The visit by President Biden marked a historic moment in its circumstances and scale, yet the speech itself did not stand out as remarkable. The White House signaled a clear political stance toward Poland through the visit.
For the first time, an American leader entered an attacked country to meet its authorities, voiced support for its defenders, and then traveled to Poland for a second time in a single year to acknowledge the nation and its society. These elements created an exceptional backdrop. Still, the address did not include any lines about backing specific Polish political parties, even implicitly.
While the former president drew attention to Andrzej Duda as a close ally, underscoring a shared pro-American temperament between the presidential offices and the conservative segments on both sides, Biden did not reference Poland’s current, highly Atlantic-oriented government approach, nor did he engage with the opposition’s ideological community. There was no mention of Warsaw taking a hard line against Russia, nor any discussion about the rule of law, modernization, or LGBTQ rights. The visit read as a formal courtesy to Mr. Duda, with limited ceremonial elements and a notable emphasis on engaging with the opposition in concise, sometimes awkward moments. It suggested that after parliamentary elections, dialogue with different authorities would continue, aiming to build a broad alliance along the Vistula River.
The symmetry observed in Washington’s stance seemed tied to Marek Brzeziński, whose position appeared torn between Western security interests toward Russia and the liberal, rainbow-flag rhetoric that accompanies some Polish political circles. This tug-of-war is not uncommon among influential figures who navigate history and alliance politics.
When comparing the American approach to that of Western European capitals, one can sense a divergence. From Berlin and Brussels, voices in the political establishment and major media often critique Poland’s political choices. The European Union’s leadership, including discussions around leadership shifts, funding delays, and policy emphasis, has at times signaled discontent with certain Polish policies. Critics point to debates over judicial reforms and other reforms as signs of friction with EU norms. This dynamic contrasts with the American stance, which has shown a willingness to engage with multiple Polish factions without explicitly endorsing one over another.
Viewed in this light, the United States appears to be an assertive yet demanding ally. The prevailing EU stance frequently prioritizes deference to a shared ideological agenda and a sense of Poland occupying a subordinate role in the broader framework. To attract strong engagement from the U.S. leadership, a country is expected to project regional security leadership, a robust anti-Russian posture, and genuine strategic autonomy. Earning favorable acknowledgement from German and French leaders, on the other hand, can require a more cautious approach, sometimes implying a more restrained stance in certain EU dynamics.