Just 300,000 votes (out of more than 21 million voters) separated the winning nationalist-conservative candidate, Karol Nawrocki, in Poland’s presidential election (50.9%) from the liberal camp’s candidate (49.1%). This narrow margin has significant implications for Poland’s domestic and foreign policy in the coming years.
The Polish constitution grants the president relatively broad powers for what is formally a representative role. The president plays a key role in shaping foreign policy, including appointing ambassadors, and holds authority in defense policy, including appointing senior military commanders. In addition, the president also has powers in domestic affairs, such as the ability to veto legislation passed by parliament, propose new laws, and appoint judges.
The incumbent prime minister, Donald Tusk, had high hopes that his presidential candidate would win, enabling him to implement domestic reforms aimed at steering Poland back toward a liberal democratic path after eight years under the Law and Justice Party (PiS). These were to be accompanied by foreign policy reforms, including a renewed closeness with the European Union and stronger ties with France and Germany. The sitting president (representing PiS) did everything in his power to obstruct the coalition government’s agenda. The government’s inability to deliver on its promises (such as judicial reform and liberalization of domestic policies, including abortion rights) triggered growing public criticism. Some of its supporters expressed their disappointment by abstaining from voting—likely influencing the election outcome.
Even if the prime minister wins the confidence vote scheduled for June 11, “cohabitation” with the president-elect—who is expected to pose obstacles wherever possible—will render the prime minister a “lame duck,” especially in domestic matters.
On pressing European and international issues, both the president-elect and prime minister view Russia as a threat. While the prime minister and his EU counterparts remain committed to supporting Ukraine, there are doubts about the incoming president’s commitment—he has made it clear he does not support Ukraine joining NATO. The partnership with the United States, especially under President Trump, is central to Nawrocki’s agenda. Trump congratulated him on his victory, and Nawrocki is expected to visit Washington after a stop at the Vatican. His few political statements reveal a degree of Euroscepticism toward the European Union and its institutions. In this regard, Nawrocki aligns with a growing coalition of European far-right populist leaders, most of whom were quick to congratulate him on his win.
In summary, the election results in Poland underscore the deep polarization within Polish society and signal a period of political instability ahead for the country.
Just 300,000 votes (out of more than 21 million voters) separated the winning nationalist-conservative candidate, Karol Nawrocki, in Poland’s presidential election (50.9%) from the liberal camp’s candidate (49.1%). This narrow margin has significant implications for Poland’s domestic and foreign policy in the coming years.
The Polish constitution grants the president relatively broad powers for what is formally a representative role. The president plays a key role in shaping foreign policy, including appointing ambassadors, and holds authority in defense policy, including appointing senior military commanders. In addition, the president also has powers in domestic affairs, such as the ability to veto legislation passed by parliament, propose new laws, and appoint judges.
The incumbent prime minister, Donald Tusk, had high hopes that his presidential candidate would win, enabling him to implement domestic reforms aimed at steering Poland back toward a liberal democratic path after eight years under the Law and Justice Party (PiS). These were to be accompanied by foreign policy reforms, including a renewed closeness with the European Union and stronger ties with France and Germany. The sitting president (representing PiS) did everything in his power to obstruct the coalition government’s agenda. The government’s inability to deliver on its promises (such as judicial reform and liberalization of domestic policies, including abortion rights) triggered growing public criticism. Some of its supporters expressed their disappointment by abstaining from voting—likely influencing the election outcome.
Even if the prime minister wins the confidence vote scheduled for June 11, “cohabitation” with the president-elect—who is expected to pose obstacles wherever possible—will render the prime minister a “lame duck,” especially in domestic matters.
On pressing European and international issues, both the president-elect and prime minister view Russia as a threat. While the prime minister and his EU counterparts remain committed to supporting Ukraine, there are doubts about the incoming president’s commitment—he has made it clear he does not support Ukraine joining NATO. The partnership with the United States, especially under President Trump, is central to Nawrocki’s agenda. Trump congratulated him on his victory, and Nawrocki is expected to visit Washington after a stop at the Vatican. His few political statements reveal a degree of Euroscepticism toward the European Union and its institutions. In this regard, Nawrocki aligns with a growing coalition of European far-right populist leaders, most of whom were quick to congratulate him on his win.
In summary, the election results in Poland underscore the deep polarization within Polish society and signal a period of political instability ahead for the country.