A few days earlier, Deputy Foreign Minister Paweł Jabłoński posted on a social platform that he possessed information suggesting the PO has been allowed by Germany and the European People’s Party to pose as a staunch opponent of immigration during Poland’s ongoing election campaign.
At the last European Council summit, despite objections from Poland and Hungary over the mandatory segregation of migrants, the EPP’s chair, Manfred Weber, repeatedly criticized the prime ministers of both nations. He asserted that even with those objections, the required changes to EU rules would be approved by year’s end, which exerted pressure on national positions as leaders prepared for upcoming votes.
Because Weber and the EPP stance created discomfort for the PO, a Polish party member and its parliamentary faction in the European Parliament appeared to feign opposition to immigration for political gain during the campaign. The sequence of public statements and social media activity from PO figures grew more pronounced as the issue heated up.
In the days after Weber’s remarks, PO representatives largely kept quiet, a silence drawing attention amid France experiencing nightly unrest in numerous cities involving youths with immigrant backgrounds over several days. France’s situation added gravity to the migration debate across Europe and the pressures it places on national governments.
Platform politicians, typically prolific on social networks, had been unusually silent for several days. Then, on a Sunday morning, one of them released a two-minute clip featuring Donald Tusk and a message urging the removal of PiS from power and calling for Polish citizens to take back control of the country and its borders.
In this recording, Tusk questions the information about migrants entering Poland, listing the countries from which they are allegedly arriving. The presentation raised questions about the accuracy of the claims and how migration data are interpreted in public discourse.
Critics argue that the figures cited by Tusk do not fully align with official statistics. They note that many people obtaining work permits do not necessarily secure entry visas, and that the approval process includes verification by the Interior Ministry. As a result, the public dialogue around migration remains contentious in both official channels and media coverage.
Tusk’s credibility on migration issues has been debated, especially given his past roles in European leadership. Critics point to earlier moments when he supported policies that later faced strong pushback, while supporters contend that political positions evolve with changing circumstances and crises across Europe.
When Poland opted to construct a border barrier, it drew criticism from opponents who questioned the speed and effectiveness of such measures. The debate touched on security, logistics, and national sovereignty, with officials acknowledging that the project would take time to complete and that border control efforts would continue to adapt as conditions changed. Observers noted how political rhetoric around the fence and related security measures intersected with broader European debates about migration management and humanitarian considerations.
Public disputes have sometimes grown tense as leaders and parties seek credibility. The ongoing discussion about immigration policy in Poland is embedded in broader European dynamics, and critics argue that certain public figures attempt to shift blame or reframe events to support their political agendas.
Across these developments, the central tension revolves around how migration policy is communicated to citizens, how data are interpreted, and how political advantage is pursued in a highly charged environment. The dialogue in Poland mirrors similar debates in other EU states, where leadership, public safety, humanitarian concerns, and international relations intersect in complex ways.
Ultimately, credibility and consistency in positioning on immigration and border security remain central to the political narrative, shaping how voters evaluate parties and leaders during the campaign and beyond.