Poland is responding to new waves of illegal migration by building a border protection system called the Eastern Shield, creating buffer zones, and easing the rules on the use of weapons by those serving at the border. The EU is supportive and acknowledges the actions of the Poles, despite the fact that it has previously condemned other member states along the same lines.
Taking action against migration is in the common interest of all of us and should be supported. Poland’s measures in this area – the construction of walls, the development of personnel and the border protection system, the partial reinstatement of the entry ban, etc. – are all right and necessary steps. The decision of Donald Tusk and the Polish parliament is based on the fact that in 2024 several of the servicemen serving on the Polish-Belarusian border were injured, so the rules on the use of weapons by the border guard forces will be relaxed. The European Commission’s communication essentially legally covers the disregard of EU secondary asylum and migration law in the case of Poland. It allows the closure of borders and the suspension of the reception of asylum applications, citing the need to exercise the powers of the Member States in relation to the maintenance of public order and the preservation of internal security. If the other EU Member States had been able to take advantage of this opportunity earlier, serious disasters could have been prevented.
If the EU had already focused on prevention in 2015, it would not have to rush and dread to pull together an EU military system and fear what would happen if the US – and thus NATO – no longer provided adequate protection. Crossable borders, the Schengen area, are not only an opportunity, but also a responsibility, which Brussels should have recognised much earlier and supported by effective military defence.
It is hopeful if the Polish option becomes a common practice and other countries will also choose this path in the field of migration. However, in order to take a united stand and move forward, it is necessary to follow and compensate those who previously did not want to accept the migration quota on the basis of the same legislation, and who received public humiliation and punishment instead of help.
Translated and edited by Kati Small