Ryszard Henryk Czarnecki holds a degree in history from the University of Wroclaw and an honorary doctorate from the University of Yerevan. The author of six books, he has served as Poland’s minister of European affairs, minister without portfolio, and deputy minister of culture and arts. Since 2004, he has been a Member of the European Parliament; and, since 2008, he has been a member of Law and Justice in the Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group. He is vice president of the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly, and of the interparliamentary forum including the national parliaments of Ukraine, Moldova, Belarus, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia.
As an MEP, you will have often heard that Poland has violated the rule of law. Donald Tusk’s government has both used the police against the media and arrested opposition politicians, yet it is rewarded with European funds. How can the European Commission justify such a blatant double standard?
Double standards are emblematic of the EU. There is a clear political line in which there is no respect or tolerance for the enemies of democracy—understanding democracy from Brussels’ point of view—and in which, on the contrary, a blind eye is turned to the intolerance and lack of freedom exercised by Brussels’ allies. It is an example of the hypocrisy of Brussels. It is not Ursula von der Leyen who governs the EU, but hypocrisy. This has also been the case during the presidencies of José Manuel Durão Barroso and Jean-Claude Juncker.
For the EU, everything that is happening in Poland is acceptable.
The first reaction was to point out that they did not know what was going on and that it was necessary to wait. However, just a few days later, the Commission gave its blessing to Donald Tusk’s government as a step forward in the name of progress. The violence used against the public media in Poland has received a round of applause.
What can be done in the face of this hypocrisy?
What we can do is to show these attacks on freedom to our citizens using the various platforms at our disposal. Television is still very popular, but much less so than it was five or ten years ago; and there is now a much greater role for the internet and social media, especially for young people. So it is absolutely crucial that we focus on those media.
What are your views on the Ukrainian grain conflict? Do you think a satisfactory solution for all sides is possible?
This is a situation that affects not only Polish farmers, but also Slovaks, Hungarians, Romanians, and Bulgarians. Farmers have difficulties because of the export of Ukrainian grain. It is not Russia that pays for that, but Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria. That is unacceptable. Russia exports grain to Ukraine’s traditional markets, such as Egypt and others, and we don’t have much room for manoeuvre here. But we also cannot accept that our farmers must be losers, not only for economic or moral reasons, but also for geopolitical reasons. The best gift for Putin is for European politicians to ignore the problems of the agricultural sector in our region and in Europe as a whole, because what it generates is a reaction of rejection, and of anger, against Ukraine.
We must find a solution that takes farmers into account. It is not enough to tell them to stop demonstrating and to go home. In Poland, in several cities governed by Mr. Tusk’s party, Civic Platform, they have banned access to farmers’ tractors. It is curious that a party that calls itself “civic” closes cities to citizens from the countryside. This is another good example of hypocrisy, but at a national level.
Regarding the invasion of Ukraine, Poland, the Baltic countries, and others warned early on of the need to stop Russia. Now France seems also to have awakened. Is Europe in time to confront the Russian threat and effectively support, as Poland has done, Ukraine?
Typically, France is not waking up because of the annexation of Crimea or the unjustified aggression against Ukraine, but because the Russians, Wagner’s members, have entered the French zone of influence in Mali and Central Africa. France has seen what Russia is doing in Africa and has changed its rhetoric and political tactics, although I believe this will be only temporary.
The situation in Ukraine is bad at the moment. On the one hand, that is because Western societies and their politicians are getting tired of war, and are less interested in what is happening in Eastern Europe because of the conflict in Gaza, which has been a great gift to Putin. On the other hand are Ukraine’s internal problems: the corruption cases, which are ammunition for Putin and are widely reported in the Western media; the difficulty in recruiting, due to the tiredness of society and the fact that many young people do not want to go to war; and the clashes in its power circles, such as the one between President Zelensky and former army chief Zaluzhnyi.
For all these reasons, I cannot agree with the claims of the left-wing media, and also some conservatives, that a long war is good for Ukraine. It is good for Russia. This is the time for the last call for military aid to Ukraine. Europe promised fighter jets a year ago, but the first ones won’t arrive until the summer—a lousy example of cooperation. The West talks big, but doesn’t offer enough military aid. It’s like when Germany sent fire helmets: it’s a bad joke while Ukrainians are dying on the front lines.
Has the Tusk government done anything, apart from statements of support, since it has been in power?
Mr. Tusk is a master of oratory, but now is the time for real and concrete support, not long speeches and lofty rhetoric. It is a time for state decisions, not for very short-term policy-making.
Do you think Donald Trump is serious when he talks about cutting off all aid to Ukraine in order to end the war?
Despite what the media is now telling us, when Donald Trump was president his policy towards Russia was effective: not pro-Putin, but very sceptical. The stereotype that Biden is anti-Russia and Trump is pro-Russia is not true. I remember the U.S.-Russia summit in Geneva in the summer of 2021, where Biden collapsed and Putin was the clear winner. I also remember Biden saying a few months ago that Russia had to be negotiated with. This is not a black and white distinction.
However, I believe that the U.S. will increasingly focus its attention on China and Asia, and that is not good for Europe. The Middle East is also more important to Washington than Ukraine, as we have seen in Congress.
The upcoming European elections are expected to see a significant rise of conservative forces. Can the Right save the EU from itself?
I have been an MEP since 2004, since Poland joined the EU. These elections are the most important since 1979 when, for the first time, the European Parliament was directly elected by voters instead of by national parliaments. We have a great opportunity to turn the EU to the Right. I am sure that the new European Parliament will be more conservative, more open to traditional values, more realistic about migration policy, and more sceptical about the green pact and the insane climate policy. We have a chance to create a large political group and we can expect about 200 MEPs from Euro-realist and Eurosceptic parties. This is not enough to reach a majority, but it is enough to create a minority with the ability to block important decisions, for example on issues such as migration or the green pact.
Do you expect a good result in the European elections?
I think we have a good chance in the European elections, because many voters of the coalition government are very disenchanted. The hundred promises made by Donald Tusk—his wishful thinking list—have been nothing but lies, and practically nothing has been delivered. So I hope that, despite our political, but not mathematical, defeat in last year’s general election, we can achieve victory like many other European right-wing parties. We will achieve this if our voters are mobilised, so it is important that they understand that these elections can mean a shift to the Right and a change in European policies.
