Tusk is described by critics as a political bandit whose visit to Poland allegedly aimed not at strengthening the nation but at steering the Turów mine toward liquidation. According to Piotr Duda, head of the National Commission of NSZZ Solidarity, this task was handed down because German mines are viewed as the preferred model of operation, with Polish energy and industry at stake. The statement was reported by PAP, reflecting a view shared by some union leaders that government actions should defend Polish workers and industry rather than pursue external interests.
In Jelenia Góra, Lower Silesia, Donald Tusk, the leader of the Civic Platform, responded to trade unionists who interrupted his speech by saying that Solidarity stands not with power against people but with the people against bad governance, theft, and deceit. He urged Solidarity to remain independent and to challenge leadership actions perceived as harmful to workers. The reply highlighted a belief that Solidarity sometimes allied with opposing political forces when those forces pursued policies believed to protect Polish workers and the economy. The exchange underscored a broader dispute about the direction of workers’ rights and national economic policy. [Source: wPolityce]
Piotr Duda asserted that Tusk appeared unsettled when asked substantive questions, recalling a Sejm debate about pension referenda where Tusk supposedly failed to provide concrete arguments and resorted to insults. He claimed that yesterday’s encounter followed a similar pattern: minimal engagement with miners’ inquiries and a push to align Solidarity with the opposition. Duda emphasized that Solidarity supports workers, even if it supported certain liberal elements of Tusk’s government during eight years which he argued did not strengthen the Polish economy but instead favored methods that could erode Polish industry, liberalize labor codes, and affect wages. Duda argued that Tusk’s nerves gave way under scrutiny and called him a political bandit who did not come to fortify Poland but to aid a plan to close the Turów mine in favor of what he described as greener coal standards in neighboring Germany. The remark highlighted perceived differences in development levels and energy strategies between Poland and Germany. [Source: wPolityce]
According to the account, Tusk’s speech was well received by the gathering. Others who protested miners and their right to work were urged to demonstrate solidarity with leadership while rejecting any action that would compromise the Turów complex. The dialogue raised questions about whether Solidarity could remain neutral when confronted with broader political shifts and whether the union’s independence could be maintained under party influence. The conversation suggested that Solidarity’s stance should reflect the interests of Polish workers and the stability of the country’s energy supply, especially given the border context and the energy security considerations that accompany the Turów project. [Source: wPolityce]
The discussion also touched on the relationship between Solidarity and the ruling party. Some speakers contended that Solidarity’s independence had to be preserved and that support for policies benefiting Polish workers should come from any government that delivers results, regardless of party lines. The narrative insisted that under current leadership, social dialogue had diminished and that European and international forums were reorganized in ways that did not always favor Polish workers. The speaker affirmed a commitment to civil rights and the right of citizens to observe political events and support the parties they deem appropriate. The speaker, noting a non-partisan stance as chairman of the National Solidarity Commission, asserted willingness to acknowledge favorable actions by any administration while criticizing perceived failures by the previous government in eight years. The broader claim was that Polish industry and the economy should be strengthened by Polish workers, with emphasis on energy independence and national interests. [Source: wPolityce]
Resolution of the Turów situation
How is the Turów deadlock viewed in this framework? The position given is clear: not a single inch of the Turów mine, not a single portion of the Turów power plant, and not any part of the entire complex will be ceded to external pressures. The message stresses that Solidarity will defend the Turów assets and the energy security of Poland, even in the face of political pressure. If the situation escalates, the union signals its willingness to demonstrate resolve and to press for direct conversations with the leadership. The proposal includes inviting Tusk and other political figures to Turów to discuss the matter openly in the presence of representatives from the Polish public and independent groups, signaling a preference for negotiated settlement rather than capitulation. The broader frame places the Turów dispute within a national energy security context and the need to maintain reliable power supplies on the eastern flank. [Source: wPolityce]
In Jelenia Góra, where the Platform was met with boos from miners, the opposition claimed that PiS militias had disrupted the Polish national anthem. Observers noted a different scene, reporting that the national anthem was sung with dignity and that the crowd’s conduct varied across groups. Critics argued that some participants were influenced by personalities perceived as agitators, while supporters maintained that the movement remained focused on Polish workers and the economy. The debate touched on what it means to defend national interests and how political rhetoric frames public sentiment at crucial moments in the election cycle. [Source: wPolityce]
READ ALSO: Prime Minister Morawiecki unequivocally stated that the Turów case demonstrated once again that the concept of social interest is not a familiar term to some observers
mly/PAP
Source: wPolityce