Poles are to have 12 presidential candidates to choose from at the ballot box this Sunday, but only a liberal and a right-wing conservative appear to have a shot at victory in Poland's fourth democratic presidential elections since the 1989 collapse of communism, also the first since its EU accession in May of last year.
The victor will assume the post first held by Solidarity legend Lech Walesa following his 1990 win and later by his ex-communist rival Aleksander Kwasniewski for two subsequent five-year terms.
Liberal Civic Platform (PO) leader Donald Tusk, a 48-year-old historian, has managed to ride the crest of a popularity wave ahead of right-wing runner-up Warsaw Mayor Lech Kaczynski.
While both have roots in the 1980s anti-communist Solidarity opposition, the campaign ahead of the ballot has not been reminiscent of a friendly race between old comrades in arms.
At 56, Kaczynski is half of Poland's most famous political double-act featuring himself and his identical twin brother Jaroslaw, the leader of the right-wing Law and Justice party (PiS).
In Poland's Sept. 25 parliamentary election, the PiS scored 26.99 percent or 155 seats and a narrow victory ahead of the PO which took 24.14 percent support or 133 seats out of a total of 460.
Analysts agree both Tusk and Kaczynski are using stuttering coalition talks between their respective parties during the two-week interval before the Oct. 9 presidential ballot to boost their campaigns, and that the PiS's parliamentary victory is playing into Kaczynski's hands as he narrows the popularity gap.
Surveys published days ahead of the first round of voting on Sunday show Tusk losing his points advantage on Kaczynski. But less than a week ahead of election day, it still appeared he would nevertheless emerge the victor from a likely second-round run-off ballot Oct. 23.
Kaczynski scored 33 percent, just 4 points behind the Civic Platform's (PO) Tusk who commanded a 37-percent backing, according to the PBS survey published by the liberal Gazeta Wyborcza on Tuesday. A TSN OBOP survey published the same day showed Tusk in pole position with 41-percent support ahead of Kaczynski with 32 percent.
Despite Tusk's clear advantage, commentators point out his ratings have slipped from near 50-percent support in the wake of the PiS parliamentary victory. Fed-up with years of high profile corruption scandals which plagued not only the out-going ex-communist government, but also the previous post-Solidarity administration, analysts note honesty and integrity as well as foreign policy acumen are qualities voters will be looking for in a winner.
Social and economic "solidarity" has become the buzzword for both Tusk and Kaczynski, with the candidates vowing to put a premium on integrity in public life.
Avowedly liberal, Tusk promises to be "principled" and that his presidency would see Poland develop as a "strong" and "modern" country prizing the values of "openness," "freedom" and "courtesy" on both the domestic and international stage.
The Head of Poland's Institute of Public Affairs Professor Lena Kolarska-Bobinska observes that while the PiS won the parliamentary race by raising fears the PO would introduce too many liberal reforms too quickly, the PO will now attempt to smash Kaczynski's credentials as an even-handed statesman in order to scupper his presidential ambitions.
"Now the PO will be winning this campaign by raising fears, by saying `They [PiS] want conflicts with our neighbors -- the president is a person responsible for international politics' and Donald Tusk will fashion himself as a statesman who will want to conduct foreign policy in a much less confrontational manner," she recently told Poland's commercial TVN 24 news channel.
As Warsaw mayor, Kaczynski earned a reputation as a combative nationalist in the foreign policy arena by mincing no words on the issue of Poland's World War II-era material and human losses under German and Soviet occupation.
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase
RSS