The Forging of the Polish Army, 1918-1919

ABSTRACT

With the regaining of independence by Poland in November 1918 it was essential to create a unified homogenous army, the more so that Poland was faced by conflict from its neighbours at a time when the borders of Poland were by no means formed let alone finalised. There were at least four seperate Polish armies and a plethora of local formations springing up all over the country. From these four formations: the Polish Military Organisation, the Polnische Wermacht, the Greater Poland Army and the Polish “Blue” Army in France. Moreover, the officer and NCO corps came from four distinct traditions. Those of the wartime Legions (Polish tradition) and of the three partitioning powers. All had different military traditions and training. An important factor was also that many of the them had only a rudimentary knowledge of the Polish language having served in garrisons far from the Polish lands. Faced with wars with the Ukrainians for Lwów and the south eastern lands, with the Germans over the Province of Greater Poland, Pomerania and Silesia, with the Czechs over Teschen and above all with Bolshevik russia in the east it was essential that the Polish Army unified as quickly as possible. That this was done within the year and eventually resulted in Poland winning the Polish-Bolshevik War of 1919-1920 and securing its borders and independence was in no small measure a result of the rapid unification and creation of an homogenous Polish Army with a single command structure and organisation. The binding glue was the deep rooted sense of national pride and desire to live and work in a free Poland.     

William Laud and the Parliamentary Politics of 1628–9

This article seeks to highlight the important part played by Bishop William Laud in the counsels of Charles I in the 1620s, and, in particular, his involvement in the parliamentary sessions of 1628 and 1629. Having demonstrated his usefulness as a parliamentary spokesman for the crown in the parliaments of 1625 and 1626, and having been promoted to the privy council, the parliament of 1628–9 witnessed the height of Laud's parliamentary engagement. His key role as a writer of memoranda and speeches both for the duke of Buckingham and for Charles himself demonstrate the weight accorded to his political views. These views, reflected in his writings, sermons and his contributions to parliamentary debate, embody a dislike of parliamentary bargaining, a firm commitment to uphold the royal prerogative, particularly in matters of taxation, and a determination to resist encroachments upon it by the common lawyers, whether by the confirmation of Magna Carta or in the form of the Petition of Right. The expression of these views in such an emphatic fashion would come back to bite him, in the parliamentary attacks on him in 1629, but above all at his trial in 1644. Nevertheless, his articulation of them suggests that Laud himself was a more considered political thinker, and a more active politician, than he has hitherto been given credit for, and that there were ideas around in influential conciliar circles that do not appear to reflect the ‘anti‐absolutist’ consensus that, it is widely claimed, prevailed within the early Stuart political nation.     

International relations and the Himalaya: connecting ecologies,cultures and geopolitics

ABSTRACT

This article examines international relations (IR)'s approach to the Himalaya. We argue that the possibility of violent conflict over contested international borders is not the region's primary international challenge. Rather, slow violence inflicted by state-building and militarisation, intimately connected to geopolitical tensions, threaten the region's ecologies, cultures and languages. The Himalaya is home to three biodiversity hotspots and a mosaic of ethnic groups, many of whom speak threatened languages. Its ice-deposits feed most of Asia's large rivers. In recent years, India and China have pursued large-scale infrastructure development in the region, enabling greater militarisation and extraction, and a tourist rush. These threats are amplified by climate change, which is occurring in the Himalaya at twice global averages, contributing to landslides, flooding, and droughts. However, the region's complexity is not matched by IR's theorisations, which overwhelmingly focus on the possibility of violent conflict between state actors. We argue that IR's analysis of the region must go beyond a states-and-security, Delhi-Beijing-Islamabad centred approach, to look at the numerous interconnections between its geopolitics, cultures and ecologies. We suggest this can be accomplished through incorporating more interdisciplinary analysis, and through focusing on the interaction between the organisation of political authority and the region's environment.