The Jagiellonian Club has behaved very much, but it is very unsettling. 1 might even consider that the well-deserved conservative think-tank intentionally showed Schadenfreude, or the joy of another people's misfortune, boasting that he did not get any gold from American grant programs. But where is the malice? – individual might ask.
One of the first decrees signed by president Donald Trump after taking power was the 1 on the suspension for 3 months of any foreign-oriented improvement assistance under the USAid programme until its thorough revision and verification. It turned out that it was a situation specified as "hit the table and the scissors will speak". The suspension of funds for 3 months – in many cases most likely without the anticipation of restoring them – triggered an avalanche of shoals to the fresh administration from those who lived well so far. There was no Jagielloński Club in this group, who tried for funds, but received circular zero PLN and now suffered no harm. Similarly, as of course PCh24 (with the difference that there was no effort here).
Who, on the another hand, is fighting? “No 1 expected this – neither we nor the grantor. We are inactive counting losses" – laments OKO Press Róża Rzeplinska from Association 61 and MamWiedzieć.pl.
Rzeplinska explains:
The problem with American money is that they fund a large part of social activities in the world, are distributed by the UN agendas, and it does not take as long to rise these funds as it does with European grants. Suddenly, many of the programmes utilized by Ukrainian organisations and Polish humanitarian organisations for refugees, LGBT people, civilian society, or the improvement of education are partially or wholly financed from the US.
And we got e-mails saying thank you, goodbye. My organization has survived the last 8 years due to funds from the United States. For any NGOs this is simply a failure of 1/3 of the budget, for others half, for others even more. What is the scale of the problem, we will find out – for now we number everything.
Whoever looked at NGOs and their backing to the planet must have noticed any irregularities. The first is that without grants in a country specified as Poland, most of specified organisations would most likely not survive, and sometimes they do a good job. On the another hand, there are besides those that finance their activities mainly or exclusively from private sources – and they manage. This is how PCh24 works to a large degree (which is possibly not a think-tank, but that does not mean that its activity does not cost). On a akin principle, Ordo Iuris operates, which already operates a typical – and large-scale – analytical activity, i.e. typical of think-tank.
The second is simply a clear ideological leap in the financing of NGOs. abroad money reaches the centre of the political spectrum, but almost never reaches the right side, but very abundantly flows to the left side. Various EU funds lead the way.
NGO gross took care of The Jagiellonian Club any time ago, fighting against a myth, as if it was someway peculiarly perpetuated by erstwhile power. The catfish are impressive. In 2022 the Batory Foundation – the richest Polish non-governmental organization – had gross of nearly PLN 75 million. The second was Greenpeace Poland – PLN 14.7 million. The 3rd was Political Critic – PLN 8.4 million. The Jagiellonian Club, including the KJ Analysis Centre, had revenues of PLN 1.9 million.
It is not easy to trace which organizations lived from American government aid, due to the fact that it does not straight influence them, but it provides funds, which in turn are donors of Polish structures – and frequently through subsequent intermediaries. Sometimes this happens – as Mrs Rzeplinska explained – through the UN agenda. USAid has not been operating in Poland for more than 2 decades, but crucial sums were allocated to our country indirectly during the presidency of Joe Biden. Due to the deficiency of transparency of the grant system, it is not easy to find circumstantial numbers, but the size of little than $400 million appears. Sometimes it's not the organization's funding, it's the event or the contest. The money will now be lost, for example, to the “SERAPH” competition for local reporters, organized by the Reporting Institute.
It is known that they will receive organizations in which the aforementioned Róża Rzeplinska operates. It will besides be passed on to various kinds of grants Political Criticism, specifically publishing warehouse and portal Stanisław Brzozowski Association. "We must halt all our activities financed by the US government. We have suspended all grants and contracts since Friday 24 January" announced Agnieszka Wiśniewska, editor-in-chief of the Polish Academy of Sciences. Andrzej Krajewski wrote in his reply: “But that Political criticism But I didn't anticipate it. It turns out that Trump can exterminate the left in Poland and will not really know it."
Mr Rafał Brzoska, president of InPost, responded rapidly to the call of the KP, writing on X: “My dear, I ask all of you to join me and the joint drop on Political Criticism so that her noble work against bloodthirsty capitalism can proceed after the funds have dried up from the US government. And seriously, I will be happy to aid you as you gotta and anticipate uncompromising criticism in return, so far, because... you are completely wrong, but pluralism in the media is truly important!”
The question is whether this pluralism should be funded by abroad grantors with their circumstantial political goals and profile. Especially report The U.S. Foundation for Freedom Online reveals that U.S. interior papers indicate that money is directed towards actions designed to form the circulation of information in a just manner. The main nonsubjective was to prevent the erosion of the authority of conventional media – which the US has influenced through grants, among others – for independent sources of information on the network by promoting various types of quasicenzore activities.
I have no regrets about projects and initiatives that depended on abroad money. On the 1 hand, it can be considered that a kid should not be poured out with a bath, and regulations prohibiting the usage of abroad means would be a regulation of freedom in the Russian style. On the another hand, the USAid situation shows that something is not right here. The minimum of changes should be a extremist improvement in the transparency of the financing of NGOs, in peculiar those utilizing abroad sources of money. Rules should be introduced into Polish law, forcing a clear presentation of the fund chain, so as not to gotta carry out laborious searches to scope the first donor, but to guarantee that the organisation is required to clearly identify it.
Meanwhile, political criticism and others, affected by Donald Trump's decision, have the chance to test their attractiveness in the free marketplace conditions of NGOs. We'll see how they go.
Luke Warches