Poland’s Political Pendulum
Poland’s 2025 presidential election concluded with a razor-thin but consequential 2-percentage-point win for Karol Nawrocki, the right-wing candidate backed by the Law and Justice (PiS) party. The vote, which attracted a record-high turnout of 72.8%, marks a decisive conservative pushback after two years of liberal rule under Prime Minister Donald Tusk, and it throws Poland’s institutional balance, international orientation, and democratic cohesion into question.
In his campaign, Nawrocki leaned heavily on nationalist themes and traditional values, successfully consolidating far-right voters. In contrast, his opponent, liberal Warsaw Mayor Rafał Trzaskowski, pivoted to the right, alienating progressive supporters. He had a strong debate performance but failed to gain momentum. The result underscores deep ideological divides and a broader fatigue with mainstream liberal politics.
A Punch to Tusk's Agenda
Nawrocki's unexpected ascent marks a significant shift in Poland's political landscape. Unlike his predecessor, Andrzej Duda, Nawrocki assumes the presidency without political experience or an established support base. His career has been rooted in leading historical institutions,and he is known for enforcing strict loyalty and instituting sweeping personnel changes. His campaign faced allegations of past hooliganism, illicit activities, and property dealings, yet he won with PiS’s backing. Nawrocki has also aligned with the far right, making promises that he will now be expected to honor.
Nawrocki has pledged to obstruct Tusk’s agenda, notably the reform of the Constitutional Tribunal to resolve Poland's judicial crisis. He has also signaled support for early parliamentary elections, despite constitutional constraints. His veto powers will constrain Tusk’s legislative maneuvering. Key initiatives, from judicial reform to social policy, now face a challenging path through a fragmented political structure.
The unity of the governing coalition is now under strain, with fissures on issues such as abortion rights threatening to widen. In response, Tusk has announced plans for a vote of confidence on June 11th to reaffirm his government’s mandate, and he may consider a cabinet reshuffle to tighten his Civic Platform’s hold over smaller coalition partners such as Polska 2050 and Nowa Lewica, whose leaders supported Trzaskowski in the runoff. The head of Polska 2050 has already called for a new coalition agreement, reflecting concerns about stability. On the other side, former PiS Prime Minister Jarosław Kaczyński has proposed a “technical government” to manage the state until new elections—unlikely for now, but a sign of the pressure on Tusk. As these competing visions play out, Tusk must preserve coalition unity and show that his government remains effective.
Defense and Security (Always) First. But How?
Nawrocki's impact will be especially significant in defense and security policy. Despite a broad consensus on increasing defense spending, misalignment between the president and the government could delay crucial reforms. Tusk’s coalition has prioritized overhauling the military’s command and control system, unifying military procurement, and updating Poland’s national security strategy. However, defense spending has often been politicized for electoral gain and will likely remain so.
Poland has fostered military modernization, particularly via contracts with the United States and South Korea, but much of the budget still pays for past deals, and oversight often takes a backseat to rapid procurement. Without coordinated leadership, Poland risks undercutting its defense capabilities. The EU’s decision to let Poland redirect unused COVID recovery funds to defense showed trust in Warsaw’s leadership. That trust now faces a tougher test.
Nawrocki has criticized EU initiatives such as the Security Action for Europe (SAFE) and the European Defence Industry Program (EDIP), viewing them as favoring Western Europe over Poland. The country now risks losing leverage to shape European defense from within. Defense spending alone will not be enough to counter this. Credibility in NATO and the EU depends on cooperation, not just capability.
Transatlantic Tensions and the Ukraine Dilemma
Nawrocki should be well-placed to maintain strong ties with Washington, especially with Donald Trump back in the White House. However, ideological affinity alone does not guarantee smooth relations. The US president has shown that transactional logic outweighs political friendship, and Nawrocki must prove that Poland remains a committed NATO member and reliable defense buyer. Meanwhile, PiS will likely frame Nawrocki as the true partner for Washington, complicating the government’s efforts to maintain balanced transatlantic relations.
Nawrocki will also focus on ties with ideological allies such as Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico. Orbán was quick to congratulate the Polish president-elect and pledged to revive Visegrád cooperation. While this format faces challenges, Nawrocki may use these partnerships to bolster his political standing, potentially at the expense of Tusk’s government and broader EU unity.
More troubling is Nawrocki’s stance on Ukraine. While reaffirming opposition to Russia’s aggression, he has rejected NATO membership for Kyiv, citing potential risks and Poland’s readiness. He also insists on resolving historical disputes before backing Ukraine’s EU accession. This undermines Poland’s diplomatic efforts and weakens regional cohesion.
Warsaw’s leadership in shaping the EU’s eastern policy—championing Ukraine’s accession, promoting democratic reforms, and working with regional allies—is now at risk. Nawrocki’s stance, focusing on historical grievances, inadvertently plays into Kremlin narratives that blame NATO’s expansion for the war. This will strain Poland’s relationships with Brussels and Kyiv, eroding its strategic influence.
A Deeply Divided Nation
The election highlighted deep polarization in Polish society. Women and men, urban and rural voters, young and old—all showed stark divides. Nawrocki’s campaign exploited these divisions, amplifying resentment and fear. The far-right surge in the first round of the presidential election reflects growing radicalization, especially among younger men disillusioned with the liberal establishment.
Foreign endorsements only deepened tensions. Romanian President-elect Nicușor Dan supported Trzaskowski, while Nawrocki received backing from Orbán and Trump. US Republican lawmakers also accused Tusk’s government of politicizing the judiciary and of being linked to George Soros, a nod to long-standing conspiracy tropes. Meanwhile, Russian and Belarusian interference, via disinformation and cyberattacks flagged by the Scientific and Academic Computer Network (NASK) in Poland, a state-run research and development center that also serves as Poland’s national cybersecurity and computer emergency response agency, highlighted the urgency of robust cyber defense and transatlantic coordination.
A Return to Nationalism?
Nawrocki’s presidency spells serious trouble for Tusk’s coalition and threatens to unravel key reforms that Poland needs to restore its democratic credibility. His alignment with PiS and the populist right raises concerns about civil rights, coalition stability, and institutional integrity. More importantly, his ambiguous stance on Ukraine and EU cooperation risks undermining Poland’s hard-earned position as a regional security anchor.
Nawrocki’s victory signals a shift in Poland’s traditional role as Europe’s principal partner in the East. The country’s NATO commitments remain, but Warsaw’s willingness to engage in deeper European initiatives is now in question. The central issue is whether Tusk’s pro-European interlude was merely a temporary correction, or if Nawrocki’s presidency will mark a reversion to a more nationalist, transactional approach that is becoming the new norm in Eastern Europe.