Valruzia

[Aethan]

INTERVIEW | Urszula Pawlik: "The best legacy a Head of State can leave is continuity and calm" 

The President of the Valruzian Republic accepts an interview with us to know her more personally throughout half of her mandate 

September 5695

---

As President Urszula Pawlik moves over half of its mandate, we have agreed an informal chat with her to get to know more about her, her opinions, where does she stand... She receives us in the Presidential Palace of Nowogard, with a big smile and a big cup of coffee, the President's favorite. And this time, without the "Kalistan flavor" as she jockingly says.

Interviewer: Thank you very much for agreeing to this interview, Madam President. It has now been eight years since you were elected president of this country, and you have seven more years ahead of you. How would you assess your presidency so far?

Urszula Pawlik: Answer that question for me [laughter]. Honestly, perhaps people expect too much from a position that is often symbolic, a symbol of the unity of our country, but with limited powers. Let me detail my powers, according to our constitution: my functions are to sanction and promulgate laws passed by the Sejm, to represent Valruzia internationally and sign treaties after parliamentary ratification, to propose a candidate for Chancellor after general elections, to appoint government ministers and ambassadors on the proposal of the Chancellor, to confer state honours and military ranks, to act as Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces in a ceremonial capacity and to call, if I deem it appropiate, for the so-called Presidential Referendums.

But the President holds no autonomous executive authority, and all acts — except internal appointments and the calling of referendums — require countersigning by the Chancellor or relevant ministers. So it is also my duty to tell people when they have "too high expectations" about what a President can and cannot do. But for the extent of my powers, I honestly can say I'm pretty proud of what I've done so far. I've been working hard every day to strengthen the position of Valruzia in the international sphere, travelling abroad many times to meet foreign leaders and secure deals beneficial for our nation and our citizens. And I will continue doing so for the time I have left in this position.

I: Under your presidency, relations with Kalistan, which were already good – although somewhat deteriorated under successive KPW governments – have benefited enormously, to the point that you have been granted the honor of entering the Order of the Grey Smoke, a distinction reserved for a few people, the vast majority of whom are citizens of Kalistan. Some would even say that you feel closer to them than to the people of Valruzia, as might be evidenced by your unilateral decision to grant the future sovereign of Kalistan a palace in Gryfit. What is your response?

U.P: Perhaps people are not accustomed to high-level politics? [sarcastic tone and shrugging shoulders]. On a more serious note, it is laughable that people could think that about someone like me, when I have worked for and on behalf of the people of Valruzia, and I always say that my only interest is the people of Valruzia. If anything, all these actions show that high-level diplomacy works and should be the example to follow in all international relations. It is an honor for me to be part of the Order of Grey Smoke, I am not ashamed to say so, and it is obvious that the gift to the future Empress of Kalistan is a symbolic gesture. In Valruzia, we have a rich history and castles and palaces that are the envy of half the planet, and it is our duty and honour to share them with the world. Furthermore, we have made it clear that the palace remains part of Valruzia, ceded for a specific period of time and subject to Valruzia law.

I: Some people, especially from the left, have accused you of being "the Forward Valruzia candidate" throughout many of your presidential years. What do you say about that?

U.P: As a human being, it is clear that I have my own ideology, which may be closer to one party or another. But that does not pigeonhole us into a framework. As parties representing the public, I think it is obvious that they will always coincide to a greater or lesser extent with the thinking of many citizens in our country, and that does not mean that we support or should support a single party, just as casting a vote once every five years does not definitively bind us to the decisions made by those parties throughout the legislative term, and allows us to criticise them freely because that is how democracy works. In fact, let me tell you something: since I was elected president in 5687, I have not exercised my right to vote in any of the three legislative elections that have taken place. Perhaps most citizens are unaware of this, but presidents are allowed to exercise their right to vote. However, I believe that in my role as the highest representative of all the citizens of Valruzia, it would be hypocritical of me to give my vote to one party or another, not because I do not know which party or parties are closest to my ideology, but because if I were not president and I saw the head of state of my country going to the polls, when we are elected as independent candidates, it would seem to me to be a way of taking a very clear position on one side or the other, and that could cause great damage to our democracy.

I: But you did serve in the government of Chynberg as development minister, right?

U.P: Yes, as an independent. They asked me to serve, to bring my knowledge to the table to help my home region, and of course I accepted. My whole life has been dedicated to improve the conditions of my fellow countrypeople, and so I had no doubts to do so. It doesn't matter who asked me, it just happened that Forward Valruzia was in power. Would I have done the same if the Marshall belonged to the KPW, to Sovereign Valruzia, or to Valruzian Alliance? Probably so, as long as I was able to bring my vision to reality.

I: You also served as rector of the University of Brzawa and were a public administrator. You first rose to prominence after leading a series of civic forums on constitutional law and the limits of executive power. How does somebody like you decides to take on the challenge of running for President?

U.P: I never imagined myself as a politician in the traditional sense, and even today I do not really see myself as one. My professional life has always revolved around institutional power rather than pure political power: universities, public administration, civic spaces where ideas are discussed calmly and with respect. When I led those civic forums on constitutional law, my intention was not to prepare a political career, but to contribute to a broader public understanding of how our state works and, more importantly, how it should limit itself in order to protect citizens' freedoms.

At a certain point, however, I realised that many people were projecting something onto me that I had not consciously sought: trust. They saw in me someone who understood institutions, who respected their limits, and who did not aspire to govern over others, but to serve within a framework. Several civic groups, academics, and even people from very different ideological backgrounds encouraged me to consider running, precisely because I did not belong to a party structure and because my entire discourse had been about restraint, balance and institutional dignity.

Accepting that challenge was "not an act of ambition, but of responsibility" I told myself. I believed – and to be honest, I still believe – that the presidency should be occupied by someone who is comfortable with saying "this is not my role" as much as with fulfilling ceremonial and representative duties. I ran because I felt that my background, my respect and understanding of our Constitution, and my distance from partisan struggle could be useful to Valruzia at a time when institutions needed to be reaffirmed and not personalized. I think our politics suffer from too much "personification". And once the citizens entrusted me with this office, my task became very clear: to honour that trust every single day.

I: One of the presidential duties is to "sanction and promulgate laws passed by the Sejm". Have you ever considered not signing or vetoing a legislative initiative approved by parliament?

U.P: Perhaps for someone else in the position, it would be a possibility. For me, it is not. And I understand that there are citizens who consider this a weakness, or who believe in the argument that ‘what good is a Head of State if they cannot exercise certain powers?’ And I understand that. But the fact is that our Constitution is clear: Parliament is the highest representative of the popular will of the citizens of our country. In my role as Head of State, I am the representative of the nation, which means that, in a way, I am the representative of the will of Parliament. Parliament is not the highest representative of my will, because then we would not be a republic, we would be something else. When parliament serves the will of its Head of State, it has another name. And that is what would happen if I decided not to exercise my role as an independent and neutral representative. Once again, if I took a stand on certain issues, such as those with which I disagree, I would be taking sides, and that could be exploited by different actors to destabilise our nation. And that is something I will never allow.

I: What would be your answer then to the question, "What is the purpose of having a Head of State?"

U.P: Well, I think it's obvious, and I've already explained it: to represent the will of the nation, to be its ‘reincarnation’. It is precisely in my institutional neutrality that my virtue lies. No one can accuse me of leaning to one side or the other, and precisely because of this, I am allowed to represent Valruzia in different nations, in different countries, with very different political systems or ideologies, because they know that I will not take sides or speak publicly about the internal affairs of my nation, because my only interest is the supreme good for all the citizens of my country.

I: You still have seven years left in office. When your mandate eventually comes to an end, how would you like to be remembered as President of Valruzia?

U.P: I would like to be remembered as someone who did not seek to center the presidency around herself, but to protect and elevate it. If, when my mandate ends, the institutions of Valruzia are trusted, respected, and stable – regardless of who governs or which party holds power – then I will consider my work successful. I do not aspire to leave behind grand personal achievements or to be associated with a specific political moment. The best legacy a Head of State can leave is continuity, calm, and the certainty that the rules apply equally to everyone.

If future presidents can exercise their role without pressure to overstep their powers, and if citizens understand better what the presidency is and is not, then I will feel that my years in office have served a purpose.

I: One last question: the presidency is often described as a lonely office. Has that been your experience?

U.P: To some extent, yes. The loneliness does not come from the lack of people around you – on the contrary, you are constantly surrounded by advisors, officials, and delegations. It comes from the awareness that, in the end, your role requires distance. You cannot form political alliances, you cannot publicly express preferences, and you must be careful not to allow personal feelings to influence institutional behaviour.

That said, I do not experience this loneliness as something negative. It is part of the responsibility. I have my private life, my family, my beloved husband – who comes with me to many of my visits abroad –, my books and my academic interests, which help me remain grounded. And above all, I find reassurance in knowing that my restraint is precisely what allows others – governments, parliaments, citizens – to act freely within our democratic framework.

I: Thank you very much for this interview, Madam President. I'm sure our readers will love it.

U.P: No, thank you for this opportunity. It was truly a pleasure to open up in this way. I really enjoyed it.