In economic theory, the term “middle-income trap” describes a scenario in which a country struggles to rise above a certain development threshold. Similarly, Poland has fallen into the middle-sovereignty trap, Brussels Signal reports.
The reason is not only due to external pressures. It is also determined by foreign influence on domestic politics – in particular, foreign ownership of the media and the elite’s lack of technocratic expertise.
Moreover, Poland has a dependency mentality that permeates the entire national strategy. Unlike countries such as France, which demonstrate strong sovereignty with political, economic and cultural autonomy, Poland faces challenges that make it unable to achieve a similar level of self-determination.
There are many such problems. They are related not only to its geopolitical position, but also to weaknesses in domestic politics. Moreover, they are related to the historical dependence on external actors that hinder its ability to be sovereign.
Historical background
In the late 18th century, the partitions of Poland divided the country and placed it under the rule of the Russian Empire, the Kingdom of Prussia and the Habsburg Monarchy. This history undermined Poland’s autonomy and created a long-term dependence on foreign powers.
This dependence persisted during the Cold War, when Poland became a Soviet satellite state, heavily dependent on the USSR for political leadership and economic resources. The structures and habits acquired during all this time have still not disappeared.
This means that Poland’s sovereignty is at stake. The country is in a precarious position where it can neither fully join the leading sovereign states nor completely lose its independence. Rather, it is in a state of semi-independence.
Foreign media influence
To understand the complexity of Poland’s struggle for self-determination, it is necessary to consider the impact of foreign media ownership in the country. International corporations control significant segments of the Polish media. They play a key role in shaping public opinion and, consequently, national policy.
Notable among them are such companies as the German group Axel Springer, which owns such major publications as Onet, Newsweek Poland, Forbes Poland, Business Insider Poland and others.
In addition, the American group TVN, part of Discovery, has significant influence on television broadcasting.
Influence also extends to the print media: the second largest newspaper, Rzeczypospolita, is linked to investments by George Soros, and the largest newspaper, Gazeta Wyborcza, was founded by members of the former communist elite.
These media outlets are considered to have a clear political bias, generally supporting Donald Tusk and his political line. They often portray the Law and Justice (PiS) party in a negative light.
In response to these concerns about media influence and to strengthen national control over the media landscape, PiS proposed a law aimed at ensuring that at least 50 per cent of the capital of Polish media companies is domestically based.
However, this initiative has faced considerable opposition from international players, reflecting the geopolitical and economic pressures that complicate Poland’s desire for greater media sovereignty.
Media impact in France
In France, national entities largely control the media sector. French law encourages local ownership and management, ensuring that French companies or nationals own most outlets. This is reflected in the ownership structure of leading French media conglomerates such as Groupe Bouygues, which owns TF1, and Vivendi, which controls Canal+.
In addition, the French government ensures strict regulation through bodies such as the Conseil supérieur de l’audiovisuel (CSA), which oversees broadcasting and enforces French standards.
Moreover, as typical of France, these standards and rules are so complex that only the French can understand them.
Donald Tusk is often singled out as a prime example of a leader within Poland’s semi-colonial system. Many believe he is heavily influenced by foreign media and outside interests. Critics argue that his political ascendancy and sustained influence is a result of these external forces.
On the other hand, the Law and Justice Party (PiS), the leaders of the last government, faced criticism for their attitude towards national issues. Detractors pointed out the lack of vigour in its initiatives.
A prime example of this is the issue of war reparations from Germany. While PiS has boldly demanded €1.7 trillion for damages caused during the Second World War, it has conspicuously refrained from internationally recognising the genocide committed against 3 million ethnic Poles during the war.
This omission, as well as the lack of a significant international communications campaign to raise awareness and support for the issue, emphasises the lack of a comprehensive strategy in their approach. This strategy – or lack thereof – highlights the mismatch between the party’s ambitious ambitions and their realisation on the international stage.
Poland’s attempt to protect its EU interests
Moreover, Poland has never proposed serious initiatives to improve the European Union. It behaves like a tenant.
Neither of the ruling parties has tried to fight for Poland’s interests, except in a passive way, accepting or rejecting the proposals of other countries. From this point of view, both political parties behaved towards France and Germany in a subordinate manner.
France and Germany might have rejected the Polish proposals, but Poland could influence the Union and other countries. Poland may influence the formation of European policy to a certain extent, but this never follows from its own decision to promote its national interests. Poland is not trying to shape the Union in its favour. EU should recognise that Poland was and unfortunately remains a subordinate state.
PiS also rules a subordinate state. A subordinate state has limited room for manoeuvre, but it must use that room for manoeuvre. The Third Polish Republic has never fully utilised this potential. It either submitted to the European Union and Germany or took a passive defensive position, believing that it was enough to reject what the powers wanted to impose on it.
What are the key challenges
It is hard to go from fighting for independence to building a strong Poland. Poland’s biggest problem is that it lacks an elite, a technocracy, people who know how to develop the country on a practical level.
The development of a national ruling elite capable of effectively managing the state is crucial for Poland. In this context, institutions such as the National School of Public Administration (KSAP), whose task is to train top civil servants, play a key role.
However, KSAP’s current budget of about PLN 10 million (EUR 2.34 million) is clearly insufficient to fulfil the considerable responsibilities of training competent public leadership. In contrast, France’s National Institute of Public Service has a budget of about 45 million euros (about 200 million zlotys).
Poland finds itself in a “middle sovereignty trap” where external influence and the lack of an active technocratic elite hinder its path to full sovereignty. In order to move from its current state to a sovereign state, Poland needs to undertake a comprehensive reorganisation of its governance and policy-making infrastructure.
