Poland’s new migration strategy, aimed at responding to the Belarusian border crisis that began in 2021, represents a significant shift in both domestic and foreign policy. The plan for 2025-2030 includes stricter border protection measures and a temporary suspension of asylum applications if immigration poses a threat to the country’s stability. However, internal political tensions within the governing coalition and conflicts with the European Union may hinder the implementation of this approach.
The migration policy of Donald Tusk’s four-party coalition government has been contradictory and often inconsistent. While they have introduced stricter border protection measures — including allowing border guards to fire warning shots — they have also opened new reception centers, reflecting tensions between the various political directions within the coalition. Disagreements between left-wing coalition partners and the center-right liberal forces have deepened the uncertainty surrounding migration policy. One of the most controversial elements of the “Regaining Control, Ensuring Security” strategy document is the provision to temporarily suspend the acceptance of asylum applications if mass immigration threatens national stability. Left-wing coalition partners have already protested this measure, though public opinion and political analysts suggest that this stricter direction may decide the political battle in favor of the center-right liberal line, which prioritizes security and tighter migration control.
With this strategic shift, Poland aims not only to secure its borders but also to send a clear message to the European Union and the international community that it is prepared to take radical steps to address the migration crisis and ensure internal stability. However, this new direction also presents political challenges for the coalition. Alongside the left-wing partners’ rejection, the European Commission has indicated that Poland has an obligation to provide access to asylum, potentially creating further conflicts in EU and international forums.
Shots at the Border, Escalating Tensions
The recently introduced Eastern Shield border protection plan, now a central element of Poland’s security strategy, is not exclusively focused on migration control but is part of a broader border protection initiative addressing regional geopolitical challenges. Nevertheless, the plan has attracted significant attention amid the migration crisis, highlighting how Donald Tusk’s government views migration challenges. This was particularly surprising for European Union member states, who expected a more liberal border policy from the Civic Coalition, which replaced the right-wing national-conservative Law and Justice (PiS) government.
While many assumed that Tusk’s government would relax strict border protection measures, the Eastern Shield has further tightened Polish border security. The project, costing billions of zlotys, establishes advanced technological surveillance systems and physical barriers along the Belarusian and Kaliningrad borders. For the European Union, Tusk’s firm stance revealed a dual approach. While some member states anticipated that his government would demilitarize the borders and adopt a more lenient approach towards migrants, Poland has committed to a rigorous border protection strategy under the Eastern Shield.
Poland’s new migration strategy aims to implement stricter controls and restrictions on migration while recognizing that the country is increasingly becoming a destination for immigrants. The strategy addresses seven main areas of intervention: access to territory, international protection, employment, education, integration, citizenship and repatriation, and the Polish diaspora. These measures aim to make immigrants valuable participants in the economy while minimizing social tensions and maintaining state security.
The ambivalence of the strategy lies in its dual approach of tightening migration rules and temporarily limiting asylum rights, while simultaneously establishing new integration centers across the country. These centers, funded by EU sources, are intended to support immigrants’ integration into Polish society, offering language courses and legal assistance. This ambivalence reflects internal political tensions within the governing coalition.
Poland’s two-faced migration policy reflects both the desire for security and the burden of humanitarian obligations. In this duality, the unprecedented strengthening of borders in Europe is paralleled by the opening of new integration centers, bridging strictness and inclusion. The question remains: how long can this tension-filled balance be maintained within Polish domestic politics?
Translated and edited by L. Earth
