It’s no surprise that the marginal win on 2 June of Poland’s President-elect, Karol Nawrocki, has rattled politics internationally considering his anti-EU stance – and his victory couldn’t have been more of a blow to Poland’s prime minister, Donald Tusk. Sensing the country’s politics have once again become destabilised, Tusk called for a vote of confidence on Monday (11 June) in an attempt to bolster his party and strengthen their political power. “I needed this vote for obvious reasons,” Tusk said after the votes have been cast. “There have been speculations that this government won’t be able to support itself and it’s difficult to work in these conditions.” Yet the vote did little to prove his critics wrong.
Marginal wins have recently become depressingly commonplace in Polish politics: in the first round of the presidential election, Rafał Trzaskowski narrowly won before Nawrocki secured the office with a 0.9 per cent advantage in the second round. Now Tusk has garnered the support of just 53 per cent of the Polish parliament, the Sejm. Rather than proving that Polish MPs have trust in his leadership, the vote of confidence has further demonstrated that Poland is divided. One member of the opposition said that what Tusk called on himself was in fact a “vote of no confidence”. Only seven members of the Sejm abstained from voting, including Jarosław Kaczynski, the leader of the right-wing Law and Justice party, whose relations with Tusk have been tense since his first term as prime minister in 2007.
So, what did the vote of confidence achieve? Simply put: nothing. The question period that proceeded the vote was less of a Q&A than an opportunity for Tusk’s opponents to air their grievances in front of one another. Addressing the “usually not present” prime minister – a phrase that many members of the opposition wielded to highlight Tusk’s frequent lack of attendance in the Sejm – the usual repertoire of issues was broached ranging from education, public spending, the national healthcare system and the prime minister’s systematic failures in their regard. As the question period dragged on, the condemnations disguised as questions became more audacious. A Law and Justice MP, Łukasz Kmita, called Tusk’s leadership pathological and only possible thanks to his “kiss-asses”. This sentiment was shared by fellow Law and Justice MP Zbigniew Bogucki who called Tusk’s premiership “pato-władza” – pathological governance. Another MP addressed Tusk as “Herr Tusk” and proceeded to speak to him “in a language he will understand” – German. The anti-German sentiment of the opposition was impossible to ignore, especially aimed at the prime minister. For years Tusk has been the subject of conspiracy theories that paint him as a “German spy” due to his pro-EU sentiments, allyship with Germany – a position some view as selling Poland out – and his German heritage on his mother’s side.
So, yes, Donald Tusk won his vote, but he didn’t exactly bolster confidence. In the past, the vote of confidence has been a tool wielded in difficult and important political moments – something Tusk has experience with having called on it in 2012 and 2014. This is one of those significant political moments, yet the tactic failed. Rather than proving unity, the vote drew a firm divisive line. With an upcoming parliamentary reshuffle in July and the presidency of Nawrocki starting in August, the country is entering a summer of political disturbance. According to United Surveys, 44.8 per cent of the Polish public think that Tusk should resign – a sentiment clearly shared with many members of the Sejm. The political divide in the country and in the Polish parliament will lead to further disillusionment and political fatigue. Nawrocki’s presidency will not only add to the domestic political unrest but will also have an inevitable ripple effect on politics and policy beyond Poland’s borders.
[See also: The world is finally turning against the war on Gaza]
Content from our partners
Related
