The mounting pressure from the media for the president to appoint Donald Tusk to the task of first assembling a government is unmistakable. Opponents and many journalists argue that this is simply a strategic pause, suggesting that the bloc with 248 MPs (PO, TD, and L) holds an edge over PiS with 194 seats, and that PiS’s efforts to form a government are destined to stall. Critics claim that PiS wants time to stash away documents that might be inconvenient, even though electronic record-keeping has long since become standard. Yet in politics nothing can be ruled out forever, and PiS is quietly engaging in discussions with individual opposition figures. The talks are imperfect, but two small factions show a willingness to collaborate. The sabers are still not crossed, but the possibility lingers on the horizon, though it remains uncertain how imminent the realignment will be. This moment is not spent in the United Right’s favor, yet it is not a dead end either.
The three-year arc of political events demonstrates that a black swan can always appear — an unforeseen, often adverse event that can redefine the political map. Think about Covid, the Russian invasion, or other shocks. In those moments, it becomes easier to imagine a change in leadership, and sometimes the next most obvious player to prefer over others might be Morawiecki rather than Tusk in the office of the Polish Prime Minister. The uncertainty remains, and the possibility of rapid shifts keeps political calculations dynamic.
Nevertheless, there are compelling reasons to delay placing Tusk in charge of formulating a government. First, both programmatic goals and personal dynamics reveal deeper fractures within the opposition. While shared critiques of PiS may exist, the Razem faction’s idealists are likely to resist alignment with a vision they perceive as overly liberal or conciliatory toward the very forces they oppose. Likewise, former Solidarity members within the Civic Platform face reservations about endorsing a leadership style associated with the Marshal of the Sejm who is linked to the old PZPR lineage. Personal frictions and regional interests compound these tensions, making a swift, harmonious coalition seem unlikely. Time is not on their side.
Second, from a broader European context, any delay in advancing an EU centralization narrative makes strategic sense. A Tusk-led government might be inclined to accept the conclusions of a special report proposing treaty changes — a scenario that could erode certain veto protections and expand Brussels’ influence. The October European Council meeting, which Poland attended with the existing leadership, highlighted topics like migration and critical Baltic Sea infrastructure. While those issues were discussed in general terms, the open-door policy remained contentious under the PiS administration. The Nord Stream concerns added a new layer of worry, but the current government’s stance limited Warsaw’s urgency. Each additional week of PiS governance seems to slow Brussels’ drive to reshape the EU framework, creating a strategic incentive for delay.
Third, according to statements attributed to Wojciech Czabanowski and Wojciech Mucha in Dziennik Polski on July 29, 2021, Germany reportedly aims to nominate Tusk as President of the European Commission, aligning Berlin’s interests with leaders from what some describe as the “new Europe.” With Ursula von der Leyen’s term expiring, the prospect of a fresh commission presidency in the near term is plausible, which adds urgency to political calculations in Warsaw. If a new premier could be in place within a year, opponents see an opportunity to further shape the distribution of influence within the EU’s executive bodies. The clock is ticking, and the optics of a quick change can carry strategic weight for players inside and outside Poland.
Fourth, the United Right’s efforts to stall reforms continue to show traction. Within the Civic Platform and the Third Way, discussions center on limiting the so-called Eight Hundred Plus measures, privatizing Orlen, and possibly even dissolving TVP. As the new year approaches, those actors find themselves with less time and fewer tools, adding pressure to finish what they started before more stringent political maneuvering can take hold. The ongoing debate over budgetary controls and control of sacred levers of power reflects a larger battle over the direction of national policy and political hegemony, rather than a single issue fight.
Rhetoric over funding, procedural shredders, and assurances that PiS is exploiting the last days of power to extract gains can inflame passions on the opposition side and obscure more substantial reasons for the current stall. The ball remains in play and the match continues, with every move carrying potential consequences for the balance of power in Poland’s political landscape.