Katarzyna Przyborska: With the first abroad visit Donald Tusk went to Brussels. He was very happy and we felt that Poland was returning to the European Union, that these 8 years of abroad policy failure had come to an end and we have a chance for a fresh opening. Moreover, that the return of Poland is needed by the Union, erstwhile Eurosceptic parties are increasing on the continent.
Danuta Hübner: I besides have before my eyes the arrival of Donald Tusk, then not the Prime Minister, to Brussels, before he formally began the rule. He was indeed greeted with joy. I think he left a good memory behind as head of the Council of Europe. Poland's return to Europe was besides welcomed.
Since its entry into the Union, Poland has played an crucial role, contributing political capital, the past of Solidarity and knowing the importance of the European Union for the improvement of fresh associate States. We were then the largest of these 10 recently adopted countries. From the beginning, Poland's voice in the debates on Europe was important, it was reasonable. This took about 12 years until something happened that had no right to happen. Democratic parties failed in recognizing the risks to democracy. possibly due to deficiency of discretion, or possibly opportunism, or possibly incorrect calculation.
As the Law and Justice took power, there was a fast attack on democratic institutions, and there was besides a violent language in the public sphere and the misappropriation of public funds. The State entered arbitrariness in the legal order. It was about combining the legislative and executive powers into the Schmittian political will of the sovereign.
The first victims were the Constitutional Court, the National Judicial Council and the ultimate Court, and after that the full strategy of universal courts. The reactions of the European institutions were ignored. 8 years is long adequate to make certain that democracy is inactive a request for our society. Therefore, Poland's return to democracy through democratic decisions of citizens was proof that there was no gradual death of values, that citizens could save democracy. Donald Tusk's arrival to Brussels was so not just an effort to get funds from the Reconstruction Fund.
Without these measures, the improvement distance between Poland and the Union would deepen. It seems that now, after this triumph of democracy, it is simply a good time to find a better place for Poland, to propose something to Europe?
The return of Poland to the planet of democracy restored assurance and created expectations. We came back in a time full of challenges for a planet that is in a precarious and unstable place. Moreover, we have returned to Europe on the eve of the European elections and hard decisions relating to security, the climate crisis, migration, a technological race threatening the competitiveness of the European economy.
When Joe Biden won the election and starting his presidency, he said, "America is backIt was not only about democracy but besides about returning to the global obligations of the United States. That is why I was hoping that, as shortly as the elections were won, in the return of democratic Poland, the debate on how we see Europe's future will begin. I haven't seen it yet.
Internal policy rapidly took over. Poland under politician regulation is against nature restoration law, against the migration pact, against the Green Deal...
In a sense, we slept through this minute of returning to Europe. We have not gone beyond reasoning in terms of interior policy, which, of course, was a condition for restoring democracy in Poland, and besides a condition for regaining the right to usage European funds. The ideas of Poles for our Europe next day were covered with large interior concerns. Even during the European elections, Europe was in my opinion great absent.
Elections to the European Parliament begin the five-year political cycle in Europe. Fortunately, the European Parliament has not been given the far right, the vast majority are inactive centred, pro-European democratic parties. However, the influence of the right is expanding on debate and legislative decisions. So politicians representing democratic Poland should have a clear knowing of what way we want to take. I can't imagine it could inactive be the way of the PiS. It is worth the time to think about our position and what Europe we want to co-create with the remainder of the associate States and citizens of the European Union. It hasn't actually happened yet.
I had 2 hopes. The first, which is now back to Europe and the debate on common European challenges. And the second – about the safety that Donald Tusk spoke about during his exposé. In building security, institutions consistently weakened by the Law and Justice could be strengthened. For example, if, in the context of safety, wellness protection were to be discussed, the issue of exempting entrepreneurs from the contribution would not be at all. Protecting forests and the right to reconstruct natural resources would be without question. You could put safety on a fewer scores just like that.
The return of Poland to Europe, the reflection of the European flag, which has already ceased to be called a rag and found its place next to the Polish flag on public buildings, coincides with Europe's large commitment to building fresh safety competences.
When Russian troops attacked Ukraine, Europe powerfully accelerated the simplification of our dependence on Russian energy natural materials – this is 1 of the safety measures. A lot has besides happened in Europe with respect to climate change and pandemic security. Russia attacked Ukraine at a time erstwhile it became clear that there was no chance of a closer relation with Europe as the largest importer of oil and gas, erstwhile the clear ambitions of Europe expressed in the strategical programme "Fit For 55".
I hope that Poland will hold a constructive, consensus-seeking position in the hard discussions that await us about the future of Europe.
Climate and energy are not everything, we besides have a discussion about defence. The Union counts in NATO structures as a very crucial component of the overall global safety system. The threat from Russia has become a full concern for the European Union as a full and not just for the countries straight neighbouring Ukraine. There is no uncertainty that the improvement of the Union's defence capacity is our common interest, so I hope that Poland will be inclined towards joint European projects and joint European funding.
The Polish approach to common defence has changed somewhat. possibly it's a bit of a fear of what happens if Donald Trump sits in the U.S. presidential seat. Before that, Poland had taken the position that the military was exclusively a domain of NATO and national states. And now the thought of a common European defence credit is being seriously considered.
The door to reasoning about common defence, at least from the economical side, from the arms industry, is open. The European Commission has put the programme on the table in spring this year. This is simply a very innovative thought for investing in defence in Europe. There is, of course, a discussion about the financing of this programme, due to the fact that there are provisions in the European Treaty that make it clear that the European Union cannot usage the funds from its budget to finance military capacity.
However, it is worth utilizing these production capacities, which already be in Europe, only that this must be done and according to the common NATO-native standards and so to make life easier for Ukrainians. Currently, Ukrainians must be trained on very different equipment from the associate States of the Union. They most likely have the most comprehensively trained soldiers, but at unnecessary costs.
Will it not consequence in interior competition by leaving the power to grow defence capacity and its financing in the hands of the associate States? any countries can benefit from the public support of their countries for certain industries, and others have problems with that.
Exactly. This is the key question of whether building the possible of the defence manufacture in Europe will be a European initiative, or whether it will be national projects, someway coordinated by the European Commission. The opinions on this issue are inactive divided and the anticipation of financing Europe's debt is 1 option.
The second option is to amend the rules on State aid. At present, public aid is powerfully fragmented by the interior marketplace due to the fact that the fiscal space that individual associate States have, namely the anticipation of financing projects from their own budgets, is very diverse. The differences came to light on the occasion of COVID-19. It was clear that not all of them had the same opportunities to usage public aid. The study on the interior market, on which the squad of erstwhile Italian Prime Minister Enrico Letty worked, presented the thought of reforming state aid in specified a way as to prevent this fragmentation.
This study is not decently discussed in the European institutions. However, I think that since the study on competitiveness by Maria Draghi has just been published, a joint debate will be held and hopefully the thought of expanding Europe's function and its financing will be won.
This will find whether the function of the States will be greater, and so State aid, or whether the function of the Commission will be greater erstwhile the task is based on joint financing.
Who's in favour and who's against?
Of course, net payers are against European funding. They see this above all as a coordinated draft by the associate States, financed by national budgets, through possibly a somewhat reformed state aid system.
Net payers are Germany, France, Denmark, Netherlands... Poland will join them in 2027. Is it decisive to be reluctant to pay, or is there any component of fear of further integration, possibly federalisation?
Member States have very different visions of Europe. COVID-19 has already shown that greater integration and joint projects service Europe. And safety challenges are an argument for European projects and European funding.
In the end, as in the case of a pandemic, it is reality, circumstances may have a final opinion. We'll compromise only erstwhile the sword hangs over us?
Crisis phenomena, processes that find the full future, i.e. the diverse technological potential, demographic potential, ideological potential, climate, migration – all this is in favour of changes in Europe that will enable us to better exploit its full potential. These changes cannot be resolved by focusing on individual interests and individual actions, due to the fact that we are talking about challenges that do not respect borders. They require common European solutions.
It is besides not worth weakening the image of Europe as a planet economic, commercial and military power. Our credibility is crucial – and as a partner of the United States, and in the eyes of the undemocratic powers, in particular, I think of China, but besides Russia, which, although hard to call it a power today, is surely inactive and will be dangerous.
As in the context of global challenges, this fight against fire in Poland, i.e. Donald Tusk's government populism?
Fukuyama said populism is about supporting a policy that people like. I think that the perception of dilemmas in the way of solving dilemmas, besides in the communicative of the current prime minister of writing style, which, of course, concerns KO voters, may be related to the fact that we are already surviving in the postpopular age.
I don't know if erstwhile the Berlin Wall was falling, we imagined that we would be setting walls on our border or that we would close the border, as happened erstwhile the pandemic broke out. I will not forget calls from Estonians who could not return from Brussels to their homes due to the fact that Poland closed the border.
The utmost right reaches for democratic institutions, the right centre uses the ideas expected by any voters until late perceived as extreme. He's doing it to win the election. It is worth noting that populism is actually a certain anticipation by voters of a policy that will respond to their frustration. We see it in France. And erstwhile I look at Mr Jarosław Kaczyński, I think about the cult of the individual, due to the fact that all the PiS plays active a leader who was expected to save and save the sovereign.
At the same time, his policy has consistently expanded the ranks of people who will be frustrated in the future. She gives a small to take more. And possibly it is akin in Poland and France that both societies are delicate to dignity, to distinctions, to humiliation, due to the fact that in democratic societies they survived profoundly established class animosities, on which it is easy to play. We remember “Poland A” and “Poland B”. The slogans about getting up from the knees reached people who lost and felt hurt during the transformation.
That's what populism is all about. But this Polish populism, observed for 8 years, was dangerous due to the fact that it created a space for politicians to gain material benefits. That is indeed gross dishonesty. And the demolition of institutions which were to stay just a facade – including a constitution that is created to defend people from state abuses of power.
This full written state in the country is indeed a terribly hard legacy of fresh years and the fight against it most likely requires a very circumstantial approach to not say maneuvering or even manipulation. So I realize what the Prime Minister is doing – that enters the PiS shoesThat he has a communicative that any of us just resent. This is simply a conscious strategy. It's not a coincidence.
Except Donald Tusk's populism goes beyond the expectations of his constituents. Civil, social, academic, teaching, activist, legal, youth, women – all those who brought him to power do not want populism. Support for Law and Justice remains at the same level all the time, the government coalition is shaking. Combating populism is necessarily a reconnaissance of combat due to the fact that no 1 has always been here before. But how is this seen from a European perspective? Does Europe realize these moves that may besides seem a small anti-European? Voting with Hungary doesn't look good, does it?
I presume this is simply a conscious strategy, and I realize that the problems are real. But on the Polish-Belarusian border reconciliation of border safety issues, work for the external border of the Union with humanity is necessary. But it didn't work out. I'm not hiding that this is something that's truly bothering me.
I realize the Prime Minister's strategy so that he sees these problems, but is convinced that he can find a way to solve them with another methods, rationally, honestly, with respect for man. There are the institutions of the European Union, which besides deal with this, is Frontex, which is based in Warsaw. I want to believe that it takes more time to solve this decently identified problem in Poland in a way that will be an example for the world. Interference with migration is our future.
I was hoping that Poland, on which the Holocaust took place, would want to propose a different approach to migration. What we do now is not only illegal and immoral, but very dangerous. Is it truly worth making enemies around the world, especially in those countries to which Russia’s abroad policy reaches?
European law besides forbids pushbacks. There is no uncertainty that this is indeed a problem that inactive requires action. You, referring to history, besides show that decently We have no moral right to specified behavior. I hope that we will shortly find a solution that will let us to reconstruct Poland's face.
The European People's organization has adopted a conservative attitude towards the Green Deal for fear that any decision supporting the Green Deal will add points to the populists. How much does Donald Tusk's actions in this case consequence from the EPP strategy and how much does it consequence from his assessment of interior policy?
In fresh years and months before the elections there were discussions in the European Union related to migration policy, legal acts were adopted, which Poland did not support. As far as climate change is concerned, EU policy has besides been negatively perceived. But I besides think that Poland's disapproval of various another actions that would lead to organization changes, specified as the departure from the unanimous vote, i.e. the veto in the Council, was a surprise to many European communities. Like Poland's attitude on the Ukrainian border and the blockade of imports of cereals from Ukraine. This was amazing in the political environment, in the European Parliament. And I'll say that she's even had a beautiful strong reaction to talking to us and about us.
It can be assumed that this non-departure from the PiS line is part of the conscious strategy of the current government. We are having clear problems uncovering a balance between policies serving Polish interests and our obligations towards Europe.
Or this could be an announcement of what the Polish Presidency will look like. Of course, the Presidency does not mean that the associate State holding the Presidency imposes its view on the others. The announcements or promises that Poland will act against what results from the acts already adopted are incompatible with the powers of the country holding the Presidency. I presume that we are aware of this and that this is any strategy that, at the right time, will require the exit of these written shoes.
What if the writing shoes are on?
Poland faces hard issues and I hope that the actions of the Prime Minister are accompanied by awareness of what is good, what is right and what should be part of strategical thinking. I very much miss talking about what Poland is, what it wants to be? What is to be the determinant of our decency, faithfulness to the ideals and values of Europe?
I think that the collapse of democracy, despite its common features, looks different in different parts of the world. In a sense, this wave of authoritarianism can be a reversal of the trend after the end of the Cold War. In Europe, however, this is not only the illness of young democracies, but besides the mature ones. In most EU countries, the extremist right brings together about 20% of voters.
Donald Tusk seems to be a soloist. He does quite a few things on his own, even if it takes more than 1 pair of hands to do something. And someway he finds these hands. But from Campus the Polish Future came a message that nothing would change until KO could regulation itself. due to the fact that in the current arrangement there are no possible changes to women's reproductive rights. I wonder if this is the beginning of the election campaign? due to the fact that in order to be able to propose long-term policies, you truly request more power.
I have large assurance in the current Prime Minister, but I would like to hear that there is simply a strategy.
How do we see the future of Poland, what is important, where we are going, what will be in 10 years? Everything you do present is shaping the future. The sum of all these ad hoc tactics is not a coherent strategy for me right now, does not match the values with which the Platform and Poland as a associate of the European Union are associated. I do not know, although of course I may not request to know who is liable for the economy in our government, on what precisely the future of Poland is to be suspended in terms of drivers of development. I can't see that at all. There is besides no place where specified reasoning takes place.
Poland and Europe are besides facing the challenge of eliminating the immense and increasing innovation gap that we are facing from the US, China and increasingly from the UK. There is besides a large challenge to make the decarbonisation of our economy and our lifestyle, our strength, our competitive advantage.
Prime Minister Tusk erstwhile expressed Unflattering Opinion on Visions.
But these strategical elements are highly needed in order to tame citizens as partners of power, not just observers, with what we are going to do and how we are imagining the joint implementation of this strategy. It's not actual that people live now. We have plans, we're reasoning about what kind of planet we're going to leave to our children and grandchildren. We build our identity not by the sense of separateness, but by the bonds that unite us, strengthen us and open us to others.
In the fresh Polish composition in the European Parliament you were short, there were no Rosa Thun - 2 people who had long experience in the European Union, quite a few cognition and relationships which I think are very crucial in the Union. Do you see specified fresh people in the Polish representation that will be more crucial in the perspective?
Each fresh associate needs any time to build political capital and may win or fail. The European Commission is now in a very hard period. It doesn't look easy or good. Let us remember that the vote on the president of the Commission was held under political impulse that there is simply a threat due to the fact that the participation of those who want to break up Europe from the inside has increased. That is why the Greens, and the Liberals, and the Socialists agreed to vote for Ursula von der Leyen – but it all took place a small under pressure.
Now this force is gone and the first minute of discharge will surely be the choice of commissioners. And here we must remember that the competitor for von der Leyen for any time was Socialist Nikola Schmidt, Luxembourger, who was Commissioner for Labour, employment and Social Affairs. He was not elected president of the Commission and was so to be a candidate for Commissioner, but was not notified by the Luxembourg Government, who reported a associate of the EPP. With this burden, socialists are active in the process of building the Commission.
Secondly, it must be remembered that in the 4 largest associate States of the Union there is no government exercised by parties belonging to the EPP – it is Spain, Germany, France and Italy, and Macron and Meloni were against the von der Leyen election.
The problem was besides the way the Commission was managed by Ursula von der Leyen, considered by many to be incoherent, due to the fact that the European Commission, in accordance with the treaties, is making collective, collegiate decisions. And here it is not known whether it will be possible to build a Commission that will have a chance of collegiality, or whether Mrs von der Leyen will run the Commission in the kind of her past term, more autocratically. any of the EPP, 5 or six colleagues, besides voted against von der Leyen. The situation is simply a small uncertain. Von der Leyen asked all leaders to submit 2 candidates to the Commission: a female and a man, so that Parliament could choose to choose a woman. And they all turned out to be deaf, 1 candidate each, and most men.
They remind Ursula von der Leyen that it is her triumph by necessity, not by conviction?
That's what it looks like for now. It should so theoretically reject those candidates who are single and request a re-application. It didn't happen. All this means that the formation of the Commission can be a very hard process.
Donald Tusk spoke about the function of the Polish delegation in the European Union in specified a populist tone, as if it were to defend Poland from the European Union. Does this composition of MEPs warrant this? I'm kidding around here, of course.
Certainly Poland has the alleged window of chance – and surely the eyebrows have already floated many times, that the instructions which the Polish delegation received from the country were all for them: not as far as Ukraine is concerned, absolute not for all ideas for pro-climate changes, not for changes in treaties, for all these were hard instructions, no, no and no. I will not forget the conversation with Latvian colleague Sandra Kalniete, author of a legal act concerning Ukrainian exports. She said, "What are you doing?" What's going on with you two? They were just shocked. Poland, which was Ukraine's biggest friend, abruptly sets itself up in contrare.
We request to make certain that window that opened right now doesn't close. What inactive gives us the chance – although it is not good to enjoy the misfortune of others – is the situation of Germany and France, which are...
Taking care of itself, and Poland is increasing up, so has a chance to strengthen its position?
Provided she can show what Europe is for. We cannot leave now and say that we are against European projects, European funding, due to the fact that we have no substantive argument. most likely no 1 expects Poland to declare that it is behind the European federation, but we cannot be in contrare for everything.
The minute has come to show the Polish imagination of Europe, strong, safe, capable of building global alliances, economically competitive. There are quite a few words that can be said about Europe's future without entering into political, ideologically uncomfortable clashes for us.
Except the imagination has it. Macron.
We blame Macro for Mélenchon and Le Pen due to the fact that at 81 French parliamentarians in EP 44 it is simply a extremist right and extremist left. Le Pen powered the Patriots of Orbán, becoming the 3rd force in parliament. Macron is besides the most pro-European leader in Europe. He has been moving towards a strong, strong Europe for years, and he does not usage the word "federal" due to the fact that that's not the point either.
Do you see on the Polish political scene a politician who would be the caliber of Donald Tusk?
Let's take care of what we have. It is besides the task of the leader of this class to think of his successor. We have no tradition of rational generation exchange. This normality, which after 8 years returned, is an chance to increase interest in politics among the next generation.
A generational change allows you to go to a fresh horizon?
When Donald Tusk is no longer in politics, we must have a natural leader who understands that if we don't aid Ukraine and Ukraine won't win this war, that means that the full of Russia, China, Iran, North Korea and their various helpers, will change the global order based on shared values and norms and replace it with others – corresponding to their geopolitical appetites.
Ukraine is not just between us and Russia, but between us and this large arrangement of authoritarian leaders. The destiny of Ukraine now depends on the destiny of the world.
What else do we need?
Strategies and debates about it. Just so we know what's gonna drive us. due to the fact that we're inactive at the end of innovation, research, investment in research. large companies from around the planet connected with artificial intelligence, quantum computers, biotechnology – this is not heard about in Poland at all. After all, Poland is attractive in our part of Europe as a place for investment. And we're worried about creating a business-friendly environment, not taking into account global challenges.
