Tadeusz Mazowiecki, Poland's first post-Communist Prime Minister explains what inspired him to take the risks that toppled a regime - and what should happen next in Eastern and Central Europe.

The Interview: It was necessary to get involved, despite the risk

https://api.multimedia.europarl.europa.eu/documents/20125/14495045/p005-00092-en.srt

No exhibition will ever be able   to fully illustrate this reality,

which was complex, which had to   experienced,

but I think that - as much as an exhibition   can actually illustrate reality -

I was fully aware of   what era was beginning,

and I had this strong belief   that this time

we could succeed and that   we were going to succeed.

I wouldn't have been able   to perform that function.

It was necessary to have   this deep conviction.

I also felt this tremendous   sense of responsibility

for leading Poland safely through   this difficult period.

For a few months Poland   was the only country

that was introducing   such serious changes.

And at that time months   counted as years.

I think that very radical changes   have been made

when it comes   to the democratic structure.

The economy has also gone through   very important changes

with the introduction of   the free-market economy.

All this triggered changes   in people's mentality.

The problem was that people   emerging from the era of communism

expected that the state would provide   them with everything.

as one has to be   in the free-market economy.

This has been changing, and   the new generation is now different.

This young generation doesn't   remember that era.

Obviously, they learn about it   from their parents.

Young people didn't experience   the hardship that we went through,

but the obstacle that they   have to face is that...

Well, they know that they have to fight   for their future themselves,

as it will not come as a gift from   an organisation such as the state.

I was convinced that it was possible   for the strike not to end in bloodshed,

and that it was necessary   to get involved, despite the risk,

so that the strike wouldn't   end in this way.

After all, the bloody suppression   of the 1970 strike was catastrophic,

and I thought that the authorities   wouldn't do it a second time.

But we had to find some kind   of acceptable compromise.

We participated in reaching this   compromise that resulted

in the success of the main idea   of the strike, that is,

the creation of the   free trade union movement...

We participated in finding   that compromise,

knowing that it was risky,   but that we had a chance of succeeding.

Well, we have to remember that   the period of rivalry between the blocs

I am not saying that it has   completely disappeared,

but it has been reduced, and I think   that this has had its impact

on the financial situation   of Western Europe.

Secondly, I think that there have been   some certain psychological changes.

like the European Communities   and later the European Union,

have become institutions that belong   not only to Western Europe,

In other words, Europe has become larger.

It's very large, which, in my opinion,   is a crucial factor

as far as playing a role   in global politics is concerned.

The difficulties were enormous.   It was impossible to predict everything,

especially in the economy. No one had   ever made this transition before,

from the centralised   to the free-market economy.

that society had to pay   during the transition.

They turned out to be higher   than we expected.

Nevertheless, with the introduction   of the free-market economy

was very characteristic   for the situation before 1990.

We knew we had to release creative   forces, forces of initiative,

but the centralised economy   didn't offer this opportunity.

The new situation led   to the reduction in employment.

People in Poland weren't   used to dealing with this new problem,

So there were some high costs   that we weren't able to predict fully.

The role that I was entrusted with   by the United Nations was a role

that is psychologically challenging   for the person performing it

because I was able   to put forward recommendations...

I could propose recommendations,   even to the UN Security Council,

however, nobody was obliged to express a   view on these recommendations,

so from the psychological point   of view it was difficult.

I saw the helplessness of   international organisations

and I thought that without   tougher action

It's not that something made me angry.   I just realised after Srebrenica

that the only way I could help   those people was to resign

because my decision   would not go unnoticed,

and it would turn the world's attention   to their situation, their tragedy.

I realised this was   a way of helping them.

Religion gives people   the feeling of sense in life,

and it gives people hope,   also in difficult situations.

And believing in this hope... After all,   politics is nothing else than...

It's not just a fight of interests,   but it's also a realisation of hope

that relations between nations   can be better.

In this context religion   offers us hope and perspective.

Just like we witnessed reconciliation   between Poland and Germany,