During a New Year meeting with the diplomatic corps at the Presidential Palace, President Karol Nawrocki suggested that Poland should take the lead in a broader coalition of countries pushing for changes in the European Union. In his vision, this would be a “camp of reform” open to states that disagree with the continuation of current EU policies but do not want to be labelled opponents of the very idea of a united Europe.
His speech, delivered in a cautionary tone, included a striking metaphor: Nawrocki compared the European Union to a “fading star,” adding that the process of such stars “dying out” can be dangerous and may even create “black holes.” At the same time, he stressed that he wants the EU to avoid this pessimistic scenario and argued that it needs a course correction to do so.
A central element of the president’s message was a sharp critique of how the Union operates today. Nawrocki spoke of the EU being “hijacked” by “various ideologies and European bureaucrats,” and claimed that the Union’s bureaucratic apparatus too often pursues policies that weaken the EU and lower citizens’ living standards, contrary to common sense and even to objective data.
He pointed to four areas he described as emblematic of the dispute: the EU–Mercosur trade agreement, the Green Deal, centralising tendencies within the EU, and migration policy. In his view, these are pursued despite what he called growing opposition among citizens of member states. The proposal of a “reform camp” is therefore framed as an attempt to channel dissatisfaction into a project that does not mean leaving the EU, but rather reshaping it by restoring balance between integration and the prerogatives of national governments.
Nawrocki also outlined what kind of reform he has in mind. He argued that the EU should return to the principle that member states remain the “masters of the treaties” and that the Union should be “given back” to the citizens of member states, because they form the true demos of united Europe. He added that a reformed EU should respond more effectively to key economic challenges such as demography, reindustrialisation and competitiveness, and suggested that Brussels should draw more boldly on the experience of Poland and other countries in the region, which—he argued—have been able to sustain strong growth.
Importantly, the president said he would encourage Poland’s government to adopt this approach as well, mentioning the prime minister, the deputy prime minister and all ministers. That was a clear signal that he wants “EU reform” to become part of a broader state strategy, not merely a presidential diagnosis delivered to diplomats.
The speech also went beyond EU policy and placed strong emphasis on security. Nawrocki highlighted Russia’s aggression and the spectrum of hybrid threats, including cyberattacks, disinformation and migratory pressure, arguing that by protecting Poland, the country also protects Europe. He spoke about strengthening the armed forces, continuing modernisation and maintaining procurement from proven allies, including the United States and South Korea, while also using EU financial instruments in the defence domain and supporting European defence-industrial capacity.
He additionally referenced the issue of wartime reparations, expressing hope that unresolved matters related to the past can be addressed. This, too, was quickly picked up in media coverage as part of the broader political message he sought to convey.
Politically, the idea of a “reform camp” appears designed to occupy a space beyond the usual binary in debates about the EU: full-throated integrationism versus outright Euroscepticism. Nawrocki presented a formula for countries that want to remain in the EU and shape it, but object to some of Brussels’ current priorities. Whether this vision will translate into a concrete intergovernmental format is still unclear. What is clear, however, is the strategic signal embedded in the speech: in Nawrocki’s view, Poland should not merely react to change in the EU, but attempt to co-design it by organising dissatisfied—but still pro-European—states around a reform agenda.
