Why
Poland won’t be punished
It’s
too big and too important to suffer serious fallout from the EU.
By JAN CIENSKI
1/13/16, 5:30 AM CET
Poland’s new
right-wing government faces international demands to roll back
radical changes to the country’s institutions, but the odds that it
will suffer any serious punishment from Brussels are close to zero.
The European
Commission meets behind closed doors Wednesday to decide whether to
place Poland under closer scrutiny for violating the bloc’s
democratic norms — the start of a process that could lead to the
suspension of EU voting rights.
But Brussels isn’t
likely to issue any significant reprimands. Commission officials are
downplaying suggestions that Brussels could bring Warsaw to heel for
taking control over public media and passing a law that critics say
reduces the powers of the country’s constitutional court.
“There are
different positions but I don’t expect the Commission to pick a
fight at this stage,” said an EU official who spoke on condition of
anonymity.
That’s also the
view of Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski. On Polish television
Tuesday night, he said Prime Minister Beata Szydło spoke with
European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker about Wednesday’s
meeting.
“This is a routine
procedure,” Waszczykowski said. “This debate will not end with
any decision.”
Here’s why the
EU-Poland standoff won’t reach the breaking point:
1. The Hungary
precedent
The EU has kept an
eye on Hungary for years due to Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s
embrace of what he called “illiberal democracy.” His government
has reduced the power of the courts, taken over state media, hiked
taxes and imposed other costs on banks and unpopular foreign
companies. And that was before Orbán infuriated his European
counterparts with his hard line on migration.
Yet Hungary remains
an EU member in good standing and still pulls in plenty of foreign
investment.
European leaders,
including European Parliament President Martin Schulz, warn of
Poland’s “Putinization.” But the soft treatment of Hungary
undermines the tough talk towards Poland, which has taken similar
steps to Hungary.
Not only that, Orbán
has made clear that Hungary will block any moves to sanction Poland,
most of which require unanimity of EU member countries.
2. Poland is too big
to isolate
The EU didn’t
succeed in changing Hungary’s direction, and Poland is a bigger
beast.
With almost four
times Hungary’s population, Poland is one of the “big six” EU
countries with a crucial political role in the bloc, and with
economic heft to match.
Poland is also a
crucial partner for NATO, especially at a time of worries about the
threat from Russia.
Here, mutual
interests may prevail.
Poland wants a
larger NATO presence in the country, something Waszczykowski plans to
push hard for ahead of a July NATO summit in Warsaw. Duda’s visit
to Brussels Monday will have a strong NATO component: He is set to
meet NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg and General Philip Breedlove, the
NATO supreme allied commander.
“Poland is
particularly interested in preserving its ties with NATO and the
U.S,” said Adriano Bosoni, Europe analyst with Stratfor, a think
tank.
NATO also needs
Poland.
In a recent
interview with the Stars and Stripes newspaper, General Frank Gorenc,
U.S. Air Force commander for operations in Europe, Africa, Asia and
the Middle East, warned that Russian missile systems based in the
Kaliningrad enclave threaten NATO jets operating over parts of Poland
and the Baltics.
Poland is one of the
few alliance members to spend the required 2 percent of GDP on
defense, and is a strategic linchpin in Central Europe.
That means there is
no chance that the Warsaw summit will be called off, diplomats say.
3. The EU can’t
actually do much
Brussels could
invoke the so-called nuclear option of Article 7 of the EU treaties
and remove the voting rights of a member who has gone astray. But it
has never been used and few think there is any chance of it being
imposed on Poland.
Otherwise, there are
few other points of pressure.
Money could be a big
one. EU funds have transformed Poland over the last decade, helping
finance roads, sewage plants, ports and lots of other infrastructure.
The 2014-2020 EU
budget allocates almost €106 billion for Poland. That money depends
on countries fulfilling the requirements of particular programs. If
that isn’t done, then disbursement can be halted, as has happened
in the past with Italy, Romania and other countries.
But the money tap
can’t be turned off for political reasons.
4. Poland is closing
ranks
The new government
stirred up domestic and foreign opposition with its rapid and
controversial measures, but it has begun pushing back at criticism.
Szydło met Tuesday
with leaders of opposition parties in Warsaw, the first time that’s
happened since the new government came to power in October.
The parties went to
war only a few weeks ago when Polish leaders rammed the controversial
legislation through parliament over the objections of the opposition.
So the sight of all political rivals sitting amicably around a table
undercuts the view that the country’s democracy is under threat.
“We agreed that
Polish issues have to be resolved here in Poland,” Szydło said
after the meeting. “It’s bad that these issues were transmitted
to the international arena and we’ll do everything for the
situation to now calm itself.”
Foreign politicians
who don’t get the message to leave the new government alone are in
for a bit of a shin-kicking from senior officials like Justice
Minister Zbigniew Ziobro.
After receiving two
letters from the European Commission’s first vice president, Frans
Timmermans, regarding the Constitutional Tribunal and the media law,
Ziobro fired back, accusing him of “unjustified accusations and
unfair conclusions” and denounced the letter as “an attempt to
exert pressure upon the democratically elected Parliament and
Government of the sovereign Republic of Poland.”
Donald Tusk,
European Council president and a former Polish prime minister, warned
Tuesday that the pressure being put on Warsaw can be
“counter-productive.”
“I wouldn’t like
the criticism coming from the European capitals, the EU institutions,
the European Commission, the European Council to be seen as an attack
on Poland and Poles,” he told MEPs.
5. The government in
Warsaw isn’t going anywhere
Despite protests by
thousands of opponents and and strong international disapproval, the
government shows no sign of budging.
“No pressure and
hollering, no words … will turn us from this path,” Jarosław
Kaczyński, the leader of Law and Justice and by most accounts the
country’s most powerful politician, told supporters on Sunday. “We
will continue moving forward.”
There’s a good
reason for that. The party has an outright majority in both the upper
and lower houses of parliament, the first time any grouping has
managed that since 1989. Kaczyński also learned a bitter lesson in
2007, when he called an early election after two years of running a
coalition government and then lost. This is a government that will
remain in power until 2019.
That means that
Poland’s partners are going to have to make the best of the new
government in Warsaw, as it’s a long-term partner.
“We have to have
friendly and good relations with Poland,” Commission President
Jean-Claude Juncker said recently. “Poland is an important and a
full member of the EU. We are at the beginning of the procedure. Now
we are in discussion with Poland and I don’t want to speculate
about further consequences. I don’t think we will come to that
point.”
Maïa De La Baume
and Jacopo Barigazzi contributed to this article
Is
Poland a failing democracy?
POLITICO
asked leading thinkers, politicians and policymakers to weigh in on
the Polish question.
By POLITICO
1/13/16, 5:30 AM CET
The question posed
above would have sounded absurd months ago.
For the quarter
century since a Polish shipyard electrician helped end the Cold War,
the land of Lech Wałesa was the poster nation of Europe’s
post-Berlin success: A thriving free-market economy, a mature
regional power and, with a vibrant press and political party system,
a model democratic citizen and influential EU and NATO member.
The political
earthquake that hit in 2015 with the unprecedented electoral sweep by
the Law and Justice party has now upset contemporary assumptions
about Poland. Immediately upon taking power, Law and Justice passed
laws that critics, among them prominent voices in Brussels, say
neuter the judiciary and hobble the free press.
The government,
sounding confident about its electoral mandate and absolute majority
in parliament, dismisses these critics as left-wing spoilers and
promises more changes to come. Backed by influential voices, Law and
Justice says its job is to clean up Poland after liberal, often
corrupt elites that were out of touch with its Christian and
patriotic values.
Every weekend for
the past few, thousands of demonstrators have gathered in Poland’s
larger cities, both to support and protest Law and Justice policies.
The European Commission, which raised concerns about the government’s
actions, meets on Wednesday to discuss possible sanctions on Warsaw.
Add Poland to the lengthening list of European crises.
POLITICO asked
leading thinkers, experts, policymakers and politicians to address
the Polish question of 2016: Is its democracy really in danger?
* * *
Poland didn’t
lurch right: PiS is a throwback to Soviet-style politics
Adam Zamoyski, a
British historian of Polish origin, is the author, inter alia, of
“Poland: A History” (Hippocrene, 2012) and “Warsaw 1920″
(HarperCollins, 2008).
Andrzej Duda’s
election as president and the victory of the Law and Justice party
(PiS) in Poland have been universally reported in the international
media as “a lurch to the right.” This is highly misleading.
The leadership of
PiS is in fact deeply marked by the political culture of the
communist era. The late-night shenanigans surrounding the nomination
of new judges to the Constitutional Tribunal and the determination to
muzzle the media are pure Soviet-style politics. In a throwback to
the old days, the ministry of culture will decide which plays are
staged by Kraków’s prestigious Stary Theater.
“Law
and Justice’s conservatism is essentially provincialism, their
politics populist.”
The PiS core are not
natural capitalists: They are hostile to free-market economics,
regard businessmen as “speculators” and believe in government
control of everything, including property rights. Their fiscal policy
is anything but right-wing. They have promised to crack down on
banks, lower the retirement age and give massive monthly cash
handouts to parents for each child.
They are
conservative only in that they view the liberal center ground of
Western politics — and the modern world in general — with
suspicion. Their conservatism is essentially provincialism, their
politics populist. They beat the drum of patriotism and talk of
preserving national sovereignty, but their idea of patriotism is to
wallow in the martyrology of the Second World War and the talk of
sovereignty is mostly an expression of xenophobia.
Their idea of
“Polish values” is selective; they display the same hatred for
the pre-war elites and landowning class as did their communist
predecessors, and in a recent interview Foreign Minister Witold
Waszczykowski poured scorn on “cyclists” and “vegetarians” as
somehow un-Polish.
Nor does their
victory in last year’s elections represent any kind of lurch to the
right by the electorate. It was the result of disenchantment with the
previous government, which was seen as incompetent, arrogant and out
of touch. People voted not so much for PiS as for change, and many of
those who did so have already made it clear that they do not approve
of the new government’s actions. There are also plenty of cyclists
and vegetarians in Poland.
* * *
Poland is
accountable to its voters, not ‘European values’
Marek Magierowski is
the spokesman of Polish President Andrzej Duda. He writes in his
personal capacity.
The most vital
challenge facing contemporary Europe is the crisis of responsibility.
You can’t run a
nation, let alone the whole continent, if you refuse to make
difficult decisions. There is a frustrating shortage of responsible
politicians amid current EU elites. When some do try to act
responsibly — like Andrzej Duda in Poland — and follow the wishes
and demands of their own citizens, a chorus of indignation suddenly
reverberates in Brussels, Berlin or Vienna, with horror stories about
a “breach of European values.”
Why such outrage?
The answer is amazingly simple.
By bearing the brunt
of tough reforms and making good on electoral pledges, Poland’s
president lays bare the irresponsibility and indolence of the very
politicians who now criticize him.
When Duda signs
bills expected by a majority of Poles, many European leaders feel
guilty about neglecting their citizens’ expectations for years. And
when Duda talks about the dangers related to uncontrolled waves of
immigration, his European colleagues choose to stand idle and keep
mum.
“Our
country is now run by politicians accountable to Polish voters, not
to German, British or French left-wing intellectuals.”
But, ironically, in
the eyes of some European commentators, it is Poland that “violates
the foundations of democracy.”
Eurocrats are good
at debating relocation quotas for refugees, but they are unable to
strengthen border controls. They are good at ‘marching in protest
against terrorism,’ but they are appallingly inept at protecting
the safety of their own people, as evidenced by shocking recent
events in Cologne.
They excel at
lecturing others about democracy, but they are afraid of their own
voters. When was the last time some of them showed up at an electoral
rally? When was the last time they visited an impoverish European
village? Say, in eastern Poland?
Democracy is not
about posturing and finger-pointing. Democracy is about
responsibility. Our country is now run by politicians accountable to
Polish voters, not to German, British or French left-wing
intellectuals. Democracy in Poland is faring pretty well.
* * *
Poland’s ruinous
path
Guy Verhofstadt,
European parliamentary group leader for the Alliance of Liberals and
Democrats for Europe (ALDE), was prime minister of Belgium from
1999-2008.
After Hungary, we
thought we had seen it all. But in just a few weeks, Polish President
Andrzej Duda and Prime Minister Beata Szydło have managed to place
their country on a ruinous path.
Purges of the
intelligence services and police, searches in associations’
headquarters, measures to weaken the Constitutional Tribunal and now
the dismissal of public broadcasting managers have created a toxic
atmosphere within Poland and despair outside it.
Poland’s foreign
affairs minister, Witold Waszczykowski, claims to be “curing” the
country of “diseases” after “25 years of liberal
indoctrination,” yet he himself shows a serious lack of awareness
about the basic principles of democracy. The measures Warsaw is
taking are not only anti-liberal; they are above all anti-democratic
and contrary to the principles of the rule of law signed by Poland
upon its EU accession.
It is clear that if
an accession agreement was to be sought now, it would fail. But
European treaties do not provide for the exclusion of a member
country. Moreover, there is no reason at this stage to punish Poland
and the Poles for the mistakes of its leaders.
Thankfully, Polish
civil society has not converted to the retrograde and nationalist
vision of Jarosław Kaczyński, leader of PiS and deus ex machina of
the Polish government. Its people aspire to be a part of a major
European country that is open to the world and to modernity. Tens of
thousands have marched on the streets to protest against the growing
authoritarianism of the PiS government, while the centrist,
pro-European party Nowoczesna continues to voice the fears of the
Polish people.
In these dangerous
times, the Polish people need and deserve EU support. There are rules
that allow sanctions for “serious and persistent” violations of
the founding principles of the EU, particularly by temporarily
removing the right to vote. The first phase of this procedure is a
verbal warning, in the hope that draconian plans will be dropped.
This worked in the case of Orban’s overreach in Hungary. And the
Commission and the European Council should do the same before the
situation in Warsaw gets out of control.
* * *
Western interference
unwisely turns Polish opinion hostile
Walter Laqueur, an
historian and political commentator, is author, most recently, of
“Putinism: Russia and its future with the West” (Thomas Dunne
Books, 2015).
At first, recent
events in Poland caused more than a little confusion among friends
(and non-friends) of Poland outside the country. Only gradually did
it emerge that it was the issue of censorship that led tens of
thousands to march in the streets of Warsaw and Krakow — a very
serious issue indeed.
I grew up in
heavily-censored Nazi Germany. I belonged to a generation that was
politicized at an early age. It so happened that Nazi censorship was
only fitfully applied to foreign language newspapers. Since I knew a
little Danish a considerable part of my pocket money went to
purchasing Politiken and Berlingske Tidende. Thus I was better
informed than most of my contemporaries. For a considerable time
after, I believed everyone had the right to know everything.
Doubts crept in
when, as a historian, I had to confront the issue of arcana imperii
(“secrets of state”) — the classical doctrine asserting that
governments have certain prerogatives, including the right to keep
secrets. I came to realize that the world isn’t a better place for
people having access to bomb-making instructions on the Internet. But
then the old question arises: Who will guard the guardians? Because,
of course, once censorship is introduced it can easily be abused.
According to Western
news reports, this is what happened in Poland following the recent
elections. And the Polish government does influence the media, by
withdrawing advertisements, or banning a play because it is allegedly
pornographic for instance. The political opposition alerted its
friends in the West.
This is perfectly
legitimate, but is it wise?
The next Polish
elections will not be won or lost in New York, London or even
Brussels. Part of Polish popular opinion has become strongly
anti-Western and in particular, anti-German, as a result of what they
regard as unwarranted interference. I am told 19th-century patriotic
songs have again become fashionable. This is about the last thing we
need at a time when Europe faces very serious challenges and needs
unity more than ever before.
* * *
Poland threatens
Europe’s unity
Jiri Pehe is a
political analyst, global professor at New York University’s Center
for European Mediterranean Studies and director of NYU Prague.
Poland — just like
Slovakia during the rule of Vladimír Mečiar and contemporary
Hungary — is quickly becoming an illiberal democracy. For the time
being it will adhere to basic democratic mechanisms, such as regular
elections, but it will continue to violate some basic principles of
liberal constitutionalism. All institutions that are by definition
independent from governments in liberal democracies — such as
public media, the judiciary and central banks — will come under
increasing pressure.
“Three
out of 4 Visegrad countries are now ruled by populists who lack
respect for rule of law and liberal democracy.”
Developments in
Poland show how limited the understanding of democracy still is in
most post-communist countries. There are large segments of society in
those countries that still desire autocratic leaders and are
intolerant of minorities.
Even more than 25
years after the fall of communism, significant parts of those
societies have not been able to internalize democratic values. For
the most part, these societies react to globalization and further EU
integration with fear, which populists easily transform into militant
nationalism.
The EU faces a real
problem in the post-communist region: Three out of four Visegrad
countries are now single-handedly ruled by populist parties that show
disrespect for the rule of law and the values of liberal democracy.
It is becoming clear
that before enlarging to the politically underdeveloped
post-communist region, where the tradition of democracy is weak, the
EU should have adopted strong safeguards allowing the Union to
suspend the membership of any country whose government chooses not to
respect the rule of law and basic human rights.
Existing mechanisms
are too rigid because sanctions, like suspending voting rights of a
country that violates EU principles, need to be adopted by a
unanimous decision in the European Council. Hungary has already
indicated that it will veto any such attempt.
The possibility that
Western Europe may lose patience with the East and resort to measures
outside the current EU treaties cannot be excluded. But there may be
no good solutions. If circumventing the current EU framework for
dealing with illiberal and undemocratic tendencies in Eastern Europe
is problematic, tolerating the countries with authoritarian,
potentially even semi-fascist regimes, in its midst may be even more
risky for the EU.
* * *
This is not the end
of democracy
Tomasz Wróblewski
is the editor of Wprost, a weekly magazine in Warsaw.
Journalists at our
weekly well remember a summer evening in 2014 when special service
officers raided our editorial offices, demanding computers and
equipment on which they believed conversations of politicians from
the ruling party had been stored.
The recordings given
to us by our sources revealed shocking cases of abuse of power,
including a conversation between the minister of the interior and the
head of the central bank, where in return for interest rate cuts the
minister of the interior promised to dismiss the finance minister and
increase the central bank governor’s powers.
Our offices were
searched and agents of the “politically independent” services
physically attacked the former editor-in-chief. Endless
interrogations and intimidation of our advertisers followed; the
cases were only recently dropped. Our journalists weren’t aware
that for many months their private phone conversations were being
tapped.
It’s hard for us
at Wprost to treat seriously accusations, levelled by politicians
from the former ruling party and the radio and television chiefs they
nominated, that the new government is attacking our freedom of
speech. These are the same people who, hand in hand with disgraced
politicians, accused Wprost journalists of a crime, of publishing
“illegally” recorded conversations.
For those who
eagerly supported the ruling party, losing their jobs will certainly
be an unpleasant experience. But that’s not the end of democracy.
The media market doesn’t only include the public media. And what’s
happening now can in no way be compared to the police harassment
previously meted out to right-wing journalists.
Wprost survived a
difficult period, thanks in large part to the broad diversity of
Polish media. Right-wing journalists fired from public television
created new magazines, portals and radio stations.
Neither the
government nor any single publisher controls the market. Freedom of
speech in Poland is safe.
* * *
Poland’s real
problem isn’t press freedom — it’s rule of law
Wojciech Przybylski
is editor-in-chief of Eurozine and chairman of Res Publica Foundation
in Warsaw.
Our democracy is
doing well. But there is a problem with the rule of law. Poland will
be in grave danger if the government introduces the bills that are as
yet only hypothetical or planned, including the revision of the
Constitution.
A law passed in
December 2015 limits the powers of the Constitutional Tribunal,
obstructing an institution firmly established in the European
democratic culture of checks and balances. By doing so, the Law and
Justice party (PiS) assumed more power than mandated in the October
elections.
PiS did so under
false pretenses. Irreversible damage was done by President Andrzej
Duda when he refused to accept legally elected judges, swore in new
judges in the middle of the night, just hours after their nomination
by the new PiS-dominated parliament, and left three previous
nominations in limbo. His decision was roundly criticized by the
legal community in the country for violating the Constitution.
Now the ruling party
wants to strengthen central powers and undermine privacy and human
rights through a series of new regulations that will limit the power
of the ombudsman and undercut the independence of the prosecutor
general. Laws that give police the right to collect private Internet
data without substantial judicial supervision and allow PiS to bypass
media regulatory bodies established in the Constitution have already
passed.
The biggest threat
would be a change to the Constitution. It can be adopted by
parliament under two scenarios: By a trick, in the absence of the
opposition since a two-thirds majority is needed with a minimum half
of MPs present; or as a consensual decision taken by the government
and the opposition.
The first option
would indeed put Polish democracy in danger. Law and Justice
politicians claim it’s unlikely, but they are already treading down
that decidedly Orwellian path.
* * *
The Polish challenge
to Europe’s post-Berlin order
Harold James is the
Claude and Lore Kelly professor of European studies at Princeton
University and author of “Europe Reborn” (Routledge, 2003) and
“Making the European Monetary Union” (Harvard University Press,
2012).
By overthrowing the
constitutional court, purging public media, and threatening to
intervene in privately owned media, the Polish government is clearly
threatening democratic principles. It also — explicitly and
deliberately — poses a threat to a Continent already weakened by a
succession of crises, related to debt, migration, security, and
energy.
The Law and Justice
party’s strategy is striking. Quietly tweaking rules in order to
increase chances of winning in the next election is not an uncommon
practice in democracies, and some commentators have pointed to other
countries (notably Italy) where governments intervene in the media.
“Pope
John Paul II’s lesson for PiS.”
But the rapid
actions the party took after their election victory were clearly
intended to get a hostile response from Brussels and from Germany.
These responses fit into a compelling narrative that resonates in a
country which — justifiably — sees its 20th century history as
perverted by foreign interventions. Jarosław Kaczyński makes the
link between German criticism today and the Soviet interventions of
1956 and 1968.
The Polish policy
has the effect of reinforcing the Western critique that the eastern
extension of the EU and NATO were fundamental mistakes. The combined
effect of the Polish challenge and the Western response will divide
and eventually destroy Europe, making European countries vulnerable
to pressure from the outside (and Poland is vulnerable). In reality,
the only way of responding effectively to Europe’s multiple
challenges is through collective response in which East and West work
together.
An effective
European response to Poland’s constitutional crisis does not
involve judicial sanctions or penalties. What is needed is a new way
thinking about why Europe matters, and why important goals cannot be
realized by individual countries any more than they can be by
individual people.
What better place to
start that thinking than with the legacy of the real founder of
post-Communist Poland, St. John Paul II, who offered a vision of a
“Europe of the spirit”? In the aftermath of the political
revolution of 1989, he explained how the political and constitutional
dimensions of a new European order should involve “Ideological
neutrality, the dignity of the human person as the source of rights,
the fact that the person comes before society, respect for
democratically agreed juridical norms, pluralism in the organization
of society.”
* * *
No cause for
hysteria or political bullying
Agnieszka Kołakowska
is a journalist and translator who lives in Paris and writes for the
Polish and British press.
The world’s press
gets its Polish news from the same people who have just lost their
power and privileges: The left-wing elites that have been in alliance
with the formerly ruling Civic Platform party and who cry fascism at
anyone who disagrees with their views or threatens their monopoly on
what passes for an enlightened opinion.
“PiS
is vilified for embracing traditional values, its smidgen of
Euroskepticism, and its refusal to submit to bullying by the EU and
Germany.”
Now they have lost
control of the media and public institutions and are howling in
outrage. Hence the talk of a fascist dictatorship and the end of
democracy, freedom of the press and civil liberties.
It is shocking that
this is being taken at face value; it shows just how far-reaching the
influence of Poland’s left-wing elites and the liberal newspaper,
Gazeta Wyborcza, has become.
The Law and Justice
party (PiS) — which won an absolute majority in both the Parliament
and Senate — is vilified for embracing traditional and family
values, its smidgen of Euroskepticism, its refusal to submit to
bullying by the EU and Germany in particular, its emphasis on
national sovereignty and its insistence that Christianity and the
Church have a public role to play in Poland. None of this warrants
investigation by the European Commission, let alone cries to topple
the government.
It was the Civic
Platform party that appointed five of its people to the
Constitutional Tribunal at the last minute, resulting in 14 out of 15
judges being Civic Platform nominees. At present there are nine Civic
Platform appointees. I fail to see how this is less democratic.
When Civic Platform
came to power, they purged the media, appointing people who would toe
the party line. Neither the foreign press nor the European Commission
seemed concerned at the time. The public media were independent only
in name. They were in fact controlled by Civil Platform and
disseminated an endless stream of virulent anti-PiS propaganda.
Government funding
for the arts was similarly partisan. Newspapers loyal to Civic
Platform were subsidized under the table through government
advertising. The list goes on.
Polish voters have
lived through eight years of scandals, spectacular corruption, and
public services that did not fulfill their purpose. The media and the
judiciary were independent only in name. Voters felt they were
treated with arrogance and contempt, and that Poland was too
accommodating toward the EU. They were tired of being dictated to.
They wanted to be proud to be Polish. They were sick of “patriotism”
and “sovereignty” being treated like dirty words.
Voters want an end
to cronyism and corruption. They want transparency and the
affirmation of their country’s sovereignty. There is no
justification whatsoever for the current hysteria over threats to
Polish democracy.
* * *
PiS is not strong
enough to end Polish democracy
Janusz Bugajski is a
policy analyst in Washington who has published 20 books on Europe,
Russia, and trans-Atlanticism. His most recent, co-authored with
Margarita Assenova, is “Eurasian Disunion: Russia’s Vulnerable
Flanks” (Brookings, 2015).
Democracies
periodically confront challenges from the “tyranny of the
majority.” The threat appears when a party gains a parliamentary
majority in one election and seeks to permanently enshrine its agenda
using constitutional amendments, new legislation, and personnel
appointments, all the while disregarding any opposition.
Poland under the Law
and Justice (PiS) government is testing Polish democracy along these
lines. The core danger is that PiS leaders believe they have a
mandate to create a “new Poland” by imposing a conservative
social agenda and a protectionist economic program.
Claiming to be the
voice of the majority, the government ignores the fact that different
people voted for it for different reasons: Some were protesting the
previous government and some believed PiS’s pledges to raise living
standards, without accepting its program in its entirety.
In democracies,
majority parties can rapidly become minority ones as voters switch
allegiances. As this process unfolds in Poland, moves to make PiS
policies permanent will increasingly be challenged by a more coherent
opposition and a vibrant civil society that has already staged mass
protests against the government. After only a few months in office,
support for PiS is shrinking and backing for the liberal and centrist
opposition is steadily rising.
“By
trying to reverse the liberalization of Polish society, PiS is
risking its own survival.”
PiS is simply not
strong enough to establish a “partyocracy,” even if its leaders
harbor such ambitions. Poland experienced a PiS government that
sought to implement an ultra-conservative agenda in 2006. But it
ended up alienating the majority of voters and being replaced in the
2007 elections. While PiS currently has a parliamentary majority,
splits and defections become more likely if protests over
controversial policies such as government control of the media or the
introduction of anti-abortion laws accelerate. Political divisions
will be compounded by unfulfilled economic promises because serious
doubts remain over PiS’ ability to stimulate investment.
By trying to reverse
the liberalization of Polish society, PiS is risking its own
survival. Its program will polarize globalists and isolationists.
Traditionalist revivals in any EU state tap into widespread fears of
competition and modernism. Most Western European societies are
experiencing a similar phenomenon, as the electoral successes of
anti-immigration and Euroskeptic parties demonstrate.
The onus is on
liberal, centrist, and free market parties in Poland to convince
voters that they offer a more secure and prosperous future. The
longer that PiS pushes its agenda, disregards all opposition, and
alienates its international allies the more likely it is that Poland
will stagnate economically and damage its international reputation.
* * *
Poland’s strong
position within EU and NATO on the line
David J. Kramer, a
former senior official in the Bush Administration and president of
Freedom House, is senior director for human rights and democracy at
the McCain Institute for International Leadership in Washington.
Every September,
Poland hosts the meeting of the Office for Democratic Institutions
and Human Rights (ODIHR), part of the 57-member Organization for
Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). Last year, most of the
criticism was focused on Russia, Azerbaijan, Central Asia, Belarus,
and Hungary, among others.
I do not recall much
mention, if any, of concerns about the meeting’s host, Poland, and
the possibility that one of the most successful models of democratic
transition — from Soviet-imposed Communism to an influential,
democratic member of the European Union and NATO — could backslide.
But that was before the parliamentary election that brought the Law
and Justice Party (PiS) to power last October.
“This
summer’s NATO summit in Warsaw could be very awkward.”
In light of a number
of actions taken by the new government, I fear that this year’s
ODIHR meeting could be quite different, with Poland much more of a
focus. It has taken worrying steps that essentially neuter the
Constitutional Tribunal and expand government control over public
broadcasters, and made several controversial, high-level
appointments, including the head of the secret security services and
the defense minister.
In addition to
hosting the ODIHR meeting in September, Poland will host this year’s
NATO Summit. Should current trends continue, that meeting could
become awkward as well. Relations with the European Commission —
which holds a special meeting on the state of rule of law in Poland
Wednesday — have already become tense.
In a January 7
letter to Commission First Vice-President Frans Timmermans, the
Polish Undersecretary for Foreign Affairs Aleksander Stepkowski
wrote, “someone has provided you with misleading information that
is biased against the Polish government.”
Whether or not
interpretations of the new Polish government’s actions have been
unfair or based on “misleading information,” there is no arguing
that President Andrzej Duda, Prime Minister Beata Szydlo, and the
PiS-led government have made a bad first impression. A meeting last
week between PiS leader Jarosław Kaczyński and Hungarian Prime
Minister Viktor Orbán (not exactly the poster child for liberal
democracy) didn’t help.
The new Polish
government needs to reassure Euro-Atlantic institutions that it
remains deserving of hosting values-based gatherings, for its own
sake and the sake of the EU, NATO, and the OSCE/ODIHR.
* * *
The EU needs to
formulate a balanced response
Rebecca Harms is the
president of the Green Group in the European Parliament.
The populist wind
that has been blowing across Europe reached Poland this winter. While
it’s no surprise the governing Law and Justice Party has lurched
away from democratic norms, the speed and extent of this shift is
disturbing.
It’s important to
await the precise analysis of the Council of Europe and the European
Commission, but there can be no doubt that the laws passed and
pending compromise the independence of the media and the judiciary,
and are at odds with the basic democratic values to which all EU
member states are committed.
There are clear
echoes of the previous situation in Hungary, but also in other EU
member states like Italy, Bulgaria and Romania. The European response
has typically been characterized by dithering from the European
Commission and complete inaction from EU governments in Council. The
response from Poland’s partners in Council must now be more
decisive.
The Commission has
already indicated it is ready to use a new a framework to safeguard
the rule of law in the European Union. While it’s far from perfect,
it is nonetheless an important means of filling the vacuum left by
the lack of constructive action from EU governments in Council.
Poland is a vital
member of the European Union. Simply accepting its rollback of the
rule of law would essentially change the rules of the club. It would
also seriously undermine the credibility of the Union in promoting
its values with partners beyond its borders, notably in accession
countries like Turkey and the wider neighborhood.
There is a delicate
balance to be struck in the EU’s response. Ultimately, it is only
with Polish citizens that this attack on Polish democratic norms can
be faced down. Meeting the Polish government’s provocative stance
with provocation, as some EU politicians have done, is not helpful in
this regard, particularly given their inaction in similar cases in
the past.
There is clearly
wide opposition in Poland to the new government’s plans. The EU has
a duty to support this opposition and ensure that one political party
does not change the country’s entire democratic architecture and
undo it’s hard-won democratic achievements.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário