Centrist President Would Give Tusk “A Brussels-Sanctioned License To Dismantle Democracy”—Former MEP Jacek Saryusz-Wolski

If Trzaskowski is elected, it will go the way of the rest of the EU, secular and anti-Western. If Nawrocki wins, it remains on the path of sanity.

From The European Conservative

By Artur Ciechanowicz

“Climate, migration, sovereignty, the rule of law, and national security are all on the ballot" in Sunday's Polish presidential election.

As Poland heads into a critical presidential election, the stakes go far beyond party labels or personalities. According to Jacek Saryusz-Wolski—a veteran EU negotiator and former vice-president of the European Parliament—the vote could determine whether Poland remains a sovereign nation or becomes a compliant province of a Brussels-led superstate.

Why is the EU suddenly quiet about controversial policies like the Green Deal and migration?

As Le Monde recently reported, the European Commission is deliberately stalling announcements on two core policy areas—the Green Deal and migration. The idea is to avoid putting the Polish government’s preferred presidential candidate, the liberal pro-EU Rafał Trzaskowski, in a politically uncomfortable position ahead of the election.

We saw a similar situation in Romania: after pro-EU centrist Nicușor Dan won the election, everything moved forward immediately, including migration-related initiatives. What we’re seeing is a strategic pause—essentially a temporary license granted to Polish PM Donald Tusk by Ursula von der Leyen to “kill the truth,” so to speak. It gives Trzaskowski room to distance himself from the EU’s most controversial policies during the campaign—a kind of political camouflage. After the election, this illusion will no longer be necessary.

If Trzaskowski wins, what kind of EU alignment should Poles expect?

There are three major issues at stake. First, if Trzaskowski wins, we can expect Poland to fully align with the EU’s climate and Green Deal agenda without resistance. This is hardly surprising given the Tusk camp’s political dependency on Berlin and Brussels.

Second, migration policy. Brussels can expect smooth implementation of its migration plans under a Trzaskowski presidency. There will be no pushback.

Third, the future structure of the European Union. This includes treaty changes and the gradual transfer of national powers to the EU level. Under Trzaskowski, Poland would effectively serve as a passive accomplice to these centralizing efforts—no resistance, no red lines. The EU’s transformation into a quasi-federal European superstate would proceed unhindered.

By contrast, if Trzaskowski’s conservative opponent Karol Nawrocki wins, we can expect strong resistance to these trends. He would defend Polish sovereignty in climate, migration, and constitutional matters.

What impact would this have on Poland’s relationship with the United States?

That’s the fourth and perhaps most existential issue. A victory for the Tusk–Trzaskowski camp would damage Poland’s relationship with the United States.

Only a Polish president capable of cooperating with Donald Trump can secure continued U.S. military and strategic support. Trzaskowski simply isn’t that figure. Western European countries are already trying to distance themselves from the U.S. and push for so-called “strategic autonomy”—in other words, a European alternative to NATO.

A Nawrocki presidency would ensure Poland’s security remains firmly anchored in the U.S.-led alliance system. This is a matter of national survival, not party politics. Anyone familiar with 20th-century history knows how dangerous it is to trust in vague promises of European defense. We tried that in 1939—and we know how it ended.

Some might argue that the president of Poland doesn’t have as much power as a U.S. or French president. Is that true?

It’s a partial truth. The Polish president has fewer powers than his U.S. or French counterparts but significantly more than, say, the German president.

He can introduce legislation—which means he can try to build cross-party majorities in the Polish parliament, known as the Sejm, on fundamental issues. He has substantial authority in foreign policy, as the official representative of the Republic. He is also the Commander-in-Chief and plays a key role in security and defense.

Crucially, he appoints judges and holds veto power. That veto can block government legislation unless the Sejm can override it with a qualified 3/5 majority—which the current government does not have. This means a president can effectively stop harmful climate, migration, or treaty reforms if they’re not in Poland’s interest.

And don’t underestimate the president’s soft power—the ability to speak for the nation and put moral and political pressure on the government when it violates the constitution, threatens sovereignty, or undermines national security.

You mentioned concerns about “democratic backsliding.” Could you expand on that?

If Trzaskowski wins, the ruling coalition will be emboldened. We’ve already seen constitutional violations, misuse of force against institutions, and politically motivated arrests of opposition MPs. That was just the beginning.

Expect more pressure on the judiciary—including the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Tribunal. Independent media may lose their licenses. The space for dissent will shrink further. The worst part? No one will be left to defend democratic rules from within the system.

Trzaskowski’s victory will give the government a Brussels-sanctioned license to dismantle democracy — all under the Orwellian pretext of “defending democracy.” Tusk’s idea of “militant democracy” means suppressing opposition and dissident voices through legally dubious or outright illegal means. This is not liberalism; it’s the logic of fascism or Bolshevism. Once democracy is dismantled, it’s extraordinarily difficult to restore.

Final word—why should voters care?

These elections are not about personalities—they’re about the future direction of Poland and its place in Europe. Climate, migration, sovereignty, the rule of law, and national security are all on the ballot. Voters—even those who may not support Karol Nawrocki—should recognize what’s at stake.

Pictured: Jacek Saryusz-Wolski, former MEP