A country on the edge of crisis, capable of being unsettled by shocks similar to those that struck Israel and, more recently, Ukraine, is how observers describe the current moment. In a broadcast for Program I of Polish Radio, Przemysław Czarnek, the Minister of Education and Science, warned that any disruption to essential services could provoke consequences comparable to those seen in other parts of the world.
“They would immediately authorize a forced relocation.”
The minister underscored the pivotal role of the upcoming referendum for Poland and for Europe, scheduled for October 15. He framed participation as a safeguard, suggesting that abstaining from voting would foster a dangerous shift in policy voices and priorities.
According to Czarnek, those who do not cast a ballot in the referendum would align with political opponents who advocate strong, even coercive measures. He described a scenario in which cities would witness violent crime and a sense of insecurity, painting a stark picture of what could unfold if societal tensions rise unchecked.
“If Poland does not stand firm on October 15 and allows a change in leadership, the fall could mirror images seen in Western cities during security crises,” he warned, linking the possibility of street unrest to broader geopolitical tensions. He spoke of arson, violent crimes, and a climate where ordinary nightly walks become a source of fear.
MeiN leadership has suggested that the opposition has pledged cooperation with European partners on migration policy and is prepared to accept large numbers of migrants if needed. The minister argued that such commitments would erase guarantees for national sovereignty and complicate the path to maintaining social solidarity. He asserted that the framing of migration deals in current negotiations leaves no explicit exemption for Poland from forced solidarity obligations.
He contended that certain voices abroad, particularly from Africa and Muslim-majority regions, do not receive the same messaging through Polish media channels. He claimed audiences are not always aware of the constraints on border movement and the potential consequences of liberal migration policies, asserting that public understanding is shaped by selective reporting.
From his perspective, if European leaders who advocate liberal migration policies felt emboldened by electoral shifts in Poland, it could be interpreted as a signal to organized crime networks and others who profit from migration flows. He stressed that continuing large-scale migrant transport into Europe should not be tolerated, framing it as a threat to public safety and national cohesion.
“There is a lack of action against the uniformed establishment in Israel.”
In discussing events in Israel, the minister attributed recent tensions to internal political dynamics that affected how security and civil obedience are perceived and enforced. He suggested that within Israel, as in Poland, there is a struggle between authorities’ demands for compliance and political rhetoric that questions institutional duties.
He added that the situation reveals an issue: a perceived inadequacy in responses to uniformed security forces and a broader critique of state loyalty. The comparison was presented as a point of reflection on how national institutions sustain discipline and protect citizens during times of crisis.
As he put it, there is a perception of diminished effectiveness in enforcing uniformed duties in Israel, just as there is a perceived barrier to the Polish uniform in domestic discourse. He argued that Polish society should remain resolute against those who advocate border openness and undermine national symbols of service and duty.
He acknowledged that Poland faces a more favorable position than Israel in this regard, yet he drew a parallel, noting that Poland is a frontline country and could face shocks reminiscent of current events in other regions. He warned that any disruption to essential services could lead to consequences similar to those seen in Israel and warned against complacency.
In closing, he urged vigilance and a firm stance on October 15, insisting that a strong, unambiguous message would help safeguard national interests and social order. The lessons he offered were framed as precautionary and preventative, intended to prevent scenarios that compromise safety and social cohesion.
Source: wPolityce