During a KO club gathering in Toruń, Donald Tusk weighed in on the dispute over Poland’s forests, accusing Solidarna Polska and its allies of facilitating a massive timber harvest and pushing for exports to China. Michał Gzowski, the State Forests spokesman, responded to the accusations via social media, challenging the claims directly.
Tusk described himself as incredulous at how Solidarna Polska’s leader Zbigniew Ziobro and his associates are said to be campaigning under the banner of forest conservation while, in his view, they are effectively occupying Polish forests. He framed their actions as an attempt to defend Polish woods from European Union influence, and he asserted that these guests are responsible for what he called the largest tree-cutting episode in the nation’s history. He argued that the management of forests under their influence had turned Poland into one of the top timber exporters to China.
Tusk’s remarks emphasized the perceived contradiction between rising wood prices in Poland and the economic benefits he attributed to the alleged harvesting and export activities linked to those in power who call themselves forest defenders.
According to Tusk, Poland faces steep prices for its own timber because Ziobro and his allies allegedly used a strategy worth describing as cunning and aggressive, masking it as a defense of Polish forests. He claimed this approach leads to forest decline and jeopardizes domestic businesses while delivering significant profits to a politically aligned group.
That line drew attention as part of a broader critique he labeled the “number of the century.”
Reply from State Forests on the matter
Michał Gzowski, the spokesperson for Staatsbosbeheer, responded to Tusk’s accusations. He rejected the claim that forest rangers were cutting forests for export to China, describing such statements as false and accusing Tusk of spreading misinformation. He noted that private traders, operating under EU regulations, are responsible for any timber exports, and that annual harvest levels are determined by established long-term plans put in place by previous government administrations.
Gzowski further argued that the State Forests do not control wood exports and that it is not within Staatsbosbeheer’s remit to engage in such trade. He pointed out that many foreign companies participate in wood purchases within the European Community, which operates under EU framework and market rules, and that these realities reflect broader pan-European trade dynamics rather than actions by a single political faction.
At a press conference held in the Sejm, the spokesman for the State Forest Service also addressed the second accusation touching on whether forests were being cut for energy purposes. He stated that the claim is unsupported by evidence and clarified that the plans governing forestry were approved by the prior administration and are still being implemented. He asserted that the economic activities in forested areas are based on these plans, and that the current administration did not initiate a policy of using forests to generate power. He emphasized that there has been no authorization to misrepresent the State Forests or its rangers, who are viewed as serving the public interest.
In summary, the exchange highlights ongoing political tensions as public figures debate the state of Poland’s forests and the economic and regulatory frameworks surrounding timber management and exports.
As the dialogue continued, it was clear that Tusk remained keen on mobilizing social sentiment around the issue. His latest remarks linked forest rangers to broader political strategy, underscoring how forest governance can become a focal point for national political discourse.
tkwl/PAP/Twitter