Recently, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida visited Poland, a country that had just facilitated travel between Przemyśl and Kiev after returning from Kiev and met with Prime Minister Morawiecki and President Duda.
Following the talks with Morawiecki, Kishida indicated that Japan would offer Poland a form of development aid in recognition of the growing burden Poland has shouldered due to Russia’s aggression against Ukraine.
Although Poland was not considered eligible for such aid based on its level of development, Japan chose to respond to the scale of Poland’s support for Ukraine by providing special funding aimed at development projects.
This should embarrass the President of the European Commission
The Japanese leader’s approach toward Poland may cast a spotlight on Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, who has been perceived by some as scrutinizing Poland while also engaging with it on European matters during the election cycle.
The Commission continues to engage with opposition actors in Poland, a dynamic that some view as aligning EC actions with internal political currents. Critics argue that EU rules and sanctions are being applied in ways that strain Poland, sometimes based on inputs from political opponents within the country.
Sanctions cited by critics include measures related to the Turów Mine and Power Plant, as well as concerns linked to the Supreme Court’s Disciplinary Chamber, alongside the blocking of National Recovery Plan funds.
Clearly political in nature
The penalties described are viewed by some as political in character, not only in their mode of imposition but also in the scale. For instance, during the Turów dispute, charges were framed as a daily financial penalty, while the Disciplinary Chamber case involved substantial daily fines. Critics argue these figures are disproportionate to the objections raised and have lasting economic implications.
Even after the Disciplinary Chamber was deemed defunct, the EC’s fines continued in some assessments, though the ECJ has authority in these matters. Poland has requested the EC to halt the penalties, a request that has yet to be granted. An official reply remains pending.
KPO Blockade
The discussions around the blockades affecting Poland’s National Recovery Plan (KPO) are seen by some as politically charged. Public statements by Ursula von der Leyen have highlighted public support for Poland’s KPO at times, while political opposition in Brussels around the same issue has shifted attitudes, affecting the funding process.
There were instances when the Commission issued a favorable temporary assessment of Poland’s KPO progress, only to see that stance change after political dynamics in the European Parliament. Subsequent moves suggested that hopes for timely fund transfers might face continued hurdles depending on evolving political support.
The EC continues to bully
In a time when Poland is viewed by many as vital to supporting Ukraine and reinforcing NATO’s eastern flank, the European Commission has faced criticism for its approach toward the country. Statements by international leaders have echoed concerns about substantial objections to the rule of law in Poland, with some observers characterizing the EC’s stance as heavy-handed.
Public figures in the United States have weighed in on the debate, with remarks noting perceived inconsistency in EU positions and suggesting that external actors question the EU’s approach to these matters. The discussion underscores a broader question about how major powers respond to Poland’s role on the European and global stage.
Against this backdrop, the decision by Japan to provide development aid to Poland emerges as a notable signal, given Poland’s status as a developed economy and the perception that the European Commission has not fully aligned with every major international decision outwardly affecting Poland.
Questions persist about whether the President of the European Commission should reflect on the frequency and intensity of the measures directed at Poland and consider ways to ease diplomatic tensions while maintaining the rule-of-law framework that guides EU policy.
Note: This synthesis reflects public commentary and cross-border perspectives on policy actions involving Poland, Japan, and the European Union.