Follow us on social

Nicusor Dan Romania

Poland, Romania and the nationalist populist challenge

Mixed results in both countries for candidates who challenge European elites on behalf of 'sovereigntism'

Analysis | Europe

Two EU countries on the front line of the war in Ukraine held presidential elections on May 18, a decisive second round runoff in Romania, and in Poland a tightly contested first round to be concluded in a June 1 vote.

In both campaigns, controversy swirled over the value of the EU, alleged Russian election interference, and whether to align with or oppose the Trump Administration’s attempts to negotiate an end to the conflict in Ukraine.

Poland: Uncertain prospects for June 1 second round

Warsaw mayor Rafał Trzaskowski, standard bearer for the centrist pro-EU, pro-Ukraine Civic Coalition (KO) of Prime Minister Donald Tusk will, as anticipated, face a runoff against Karol Nawrocki, the candidate of the main right-wing opposition Law and Justice Party (PiS) in the runoff set for June 1.

Trzaskowski’s margin of victory over Nawrocki (31.4% vs 29.4%) was much smaller than polls had forecast. Turnout was over 67%, a post 1989 high for a first round presidential race.

The difficulty for Trzaskowski’s second round prospects is that the third-place finisher in the race, Sławomir Mentzen, represents the Confederation Liberty and Independence party, which is further nationalist populist right than PiS. The prospect of Mentzen’s nearly 15% of voters rallying to Nawrocki on the second round could swing the election against Trzaskowski. Prime Minister Tusk’s government has been frustrated by vetoes from the incumbent PiS president Andrzej Duda who defeated Rafal Traszkowski to win reelection in 2020.

The Polish electorate since 1989 has shown a marked preference for electing presidents who tend to check the power of the governing majority in parliament, and this might tend to favor Nawrocki’s chances in the runoff.

While it is true that both PiS and Civic Coalition support Ukraine in its war with Russia, PiS and Mentzen’s Confederation party cultivate rural voters in Poland’s east who are unhappy with the alleged costs of supporting Ukrainian refugees in Poland, bear a grudge against Ukraine for the mass expulsions and killing of Poles by Ukrainian nationalists in western Ukraine in 1943, and oppose Ukraine’s EU accession because of its potential impact on Polish agriculture.

Cohabitation with Nawrocki as president would make it harder for Tusk to pursue his cooperation at Europe’s top table with Macron, Merz and Starmer in defense of a doubling down on the European effort to force back Russia’s ambitions for an advantageous settlement in Ukraine. The distinction between Tusk’s camp and his opponents in PiS and Confederation can be framed as a choice between pro-Americans and pro-Europeans, with Tusk and Trzaskowski seen as the latter.

Tusk’s tenure as president of the European Council and his strong acceptance in Europe allows him to be painted by opponents as pro-German and divorced from the concerns of ordinary Poles. It is not accidental that Nawrocki has made his career in the highly politicized and polarized historical debates in Poland where opposition to Russia is a constant, but where Germany and even Ukraine are also depicted as potential foes.

Romania: Calm restored?

Having won handily the first round of the Romanian presidential contest on May 5, nationalist populist George Simion lost to the liberal pro-EU mayor of Bucharest Nicosur Dan by a decisive 8 percentage point margin (54% to 46%). Turnout was much higher (65%) than the 53% garnered in the first round. Simion conceded defeat, after having at first indicated he would challenge the results.

The storm caused by the cancellation of last November’s first round won by the nationalist dark horse Calin Georgescu may now have ebbed. The rallying of Romanian voters to oppose Simion (who had pledged to appoint Georgescu as PM) was impressive but not total. Simion’s Alliance for the Union of Romanians is the second largest party in parliament and could be joined by the largest party, the Social Democrats, to become a formidable opposition.

Dan himself lies outside the mainstream parties which in coalition have disappointed many Romanians and fed the rise of Georgescu and Simion. His anti-corruption stance had at least something in common with Simion’s arguments. In the interim between the two rounds, the exchange rate wobbled and there were indications that Romania might face tougher borrowing terms for its public finances. Romania is one of the largest net recipients from the EU budget, a position that a Simion victory could have jeopardized.

Polls show that a large majority of Romanians favor the EU and NATO membership. Simion reassured the public that he did not favor leaving the EU; he only sought to restore a greater role of member state governments relative to the Commission. As for NATO, Simion approved of this as the embodiment of U.S. engagement in Romania and depicted this as challenged by figures such as Macron and Merz who sought greater independence from the U.S.

Conclusion: West vs. West?

The nationalist right sees the EU as setting itself against the U.S. and tends to elevate relations with the U.S. over the preservation of EU cohesion. They obviously and ostentatiously imitate the American president’s MAGA approach to nationalist self-assertion over the advantages of EU collective approaches to matters such as the war in Ukraine, migration, the green transition.

The pan-European scope of these elections was noteworthy. Poland’s election shadowed Romania, with Nawrocki campaigning with Simion. Former PiS PM Mateusz Morawiecki, a close associate of Simion, joined him in castigating Macron for allegedly interfering in Romania’s election. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban actually endorsed Simion, despite an abiding historical grievance about the rights of ethnic Hungarians in Romania’s Transylvania region.

Brussels, meanwhile, has shown great forbearance toward Tusk’s perceived political imperative to oppose EU positions on immigration, the Green transition, and other issues because of his stalwart pro EU and pro Ukraine policy.

The novelty of these races is the pitting of the U.S. against the EU mainstream on Ukraine, Russia, trade, climate change — “sovereigntism” versus EU solidarity. The results indicate that emulation of Trump’s appeal to voters may not be a winning tactic.

On the other hand, there is clear evidence of a reorganization of political competition across Europe setting the nationalist challenge against a mainstream consensus. This process tends to lock the parties encompassing the traditional social democratic left and the pro-business right into a single pro-establishment bloc.

This development could produce a fundamental realignment of party competition in Europe and force fundamental redesign of the European Union.


Top photo: Presidential candidate Nicusor Dan speaks to the media after polls close for the second round of the country's presidential election redo in Bucharest, Romania, on May 18, 2025. (Photo by Alex Nicodim/NurPhoto)
Analysis | Europe
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo), Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.)  Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)
Top Image Credit: Top photo credit: Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo) (Gage Skidmore/Flickr); Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.)(Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect); Rep. Majorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)(Gage Skidmore/Creative Commons)

The Capitol Hill Republicans against US war with Iran

Washington Politics

Even as polling indicates that a majority of Trump voters don't want to go to war with Iran on behalf of Israel, it’s been difficult to change GOP minds on Capitol Hill.

But that doesn’t mean there aren’t strong conservative voices trying to do just that.

keep readingShow less
Nato-scaled
Official Opening Ceremony for NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) Summit 2018 in Brussels, Belgium. (Shutterstock/ Gints Ivuskans)
Official Opening Ceremony for NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) Summit 2018 in Brussels, Belgium. (Shutterstock/ Gints Ivuskans)

The 17 Ukraine war peace terms the US must put before NATO

Europe

In the run up to the NATO Summit at The Hague next week, June 24-25, President Donald Trump and his administration should present a clear U.S. plan for peace in Ukraine to the European and Ukrainian governments — one that goes well beyond just a ceasefire.

While it is understandable that Trump would like to walk away from the Ukraine peace process, given President Vladimir Putin’s intransigence and now the new war in the Middle East, he and his team need to state clearly the parameters of a deal that they think will bring a lasting peace. Walking away from the effort to end the war prematurely leaves Washington in continued danger of being drawn into a new crisis as long as the U.S. continues to supply Ukraine with weapons and intelligence.

keep readingShow less
Benjamin Netanyahu Donald Trump
Benjamin Netanyahu Donald Trump at the White House in April 2025 (White House/Flickr)

Israel is luring the US into a trap

Middle East

Joining in Israel’s aggression against Iran would hurt, not advance, U.S. interests and international security.

This should not be surprising, given that support for U.S. interests and international security was not what led to Israel’s launching of the war. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu argues that Iran’s nuclear program poses a threat to America and not just Israel, but the nuclear issue was not the main motivation behind Israel’s attack, as reflected in a target list that goes far beyond anything associated with Iran’s nuclear program.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.