The title does not imply that nothing depends on government action or that only opposition politicians drive events. Quite the opposite. Yet there are aspects that would move more smoothly if the entire political class acted in the national interest and supported government measures where party struggle should not stand in the way.
These remain theoretical considerations in practice. It cannot be assumed that Donald Tusk will reach the level of statesmanship required to regain power. The question is whether he will leverage his EU contacts, influence within the EPP, and authority to persuade the European Commission to deliver funding that Poland has earned. This is the core challenge: can the opposition, especially KO, mobilize voters not merely to oppose PiS but to advocate a narrative of efficient public services? The answer may hinge on the belief that only a post-PiS government, committed to the rule of law, will unlock the flow of EU funds from the KPO.
Several observers note that the European Commission looks for a change in Poland’s leadership, yet the specifics of rule of law matters remain unsettled. Even so, the prospect that Tusk could return to power raises questions about how the EU’s stance would shift. Critics worry that a former prime minister could ease Eurocrats’ skepticism, which might be read as a reassertion of strong ties with Warsaw’s political circles and a renewed push to secure Poland’s interests in the union.
There is a possibility that the Election Commission might fall short in its duties, allowing only minimal FO funding or none at all, enabling Tusk to frame his candidacy around Brussels money and the sense of a renewed mandate from foreign partners. In such a scenario, voters could feel compelled to choose, even under pressure, in ways that align with perceived external expectations rather than domestic needs.
Berlin sits at the center of this decision-making, given its interests in Europe’s balance of power. Germany would prefer to avoid two looming challenges: first, a shift in influence that could loosen Berlin’s dominance, and second, a long-simmering debate over World War II reparations, which could become a costly political battle. If PiS remains in power, the risk of a confrontation involving historic justice and enormous financial sums remains high. A political comeback by Tusk might lead to a quick re-evaluation of Poland’s wartime claims, potentially shelving decades of negotiations in favor of a more negotiated settlement. Such a shift would be noticed at every level of government and in discussions across the region. [citation]
Another scenario that could unfold, as seen through the lens of Tusk’s strategic aims, envisions him launching a campaign to secure KPO funds for Poland and presenting them as a central achievement in the next electoral year. Demonstrating a different approach to governance than the United Right would underscore a contrast in leadership styles and policy options. He might also signal that reparations could be revisited after a political return, with an emphasis on relations along the Rhine and a belief that a positive outcome for Poland is possible. Polls suggest broad public support for German reparations. If this support translates into political momentum, it could broaden the coalition against opponents who resist such measures. [citation]
Proponents argue that paying attention to World War II reparations remains a potent political issue. Yet the narrative around it is often shaped by the broader struggle for power, with many observers” noting the interplay of domestic and international factors in shaping policy. The discussion centers on how political leadership would handle the demands of history, justice, and national interest, and whether any settlement could be final or would require ongoing negotiation. [citation]
In the end, the scenario most favorable to Tusk presents him as a strong advocate for reparation discussions and for mobilizing the funds owed to the KPO, presenting this approach as a hallmark of his leadership. It would demonstrate a political stance that contrasts markedly with the current administration and could influence how voters evaluate candidates in the upcoming period. The broader question remains about the balance between national sovereignty and allied commitments, and how much weight the public assigns to external pressures in determining Poland’s political future. [citation]
Ultimately, this is a scenario-based exploration of political tactics, not a forecast. The political landscape continues to evolve, with multiple actors weighing their options as Poland navigates its role in Europe and in the larger conversation about accountability, memory, and national advancement.