The recent meeting at the White House between US President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, attended by various European leaders, saw a notable absence: no representatives from the Polish government were present.
This omission raised eyebrows, particularly given Poland’s critical geographical location bordering Ukraine and its status as NATO’s highest defense spender relative to GDP.
Polish President Karol Nawrocki had previously participated in teleconferences between Trump and European leaders regarding the Ukraine crisis but was not invited to the significant meeting on August 18, which also included leaders from Italy, Finland, the UK, and Germany.
Despite not being included, Poland’s absence was particularly perplexing, especially considering that Romania and Hungary, like Poland, share borders with Ukraine, and the Czech Republic has been actively involved in supporting Kyiv.
Nawrocki aimed to reassure the Polish public about this absence, insisting that the nation’s perspectives would not be overlooked.
He plans to visit Washington for a bilateral meeting with Trump on September 3, presumably to address concerns regarding Poland’s role in the ongoing dialogue about Ukraine.
The absence of Poland from these talks has sparked blame between political factions in the country.
While Nawrocki, supported by the opposition Conservatives (PiS), pointed out that the Polish government participated in every meeting of the “coalition of the willing”—a group of 33 nations supporting Ukraine—he also mentioned that it was Zelensky who decided the guest list for the Washington talks.
Radosław Sikorski, Poland’s foreign minister, attended an online meeting of the coalition on August 17, and subsequently responded to Nawrocki’s comments.
Sikorski noted it was President Trump who extended the invitations to the White House meeting.
He expressed surprise that Nawrocki could not leverage his purported strong ties with the US administration to secure an invitation, especially after being included in previous teleconferences focused on Ukraine.
The absence of a Polish delegate did not go unnoticed; opposition politicians criticized the move as a diminishing of Poland’s influence on the international stage.
Sławomir Mentzen, a prominent figure in the right-wing Confederation party, lamented that Poland, despite significant assistance to Ukraine and its geographic significance, seemed less influential than Finland in this context.
Meanwhile, PiS officials preferred to shift the blame towards Prime Minister Donald Tusk for his past comments regarding Trump, labeling him a Russian agent and suggesting this made Tusk unwelcome in Washington.
The August 18 summit also signaled a possible thawing of relations leading to direct talks between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Zelensky, alongside considerations for European security guarantees for Ukraine.
Trump’s insistence on facilitating a meeting between Putin and Zelensky was seen as a potential breakthrough in bridging the gap between the two nations.
However, specific details about how these security guarantees would function remain elusive, with Moscow retaining its position against any NATO presence in Ukraine after the conflict.
French President Emmanuel Macron proposed a four-way dialogue format, involving the US, Russia, Ukraine, and European leadership, yet he did not specify who would represent Europe in these talks.
As developments unfold, Poland’s role and response to the ongoing situation vis-à-vis Ukraine and its relations with the US and NATO allies will remain under scrutiny.
The discourse surrounding Poland’s absence at the Washington meeting highlights the challenges facing the nation, as well as the complex dynamics at play in the current geopolitical landscape surrounding Ukraine.
image source from：brusselssignal
