeed.
Lastly, this was probably Pienkowska’s biggest contribution to the movement. After the third day of strikes and them being called off by Walesa due to the signing of the concessions from the government, Pienkowska was outraged. She stated to Walesa, ‘You betrayed them! Now the authorities will crush us like bedbugs’.[22] She grabbed the loudspeaker and addressed the workers. Such bold leadership was what made the movement even stronger. By not settling for less than agreed, Pienkowska took the opportunity by the strings, and orchestrated them in such way that the movement’s future was more than likely to continue in its aims and goals. This is why Pienkowska deserves the recognition for the work, and when as the extent in which she contributed to the movement, it can be stated that it was vital.

Through a critical analysis on the three chosen key individuals associated with Solidarity, I was able to see heroes rather than just a simple working class attempting to fight for their liberties. The contributions which all three figures have made and what they have sacrificed for free Poland are remarkable. As Walesa put it, ‘we hold our heads high; despite the price we have paid, because freedom is priceless’.[23] When assessing Walesa key factors were found and those were his experience and in particular his likeable character, which earned him the respect of western leaders and media, which was essential in securing the movement’s future in post-communist Poland. Help in distribution of propaganda as well as him becoming a symbol of hope were also crucial in making sure that the movement remained and was not crushed just like in 1970. Adding to this contribution in securing Solidarity’s future, Walentyowicz was also as essential. It was due to firing of her that the strikes were able to gain its momentum. Her being there and participating in the strikes was enough to keep the force going. It was also due to her as well as her mother-like figure and her selflessness for the cause that her success in the movement contributed greatly to its development. Lastly even though not as widely spoken about, Pienkowska’s determination as well as standing up for what she believed was right, even after the strikes were called off after the third day, was what made a lot of people what this movement was actually about, and for that I therefore think she also deserves to be recognized. In conclusion, without those figures, the future of Solidarity would not have been clear, of course we are unable to see what would have happened if these people were not there to spur on the movement, but for sure, the movement without them would have taken a totally different direction, which is why the extent of those people taking part in the movement was imperative to its existence.

Chapter 3: Catholic Quagmire towards Solidarity: How far did the split of policy towards communism in the Roman Catholic Church contribute to the Rise of the Solidarity Movement

Another important debate in the analysis of the components that led to the rise of the Solidarity movement is the affiliation that the Church had with the Solidarity movement, especially in the stages prior to Solidarity being legalised by the communist Government as per the Gdansk Agreement in 1980. WithPoland being one of the most religiously homogenous countries in Europe, it is therefore no surprise that Catholicism according to many historians played a major role in toppling the communist regime. The homogeneity of Poland’s religions can be attributed both to the atrocities of World War Two as well as the Stalinist Purges in the 1950’s, when religion was fundamentally repressed as it did not align with the Marxist ideologies. It led to Christianity, due to some concessions from the state, to become the major religion of Poland, and happens to be it to this day. Involvement of the Church with non-state politics, just like in any authoritarian government would have been met with much aggravation to the political state. This is why the split of opinion of how to deal with the issue of Solidarity, and tip-toeing around the issue due to politics of the state, is what makes for an important factor that contributed to the rise of the Solidarity.
Once again when looking at this key factor, a reoccurring theme is found, that being that there was a clear split in the approach which was meant to be taken towards Solidarity during its founding stages. All across the Roman Catholic Church. Biggest splits were recognised within the highest ranking church officials. Therefore a paradox is once again created as rather than unifying the church on the topic of the arising trade union activities, and having a decisive stance on the topic; it was causing a further split in attitudes towards the movement.
This chapter will analyse the relationship of the church with the state and in particular that of Cardinal Wyszynski. It will also investigate the impact of Karol Wojtyla being elected pope, as well as what impact did the religious beliefs of those protesting have on securing the future of Solidarity and Solidarity’s aims. This chapter will conclude with the view that the Church was one of the main reasons and if not the most important reason for securing the freedom of Polish workers, and thus contributing to the collapse of the communist regime regardless of its split opinion on the existence and support for the movement.

3.1 Cardinal Wyszynski and Religious Elites:
In order to analyse the religious factor in contributing to the rise of the Solidarity movement effectively, the critical analysis must start with the key religious figures, with one of the most essential being Cardinal Wyszynski. Assuming the title of the Primate of Poland, Wyszynski is also often credited for the survival of Christianity in Poland, in the face of authoritarianism. Importance of Wyszynski in this analysis is imperative, as it was him who pushed Karol Wojtyla to accept being elected as the Pope. At the time of the Solidarity’s breakthrough, the most controversial attitude came from Cardinal Wyszynski. Rather than supporting the movement publically, he made many public appearances which insinuated to put the movement on halt or abandoning it completely.
His first address about the strikes was made on 17^th August 1980 during a mass. During the sermon he highlighted to ‘better fulfil, all the needs of the nation, moral, social, religious, cultural and then domestic’.[24] Such attitude can easily be misinterpreted but it could just as easily be explained and can be challenged with evidence from archives which opened to the public after the collapse of the communist regime. Evidence suggests that ‘Wyszynski believed until the end that the Church must be supportive of the government in maintaining ”social peace” in the country, a stand he would maintain even when the Solidarity trade union movement was in full rebellion in the summer of 1980’.[25] The policy of social peace and state co-operation which Wyszynski undertook is something which often gets misinterpreted and viewed by many Catholics as betrayal. In a meeting with Solidarity leaders, in January of 1981, Wyszynski states that ‘responsibility for life of children of Poland is a great responsibility, which is therefore I often ask myself, is it better, with the dangers to our freedom, our wholesome, the lives of our brothers, would it be better to reach for it now, or would it be better to achieve some today, and leave the rest for later’.[26] This two-track policy of compromise and negotiation with the authorities can be seen on multiple occasions.
If claims that Wyszynski was supporting the state rather than just Solidarity have to be incorporated to get a full analysis, the evidence only points to him being a mediator at the most, rather than a full supporter for the state. This can be sustained once again with the notion that he did not want any unnecessary blood spills ‘as any life of a Polish child unnecessarily lost would trigger him with guilt’.[27] This statement alongside of Wyszynski’s mediator status can be corroborated with evidence that highlights the decrease in numbers of conflicts between the state and the protesters, since beginning of the movement through to legalisation of Solidarity. ‘Thanks to the decision making of the primate, the church became a factor for softening the tensions in Solidarity’s line’.[28] Even though this approach caused significant splits of opinion, it still contributed greatly to the rise of the Solidarity movement, enabling it to exist without being crushed by the state.
Furthermore, the overall future aims and goals of the church which would contribute to the personal gain of the Catholic Church also support in the analysis that the church was a key factor in contributing to the rise of the movement. Wyszynski could not stay on the side-lines as this was too big of an opportunity for the democratization which would guarantee a chance for better conditions for the functionality of the Church, so to be against the movement would be not favourable for him nor the church. Not supporting the state and the government would also be met with the states’ disapproval and would more than likely have been met in a similar fashion as the churches in Czechoslovakia and Hungary, by simply being clamped down[29]. As the impact for the rise of Solidarity came in numbers, this would overall hinder the cause of Solidarity by reducing the platform for disseminating anti-communist propaganda. By remaining neutral to both sides the church was still able to hold some power, and continue with the two track policy.
With such evident split of opinion on the amassing movement, with some priests choosing closer affiliations to the state or fully embracing the radical change, Wyszynski was able to create conditions in which the movement was able to flourish more freely, without the church being punished also. It was seen as an almost sign of encouragement, which came with a warning label. With Wyszynski’s thirty year experience of dealing with the communist state politics, it is therefore a clear indication as to how he managed to contribute to the rise of the Solidarity movement.

3.2 Karol Wojtyla as the Pope:
Another factor within the religious theme which was very important and secured the movement its popularity was the election of Karol Wojtyla as the Supreme Pontiff. He was made Pope on October 22^nd 1978. ‘Given the rising tension in the communist world in general and in Poland in particular – and considering his powerfully assertive Polish national identity – it was inevitable that his attention would be centered instantly on the land of his birth’.[30]  Even though the Pope was not on the frontlines of the conflict, his contribution cannot go unnoticed. His set of papal visits to Poland starting in 1979 and then followed by visits in 1983, 1987 and two visits in 1991, created a wave of hope and mass mobilisation across all of Poland all while preaching peace and compromise. This is why the pope is said to have contributed to a great extent to the rise of the Solidarity. ‘His two visits to Poland in the course of the 1980’s were crucial in affecting the march of events, as John Paul II displayed the keenest instinct and judgement about the situation there.’[31] The visits have also managed to contribute to the rise of the movement by bringing more international attention and media coverage.
Even though the Pope remained largely silent on the issue of Solidarity publically as a Pope, due to his neutrality, there is plenty of evidence to show his personal sentimental support to his land and his people, in form of the correspondence which he exchanged between himself and Cardinal Wyszynski which was further re-printed with the protesters. In a formal address to the Primate, the Pope informed the Polish Episcopate that ‘reports about these issues are not coming off the front line headlines of newspapers, television programmes and radio’.[32] The pursuit of a two track policy by the Pope could be considered as a split of his opinion towards the movement’s actions. By distancing himself publically, if the movement became too radical, it allowed the Pope to estrange himself from the movement. Also by not having a clear policy towards Solidarity and supporting the movement publically only to a proportionate degree, it meant that further splits in Polish Episcopate occurred as they did not have clear direction to who they should be supporting and preaching towards. It would have also made it easier for priests who affiliated themselves more with the state, to comply with the regime.
Another way in which the Pope contributed to the rise of the movement once again relates to his two track policy. Because the Pope’s support was coming from a non-authoritarian nation, the state could not suppress his support and feared what would come of it, if the Pope decided to make a pivotal change in his neutral policy making. This contributed greatly to the cause of Solidarity and played into their advantage. If the government was not scared of being over thrown prior to the election of Wojtyla as Pope, this fear could be seen after his election. Sense of protection from John Paul II, gave a political and psychological advantage to those who were involved in the movement. Ash agrees with this and states that ‘without the Pope, no Solidarity. Without Solidarity, no Gorbachev. Without Gorbachev, no fall of Communism.’[33] This clearly shows just how important the Pope was to the rise of the movement despite the splits in religion, which were more to do with how to tackle the movement if it got out of hand, rather than with the overall aims of the movement.
Furthermore, the approach of the Pope, seemed to send the same message, yet had different undertones to the messages which Wyszynski and the Polish Episcopate was sending out, and seemed much stronger despite the support not being as publicised, as it was by the Episcopate. This could be explained by Szulc. ‘Wojtylas quiet toughness toward the regime contrasted with the attitude of much of the Polish Church establishment, often including the primate, who tended to cooperate more fully with the authorities’.[34] The Pope knew that completion of agricultural, administrative and personal demands is impossible to complete immediately, but needs to be done gradually, which is why the Pope’s constant support as well as careful judgement with signs of encouragement over the years when needed were so important to the rise of the movement, which means that the Pope’s contribution to the rise of the movement through upkeep of his personal politics was enormous.

3.3 Work Force and Catholicism:
The last religious focus which enables to bond all of the previous points together, is the effect religion had on the work force which took part in the protests that enabled for the rise of the movement. The rise of Solidarity could not have been possible without the workers. With that, high proportions of workers attributed religion for enabling Solidarity to flourish.  One way in which the workers showed their religious affiliation and allowed for Solidarity to be religiously charged rather than purely politically, was through display of Catholic insignia. Crosses, pictures of Madonna and Christ as well as Vatican flags were only some of the methods in which the workers displayed their attachment to the church. Lech Walesa is a key example of such display. The former president of Poland, affiliates strongly with Catholicism to this day, and this identity has been displayed proudly on numerous occasions. During the protests, as well as state visits, Walesa used to wear a lapel of the Black Madonna of Czestochowa as displayed in fig.1[35]. Since election of the pope, photographs of John Paul II also made a common appearance, as demonstrated in figures 2[36] and 3[37] and were also something that Lech Walesa incorporated as part of his identity as pictured in figure 4[38]. Association of the Vatican, an external body and Vatican’s continuous international coverage in particular for the cause through sermons dedicated to the situation happening in Poland, allowed for international attention to be shifted on the cause of the Polish workers and establishing the movement globally. This thus highlights that the better the relationship of the workers, the better off their cause was, explaining as to why some workers might have chosen to affiliate themselves with religion. Another notion explaining as to why so many workers linked closely to religion could be due to religion’s legal status in Poland at the time, which means that by teaming up with another minority group against the state, not only would they have a higher chance of succeeding overthrowing it, but also more attention to their cause from the state would be given. However, at this moment there is not enough evidence to support this claim.
Further evidence supporting the claim that religion was a key aspect which contributed to the growth of the Solidarity movement can be found through records of pilgrimages that were organised by Solidarity. If Solidarność was not as influential, such activities would not have occurred. A key pilgrimage was the one that Solidarity made to Vatican in January 1981. An excerpt from a post card written by Anna Walentynowicz read ‘We, gave our honour to our land, we will also give our lives’[39] as shown in fig. 5. Sending this post card from Vatican City could be understood as making a firm point and as an act of defiance to the authoritarian state, and once again gives a clear indicator how closely intertwined the relationship of the church and the movement was. This allows for a clear judgement to be made, meaning that church contributed greatly to the rise of the Solidarity Trade Union Movement.
In addition to this, evidence can also be found in the slogans which started to develop as a result of this relationship. The longer the protests went on, the more catholically charged the slogans became. Slogans such as ‘God protect us from Communism’ or ‘Badz z nami Maryjo‘, which translated to ‘be with us Mary’ with Solidarnosc logo’s attached onto banners, were common throughout the duration of the protests as shown in figures 6[40] and 7.[41] The pilgrimages, even though were meant to have a personal meaning behind them, were tied to Solidarity to a great extent. With each pilgrimage organised by Solidarity, the movement was able to reach more people, through first hand contact since media was state controlled. This was particularly correct when speaking about the pilgrimages to the shrine to the Virgin Mary, in Czestochowa, on the Jasna Gora (Mountain of Light). This also allowed for more remote areas to be reached such as the Czestochowa County. ‘Not in Czestochowa, nor in the region, there were no strikes in July or August 1980’.[42] Because of the pilgrimage influx into this region, this had changed. Post August, due the pilgrimages a propaganda offensive was initiated. This means that the movement was able to recruit more members, and therefore this led to a more successful movement. This was one of the most effective ways in which religion contributed to dissemination of Solidarity’s aims and goals, which once again allowed for Solidarity to flourish.
Lastly, a much smaller contribution of religion to the movement’s rise was through masses for the striking labourers, often led by prominent priests. They often improved the spirits of the protesters and embedded them further in the belief that the church supports their actions. ‘In Warsaw, under the wish of the strikers, a mass was organised and led by a young priest for a Zoliborsk parish – Jerzy Popieluszko’[43] – who was murdered by the State Security Services in 1984. Other examples of a masses which managed to contribute to boosting the morale of the workers, thus to the upkeep of the growing movement were held in the Gdansk shipyards. Big crosses were often erected to pay respect to those lost in the brawls. This established a further Catholic identity, despite the shipyards being state owned. This once again contributed to the act of defiance against the state, therefore allowing for Solidarity to flourish and contributing to its rise greatly.

Through careful analysis of religious components and the extent in which they have enabled the Solidarity movement to rise and become an established trade union, it is clear that the religious element plays a key role. With this element also comes the notion of paradox, which enables us to see that rather than Solidarity uniting everyone to fulfil their aims, Solidarity was causing splits of opinions everywhere in the religious sphere. Through analysing the behaviours of Cardinal Wyszynski, as well as his motives, it can be clear as to why he supported Solidarity. Furthermore his two track policy alongside his experience, allowed for him to be an asset for the growth of Solidarity.
Additionally when Catholicism is concerned, John Paul II was also one of the biggest influences who contributed to the rise of the movement within the religious theme. Through adaptation of a personal two track policy, the Pope was able to allow the movement to flourish as concession, compromise and peace alongside resilience stood at the height of his politics. Alongside that was also the differing undertone, in which the Pope addressed the movement also allowed for growth of the movement. Furthermore, the number of Papal state visits which John Paul II carried out during the period of Solidarity’s rise helped greatly to maintaining the power that Solidarity held, which means that the Pope made up a significant proportion of the religious factors which allowed for growth of the movement.
Lastly, the work force itself and their religious beliefs have a lot to owe for the rise of the movement. Through embracement of their religious identity, as well as methods of dissemination such as pilgrimages and religious slogans, the workers were able to contribute the most to the rise of the movement and make sure that it keeps on growing. Overall, this critical analysis enables us to see the insight as well as allows us to judge the extent in which religion is to have contributed to the rise of the movement, and in this case of judgement it allows to make the conclusion that religion was one of the greatest assets to have ensured the escalation of the movement.

Chapter 4: Make or Break: In what way did the International Community’s response to the crisis help in the development for the fight for freedom of the Solidarity Movement?

The history of Poland across the globe tends to be characterized by one of sorrow and suffering as well as heroism and bravery. The Solidarity movement provided for much of that stereotype and moved into the new century victorious from their oppressors. International relations of Poland are also rich just like her history. It came as a shock globally, when people heard about the first strikes. It did not take long, even in a communist regime for the news to leak into Western media. ‘Reports about these issues are not coming off the front line headlines of newspapers, television programmes and radio’[44] wrote the Pope to Wyszynski in 1980. It was clearly a big deal, domestically and globally.
This chapter will look at the way in which the Solidarity movement was received internationally and will also critically assess whether the opinions of the international community as well as actions have aided the movement in its birth and solidification, or whether the international meddling of relations stirred the pot and damaged the chances for an earlier concession and freedom of Poland. This chapter will conclude with the notion that the most important factor which contributed to the rise alongside the international factor was America and in particular the financial support from the Central Intelligence Agency. It will also conclude with the notion that other international focus on the movement was as beneficial for its growth.

American Response to Solidarity:
America was a key ally to Poland after the war and continued to have a close relationship with Poland all throughout the Soviet rule. It can be clear that at the first sign of distress of Poland and with the already rising tensions during the Cold War between America. It was also clear that Poland was ripe for change. America had to think twice in the way that it supported the Solidarity discontent in Poland, which is why help as well as other support for Solidarity came in two waves. The first step was the financial funding organized by the CIA. The CIA transferred around $2 million yearly in cash to Solidarity, for a total of $10 million over five years. There were no direct links between the CIA and Solidarnosc, and all money was channeled through third parties.’[45] Colonel Ryszard Kukliński, a senior officer on the Polish General Staff was secretly sending reports to the CIA.[46] Through secret organizations not only was America able to keep quiet as not to increase the rising tensions and transform a peaceful movement into a war, they were also able to benefit themselves by helping to eradicate their own enemy. Further evidence also points that it was not just America who did similar actions. ‘Money for the banned union came from CIA funds, the National Endowment for Democracy, secret accounts in the Vatican and Western trade unions’.[47] This is a clear indicator as to why America was so keep in helping the development and growth of Solidarity and as to why they contributed so much towards it. It was seen as an investment which would enable to do a lot of damage to their enemy. Further evidence can also be seen in an article titled ”Holy Alliance”. ‘The Times magazine, reported that “Tons of equipment – fax machines (the first in Poland), printing presses, transmitters, telephones, shortwave radios, video cameras, photocopiers, telex machines, computers, word processors were smuggled into Poland via channels established by priests and American agents and European labor movements.’[48] Through supply of new equipment, America was able to promote their cause more effectively, thus allowed for growth and expansion, and revolutionised the way in which the organization was ran, this therefore provides for evidence that the international support was key in the development and establishment of the movement leading to its birth.
Another way in which America has contributed which ended up beneficial for the development of the movement was through an international widespread recognition as well as coverage of the movement’s actions as well as portraying the regime in a bad light, therefore applying more international pressure. A segment released by the US Embassy, showed a video of important high profile figures in American politics as well as other global authorities. Titled, ‘Let Poland be Poland’[49], the video featured messages of goodwill as well as full blown support for the movement. The support was meant to encourage the workers of the strikers to continue with their policy, which has been so widely publicized beyond the borders of Poland. President Reagan stated in that broadcast that ‘There is a spirit of Solidarity abroad in today that no physical force can crush’.[50] This once again was an insinuation that even if things did get violent, America had Poland’s back. With that psychological support affected the movement greatly and allowed them to push the government as far as they could in order to achieve their goals. America therefore is a key part of the international community that essentially established the movement.

Chapter 5: Conclusion

The reason as to why Solidarity movement gained so much popularity and did not fail like any previous movement, was because it captured the ‘hearts’ of the west, and also because there was not a movement quite like it anywhere else in Europe at the time.
As it can be clearly understood, when analysing the Solidarity movement and in particular the issues which allowed for the rise of the movement, nothing can be black or white. The number of grey areas is what makes this topic so interesting, and also makes for a fruitful research topic. Due to the topic being of recent history, new perspectives are still being uncovered, which is something that I and many more historians are trying to contribute to. This dissertation’s aim was to provide a clear reasoning for the support and for the Solidarity movement as outline the factors clearly through critically assessing evidence.
The first chapter aimed at highlighting the key figures which helped with building of the movement, and making the strikes, from a simple revolt, into a life changing policy of governance resulting in a free Poland. The key personalities highlighted in this work are Lech Walesa, Anna Walentynowicz and Alina Pienkowska. Through showing strong leadership in a quagmire, which the movement had started with the authorities, in order to protect their liberties, the key leaders were able to succeed in making the movement a success, and unlike any other movement in history. By using a number of methods, these people contributed to something that was never done before, setting a precedent for other countries and becoming heroes of Europe, as well as leading to fall of communism in Eastern Europe. It can be therefore said that they were truly successful in their aims and methods. Another important aspect which strongly relates to Solidarity is the Church. The second chapter assessed firstly the way split of opinion on the way in which the Solidarity movement should be referred to as some Catholic leaders sided more with the authoritarian state than the others. I have used the like of Cardinal Wyszynski who at the time was the Primate of Poland and served as the highest religious entity in Poland. I have then referred to the newly elected Pope and analysed the ways in which he contributed to the movement and how it allowed for its rise. It was clear that the Papal visits were the key in securing the motivation and mobility of those suffering from the ill fate of the government. Lastly, this chapter analysed the working classes and their religious affiliation and how far did that influence their fight and growth of the movement. I found that both of these allowed for growth of the movement and also enabled the working classes in voicing their struggles and achieving their goals. The last chapter focused on the international strain that the movement had put all over the world and to what extent did the international community’s actions contribute to the growth of the movement. Firstly, by analysing the impact that America’s approval for the movement had, and also by looking at the loans that the CIA made to the movement in order to achieve their goal, which is a clear indicator that this enabled for the movement to flourish. The second aspect of this chapter looked at the response of the British Government and other high ranking officials to the movement. Once again through carefully analysed sources I was able to prove that the support of the international community was detrimental to the evolution of the movement and securing the liberties of millions of Poles across the globe. Lastly, this chapter, looked at the sympathy associations which were formed as a result of the originating strikes and found that the flood of support received by the international community, enabled firstly to build alliances and secondly made sure that the current regime was choked out from the outside global groups and nations. The overall conclusion for this dissertation is that through a number of factors, and restrictions that were imposed by the authoritarian government, the Solidarity was able to break free from their oppressors, and creating a new identity for themselves on a global scale, moving away from the label of suffering into a new decade of bravery. all of the factors and aspects of Polish life contributed greatly to this, and without one or the other it would be difficult for the movement to succeed.

Fig.1

Fig.2

Fig.3

https://tavaana.org/en/content/solidarity-pope-john-paul-ii-and-orange-alternative-bringing-down-communism-poland-0#_edn9

Fig.4

http://sierpien1980.pl/s80/dokumenty/czestochowa/7421,dok.html

http://bibliotekacyfrowa.eu/dlibra/docmetadata?id=53566&from=publication

http://www.pope2016.com/polska/historia/news,458849,kosciol-wobec-nszz-solidarnosc-1980-1981.html

[1] Graham Crow, Social Solidarities, (Buckingham, 2002), Chapter 5, p.90 – Sztompka (1999)

[2] Graham Crow, Social Solidarities, (Buckingham, 2002), Chapter 5, p.90 – Barker (1986)

[3] A., Touraine, Solidarity, Analysis of a social Movement: Poland 1980-1981, (Cambridge,1983), p.32

[4] (Paczkowski & Byrne, 2007. p. xxix)

[5] Lech Walesa Foundation, A Biographical Note, 2003, https://web.archive.org/web/20090614022258/http://www.ilw.org.pl/en/117,50

[6] find reference

[7] R. J., Overy, 20^th Century, (London, 2012), p.251

[8] A.M., Cirtautas, The Polish Solidarity Movement: Revolution, Democracy and Natural Rights, (London, 1997), p. 200.

[9] Ibid.

[10] ‘Lech Walesa, Man of the Year’, The Times, January 4, 1982, http://content.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19820104,00.html

[11] Lech Walesa – Facts, Nobel Media AB 2014, http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1983/walesa-facts.html

[12] Documentary on Margaret Thatcher’s Visit to Poland, November 3, 1988, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cADKFsQRl2s

[13] ‘Lech Walesa, Man of the Year’, The Times, January 4, 1982,

[14] Lech Walesa, Polish Film Chronicles, 1981, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7X1caR4Zqsw

[15]M., Lewandowski, Informants from the Gates, Nasze Miasto Archives,31 August 2008, http://gdansk.naszemiasto.pl/archiwum/sierpien-80-oczami-i-uszami-bezpieki-donosy-spod-bramy,1516742,art,t,id,tm.html

[16] ‘Don’t Wait for Instructions’, Interview with Anna Walentynowicz in Lower Silesian Bulletin, Issue 1, January 1985, p.3

[17] Ibid.

[18] M., Pashkovets, They Call Her ‘Justice’, Day Kiev Newspaper, Issue 31, 8 June 2010, https://day.kyiv.ua/en/article/nota-bene/they-called-her-justice

[19] J., Jankowska, It’s me who stopped Walesa; Memoirs of Anna Walentynowicz, Polskie Radio, 17 August 2015,  http://www.polskieradio.pl/8/3869/Artykul/861172,To-ja-zatrzymalam-Walese-Wspomnienia-Anny-Walentynowicz

[20] S., Cenckiewicz, Anna Solidarnosc, (Warsaw, 2010), pp.123-124

[21]S., Smith, We Want a Decent Life , Time magazine, December 29, 1980

[22] M. T., Kafuman, Alina Pienkowska, A Force Behind Solidarity Dies at 50, New York Times, 28^th October 2002, http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/28/world/alina-pienkowska-a-force-behind-solidarity-dies-at-50.html

[23]

[24] Cardinal Wyszynski, Sermon Per Mariam ad Jesum, (Wambierzyce,1980), in P. Raina, ‘Kardynał Wyszyński’, pp.30–31

[25] T., Szulc, Pope John Paul II Biography, Chapter 20,(New York, 1995), Chapter 20, pp.285-6

[26] Recording of a meeting with NSZZ Solidarity Representatives, Warsaw, Curia, 4th April, 1981, http://www.polskieradio.pl/87/1133,Solidarnosc

[27] Ibid.

[28] R., Gryz, ‘Prymas Wyszyński i narodziny „Solidarności”. Mediator czy sojusznik?’, Tygodnik Powszechny, 2000, no.2734, http://www.tygodnik.com.pl/numer/2734/gryz.html

[29] T., Miroslav, Struggles for the Character of the Roman Catholic Church in Czechoslovakia, 1948-1989, in Eurostudia, Collaboration and Resistance Under Communism, V.10.1, (2015),pp.51.73

[30] T., Szulc, Pope John Paul II Biography, Chapter 20,(New York, 1995), pp.285-6

[31] Ibid, pp.337-38

[32] John Paul II, ‘A Formal Address of John Paul II to the Primate of Poland, Stefan Cardinal Wyszynski’, Strikers Informative Bulletin, 25 august 1980, Ref. ECS/AS/11/384/1/6

[33] Ash Timothy Garton Ash, “Poland After Solidarity,” The New York Review of Books, vol. 38, no. 11 (13 June 1991).

[34] T., Szulc, Pope John Paul II Biography, Chapter 20,(New York, 1995), Chapter 20, pp.285-6

[35] Polish Press Agency, Lech Walesa During a visit to Switzerland, 2^nd June 1981, http://historia.wp.pl/title,Czy-Lech-Walesa-byl-tajnym-wspolpracownikiem-SB-o-pseudonimie-Bolek,wid,18168268,wiadomosc.html

[36] photo

[37] photo

[38] photo

[39] http://bibliotekacyfrowa.eu/dlibra/docmetadata?id=53566&from=publication

[40] maryja photo

[41] komunizm god photo

[42] W., Rotarski, NSZZ Solidarność: Region Częstochowa 1980-1989, (Czestochowa, ), p.1 https://www.academia.edu/31048178/NSZZ_Solidarno%C5%9B%C4%87_Region_Cz%C4%99stochowa_1980-1989_w_Solidarno%C5%9B%C4%87_1980-1989_t._6_Polska_po%C5%82udniowa_red._%C5%81._Kami%C5%84ski_G._Walig%C3%B3ra_Warszawa_2010_s._827-876

[43] R., Sidorski, Church in regards to the blow up of strikes in the year of 1980, https://histmag.org/Kosciol-wobec-wybuchu-strajkow-w-1980-roku-5391

[44] John Paul II, ‘A Formal Address of John Paul II to the Primate of Poland, Stefan Cardinal Wyszynski’, Strikers Informative Bulletin, 25 august 1980, Ref. ECS/AS/11/384/1/6

[45] G. F. Domber, Supporting the Revolution: America, Democracy, and the End of the Cold War in Poland, 1981–1989, (2009). p.199

[46] The Times Magazine, 24 February, 1992, p.29

[47] Solidarity, 1980-1989, http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/ops/solidarity.htm

[48] Ibid.

[49] ‘Let Poland Be Poland – Political Leaders’, US Embassy, January 31, 1982, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=by1xk1i2hHo

[50] Ibid.