Just two weeks ago, Brussels was celebrating the victory of its candidate in the Romanian presidential elections while watching with a sidelong glance as Chega! became the second political force in Portugal. The victory of Rafal Trzaskowski, candidate of Civic Platform and progressive mayor of Warsaw, in the first round of the Polish presidential elections, was also a cause for rejoicing in Brussels, but clouded with concern because the conservative candidate, Karol Nawrocki, came in second and was close on the heels of Donald Tusk’s dauphin. With a turnout of almost 70%, Trzaskowski obtained 31.36% of the votes, while Nawrocki obtained 29.54%. Less than two points difference, despite the fact that the polls gave the mayor of Warsaw a much larger victory.
Third and fourth place went to Konfederacja candidates Slawomir Mentzen, who obtained 14.81%, and Gregorz Braun, with 6.34%. In the opposing camp, none of the three candidates of the “center” and the left exceeded 5%. The numbers are very clear and, if the trend of the first round were to be repeated, Trzaskowski’s lead would not be enough to win the presidency. On paper, it seems obvious that Konfederacja’s support should go to Nawrocki, who was quick to ask for his vote to “save Poland” from Donald Tusk, but Mentzen made it clear that his party was nobody’s crutch and that the candidates would have to convince their voters. To that end, he organized a debate with Nawrocki and another with Trzaskowski, which were broadcast on YouTube.
The debate between Mentzen and Nawrocki took place in a very respectful tone and both agreed on many proposals. For example, in the rejection of the European Green Pact and the agreement with Mercosur, the fight against illegal immigration, the defense of the zloty -the Polish national currency- and cash payment, the rejection of tax increases and laws limiting freedom of speech under the excuse of “hate crime”. Nawrocki presented himself as an independent, something that has made him popular among Konfederacja voters, and he did not hesitate to criticize some measures of Law and Justice, such as economic confinement during the pandemic and tax increases. After the debate, Nawrocki signed a declaration in which he pledged to implement all the common proposals if elected president.
On the contrary, the debate with Trzaskowski was rather tense. The mayor of Warsaw tried to dodge all the difficult issues and gave contradictory and unclear answers. Of course, he did not sign or commit himself to anything. Nevertheless, when the debate was over, the two went for a beer together at a place owned by Mentzen. This caused a certain controversy, which Mentzen wanted to get out of by saying that this is “normal in a democracy”. The gesture did not sit well in the Law and Justice environment, which accused Konfederacja of not explicitly supporting Nawrocki. Mentzen settled the controversy last Wednesday, when he posted a new video analyzing the talk with the two candidates and pointed to the mayor of Warsaw: “I see no reason to vote for Trzaskowski. He is the man who represents leftist ideologies such as the LGBTQ agenda: the man who wants to restrict freedom of speech and censor dissenting voices, etc.” The message to Konfederacja voters is very clear.
Apart from the debates, the other most striking aspect of this campaign has been the progressive media’s dirty war against Karol Nawrocki, in a campaign very similar to the one waged against George Simion in Romania. Absolutely everything has been said against the conservative candidate, from hooligan to “pro-Russian”, and, of course, “anti-European”. The “pro-Russian” thing is straight up insane when his name is on Russia’s most wanted list for his key role, as director of the National Institute of Remembrance, in the destruction of Soviet monuments in Poland. A task that has made him the victim of numerous death threats and for which the authorities granted him a weapons permit.
Regarding the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Nawrocki does not want to send Polish soldiers to Ukraine and does not support its accession to NATO (this is the only difference with Trzaskowski, who wants NATO membership, but no Polish soldiers to fight there, forgetting Article 5), but he is in favor of continuing to help Ukraine by sending arms, as Poland has been doing since the beginning of the war. This is not exactly a “pro-Russian” position and it is the one maintained by other European governments of different sign, but the left at global level is trying to monopolize the Ukrainian cause and to present all conservatives as “pro-Russians”. I can give the example of Spain, where it was even said that Giorgia Meloni was “Putin’s candidate”. The other big lie is “anti-Europeanism”, presenting opposition to the federalist project and Brussels agendas as contrary to European values. It seems difficult for this campaign to have a similar effect as it had in Romania, but it also seeks to use fear to influence voters.
Trzaskowski’s election would mean the end of the firewall with which President Duda has kept Poland safe from the progressive agenda and would revalidate the policies of Tusk, who has persecuted conservative politicians, shut down media outlets, and cut off funding to the main opposition party. Trzaskowski is a supporter of the green pact and has signed 21 Green proposals, such as bans on coal heating, promotion of insects in the diet, and restrictions on gasoline cars; he believes that freedom of speech should be regulated by “hate crime” laws; he defends the LGBT agenda and its introduction in schools; he is in favor of a full legalization of abortion and, that is why he is the candidate of Brussels, ceding sovereignty to the European Union on key issues such as energy or the fight against illegal immigration.
Opposite him is Karol Nawrocki, who defends Polish national interests, such as its currency, its energy independence or its borders, and who is the only one who can put the brakes on Tusk’s authoritarian drift.
This Sunday, Poland does not decide between two different politicians, but between two different models: Maintaining its independence or surrendering it to the agendas imposed by Brussels. Sovereignty or globalism? That is the question.
