President's Decision Karol Nawrocki about vetoing the law allowing Poland to benefit from the EU's debt program SAFE has sparked a loud nagging of supporters to make Poland a vassal of the EU and Germany. The head of state announced in a peculiar message that it would not sign a legislative act that would let the government to scope for billions of euros from the European arms financial instrument.
The Unis are angry after Nawrocki's veto on SAFE. His decision is 1 of the most crucial points in the conflict between the president and the government led by Donald Tusk. The dispute is not only about money, but besides about the sovereignty of the state, the principles of defence financing and Poland's relations with the institutions of the European Union.
SAFE (Security Action for Europe) is an EU financial mechanics whereby EU countries can make preferential loans to increase defence expenditure. The full programme amounts to about 150 billion EUR, and Poland could receive as much as 43-44 billion EUR of loans for military investments.
The government argues that these measures would accelerate the modernisation of the army and increase the country's defence capacity in the face of expanding safety threats in Europe. The critics of the program, however, argue that it is simply a long-term abroad debt – according to any analyses it could be repaid for up to 45 years, and the cost of interest calculated over the full period could scope hundreds of billions of PLN.
In His Message president Nawrocki stressed that he would not agree to a solution which, in his opinion, could limit the independency of the state. As he pointed out, the SAFE mechanics is based on the conditionality principle, which gives the EU institutions the chance to suspend financing while leaving the debt repayment work to the beneficiary State.
The president besides said that specified a solution could hit Poland's political and economical sovereignty. alternatively of the loan, he proposed an alternate task referred to as ‘Polish SAFE’, which assumes financing defence investments from national resources and a peculiar defence investment fund.
Donald Tusk's government reacted very critically to the veto. The ruling coalition politicians argued that the president's decision weakens the country's defence capabilities and blocks access to inexpensive military investment funding. The Prime Minister announced the convening of an extraordinary government gathering and the preparation of an alternate solution that would enable the programme to be utilized despite the President's opposition. This is about extra-legal activities, most likely taking this debt through a parliamentary resolution.
The dispute over the SAFE program besides sparked social emotions. Before the Presidential Palace in Warsaw there was a manifestation of the utmost left connected with the decision on the program. The banner states the word “traitor!” addressed to the President.
Participants in another demonstration protested against SAFE and thanked for vetoing the bill. Demonstrators argued that Poland could lose its sovereignty and become besides dependent on decisions of the European institutions.
However, the conflict around SAFE shows a deeper problem: various visions of Poland's place in Europe and how the state safety is financed. 1 organization focuses on close cooperation with the institutions of the European Union, the another 1 stresses the request for greater financial and political independence.
OUR COMMENTS: Imagine in Germany the existence of a serious political force that demands taking a debt from France to buy weapons for the German army. A debt for 45 years, secured by French banks. Imagine the president, too. which urges us to remember and avoid borrowing for years in French banks, which is called in Germany a national traitor in authoritative organization and state broadcasts.
Unfortunately, as long as we let a abroad influence agent to decide our future, we will not be any respected state. We so support the veto on the SAFE loan.
We besides recommend: CIs the Polish investigation into Epstein's affair fake?
