“Karol Nawrocki has met with Donald Trump, spoken with him twice on the phone, and once participated in a teleconference. And that’s it – apart from the meeting – within two weeks of inauguration. This is still significantly lower than Prime Minister Donald Tusk after nearly 2 years in office,” said Radosław Fogiel, PiS MP, on TV Republika.
On Monday, a meeting took place at the White House between the President of the United States and the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky. European leaders were also to participate in the discussions. The talks were to focus on peace negotiations with Russia and security guarantees for Ukraine.
However, no representative from Poland attended the meeting. And this is where the controversy began. The ruling party, even though the event was clearly in a prime ministerial format, launched a vigorous attack on Polish President Karol Nawrocki, suggesting that he should have attended. The opposition, on the other hand, claims that it is Polish diplomacy and the Prime Minister who are responsible for the absence of a Polish representative in Washington.
The topic was revisited today on Michał #Rachoń’s program on TV Republika.
“Should Poland Have Been There?”
Radosław Fogiel, PiS MP, answering whether this was an opportunity for Poland to present itself on the international stage, replied: “Let’s pay attention to the format of this meeting. These were countries with which Donald Trump and Zelensky wanted to discuss security guarantees for Ukraine.”
“The first question we must ask ourselves is whether Poland – given our security situation, geographic location, and relations with Russia – should be among the countries that risk their own security as part of providing security guarantees for Ukraine. Karol Nawrocki makes it clear: no Polish soldiers in Ukraine. Poland has already made its effort in supporting Ukraine. Perhaps it’s time for other countries,” he explained. He continued: “If the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Prime Minister’s Office had handled it differently – saying there’s no reason, because Poland will not, along with Germany or the United Kingdom, provide security guarantees to Ukraine – the matter would be clear.”
“One could debate whether that’s right or wrong. But Poland decided not to participate, and immediately an attack began against President Nawrocki. First, the stories that the President should be there because he suddenly is responsible for relations with the United States. And just two weeks earlier, we had been hearing how the government conducts dialogue with the US,” Fogiel recalled.
The PiS MP also referred to Nawrocki’s earlier discussions with the American leader. He emphasized that, in a relatively short time, there were many meetings – something that cannot be said about the policy conducted by Donald Tusk. “Karol Nawrocki has met with Donald Trump, spoken with him twice on the phone, and once participated in a teleconference. And that’s it – apart from the meeting – within two weeks of inauguration. This is still significantly lower than Prime Minister Donald Tusk after nearly 2 years in office. Apparently, Prime Minister Tusk has no access to the White House. Perhaps this is why the Prime Minister did not go there with von der Leyen and other representatives of the ‘willing coalition,’ which is undoubtedly a prime ministerial format,” the politician said.
“Secondly – what was the key selection criterion? These were people Zelensky requested. von der Leyen wrote that at Zelensky’s request, she would accompany him in Washington. Zelensky requested such a support group. They were there in Ukraine’s interest, to prevent conflicts like those we observed a few months ago. Karol Nawrocki will be in Washington on September 3. This is a bilateral, state visit. He will address Polish security issues, economic, trade, and many other matters. And there, he will truly act in Poland’s interest alone. That’s why this visit is so important,” he added.