EU Migration Debate: Poland, Solidarity, and Sovereignty

In a recent interview with the wPolityce.pl portal, PiS MEP Anna Zalewska commented on the EU debate over relocating migrants, stating that a future electoral victory would prevent any forced relocation decision. She described such moves as a breach of democracy and expressed hope that many EU countries would resist similar measures. The discussion underscored a clash over the European Commission’s plan to require member states that refuse relocation to compensate with a monetary sum. The commission proposed a payment of 22,000 euros per migrant, presenting it as an act of solidarity and responsibility. Zalewska drew a clear distinction between this framework and the status of war refugees hosted in Poland, noting numbers that could reach 35,000 and possibly rise to 120,000. She emphasized that while some advocate for freedom of choice, the proposal would impose a financial burden on those that decline accepting unauthorized migrants.
France, facing its own financial pressures and migration concerns, argued that the proposed amount might still fall short and urged stronger accountability for EU-wide policies. Poland’s ambassador to the EU highlighted perceived double standards by recalling that the EU had previously provided only 200 euros per Ukrainian refugee in Poland, underscoring differences in how the union treats various migrant groups. The central question became why payment for non-acceptance is framed as solidarity rather than a tax. Zalewska suggested that the discrepancy reflects broader EU policy dynamics affecting Poland, including efforts to influence Polish politics during elections. She recalled that in 2015 there were early ideas from a coalition that would accept some migrants, claiming Poland could shoulder the burden, but political shifts at the time blocked broader EU consent. She argued that several large EU economies have struggled to build resilient national systems since 2015, preferring to shift the burden to other member states rather than investing locally in processing and integration infrastructure.
When asked about the positions of Germany and France pushing for higher migrant admission thresholds and funding levels, and the willingness of Slovakia, Croatia, and Hungary to back Poland, Zalewska framed the issue as a regional burden. She observed that comments from some European partners suggested greater openness while individual German states indicated difficulties in organizing support for newcomers, revealing a fragmented policy landscape across borders. The regional experience in Germany included public reminders at railway stations welcoming refugees, a sign of hospitality that also highlighted the strains on national systems.
The discussion then turned to possible consequences if the government chooses not to move forward with the relocation mechanism or its financial form. Zalewska asserted that a victory in the upcoming elections would block any forced decision, arguing that such moves would violate democratic norms and that many EU states would join a cautious stance. She also addressed hypothetical shifts should the opposition come to power, warning that the opposition would likely support policies centered on the EU’s exclusive competence and collective decision-making, potentially opening borders to unauthorized migrants if governance changes occurred.
Beyond these political calculations, the dialogue touched on the broader trajectory of EU centralization and the idea of a supplementary payment scheme as a form of regulation. Zalewska described what she sees as a financial squeeze on the EU budget, noting that the union relies on member contributions and aims for greater financial independence. She argued that decisions based on equity would rely on revenue streams from sources such as emissions trading schemes, while acknowledging that climate-related policies sometimes serve as a tool for enforcing additional obligations on member states.
The exchange offered a window into the ongoing debate about balancing solidarity, national sovereignty, and fiscal responsibility within the European Union as member states evaluate their obligations amid migration pressures and domestic political shifts.
Overall, the interview highlighted a recurring theme in EU migration policy: the tension between collective strategies and national-level decision-making, with Poland positioning itself as a defender of sovereignty while urging accountability among larger member states.