Sunday night’s results from the high-turnout European Parliament elections, the biggest multinational election in the world, saw gains for anti-integration parties, but also centrist liberals and greens, too.
In what will be widely perceived as a referendum on the six-decade integration project of the Brussels-based club, there was a mixed message from voters resulting in a more fragmented political landscape that will help set the EU political agenda into the 2020s.
Yet, the ballot is not just important for the future of the continent, but also the rest of the world, too, given that the 28-member EU remains an economic superpower with its collective GDP paralleling that of the US, and remaining larger than that of China.
It is also the world’s biggest exporter with the scores of nations for which Europe is their leading trade partner, ranging from China in Asia to Brazil in South America.
Building on the results of the 2014 parliamentary elections, and national elections across the continent, euroskeptic parties made clear gains in some nations, including the extreme right: the League in Italy, Fidesz in Hungary and the UK’s Brexit Party.
Yet at the same time, the centrist, pro-EU Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe also won many seats too, buoyed by the addition of French President Emmanuel Macron’s En Marche to its group.
Clear losers were the two largest “status quo” parties — the center-right European People’s Party (EPP) and center-left Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D).
Indeed, these groups have lost their, collective, previous majority of seats, which could have a significant impact on parliamentary proceedings given that the two have previously helped push most legislation through.
Take the example of Germany, where German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s center-right Christian Democrats got 28 percent of the vote — its worst-ever performance in European elections. The center-left Social Democrats also did poorly, coming third with 16 percent.
The weak results for EPP and S&D reflects the very clear disenchantment of millions of people against the “status quo” in Brussels. This has been driven by a wide range of factors, not just popular discontent with growing European integration.
Broader issues include deep disquiet with long-established national political parties and systems, concern over immigration, and discontent over the post-2008 economic downturn and subsequent austerity measures.
Yet, despite this context, and the high profile that euroskeptics enjoyed in this year’s elections, there will be disappointment that more gains have not been secured by anti-integrationists. Part of the reason for this was the marshaling of centrist, liberal forces, including by the strongly pro-EU Macron, who depicted the contest as a choice for or against Europe.
Macron also successfully sought to capitalize on the fact that Eurobarometer surveys last year found more people than ever consider their nation’s membership of the EU to be a good thing (62 percent).
This was the highest figure in a quarter of a decade, with 68 percent of people believing that their nation has benefited from EU membership.
Another striking element of the elections was the relatively high average turnout of 50.5 percent of the 350 million electorate. This 20-year high figure comes in the context of previous major voter discontent and apathy in European Parliament ballots that has been fueled by the fact that the parliament, specifically, is generally not trusted by many in the continent for whom Brussels seems very remote to their day-to-day lives.
Voter turnout at European Parliament elections — before this year — was a picture of decline, slipping from 62 percent in 1979 to a record low of 42 percent in 2014. Indeed, in some nations, turnout only just got into the double-digit percentage five years ago.
This apathy was apparent despite the steadily growing powers enjoyed by the parliament. Originally created in the 1950s, it assumed enhanced political legitimacy in 1979 when it became a directly elected chamber.
Since then, it has assumed veto power over annual EU budgets of about 140 billion euros (US$156.7 billion) and secured powers to amend or block a wide range of draft laws that are devised by the European Commission.
The new members of parliament might also now have significant opportunity to influence the choice of the commission’s next president, widely viewed as the key office-holder in Brussels.
This is because key groups in the parliament forged an agreement before the 2014 election, for the first time ever that the choice of candidate for president to succeed then-European Commission president Jose Manuel-Barroso should be nominated by the voter bloc that secures the most seats.
While national governments have ultimate power over the appointment, the legislature’s voice was louder than ever on the important decision to select European Commission President Jean Claude Juncker, who has held the post for the last half a decade.
As in 2014, the EPP finished first in this year’s election and its candidate to replace Juncker — Manfred Weber, the German leader of the EPP in the European Parliament — is now in poll position.
However, his elevation is by no means a foregone conclusion as several leading European leaders, including Macron, have indicated that they are lukewarm, or even opposed, to Weber’s appointment.
Taken overall, the higher than expected turnout has not produced the massive gains that euroskeptics had hoped for. Instead, voters have delivered a mixed message that has fragmented the legislative landscape in a way that nonetheless sees the preponderance of power in the European Parliament continue to be held by a moderate majority that has been bolstered by the resurgent liberals.
Andrew Hammond is an associate at the London School of Economics and Political Science’s LSE IDEAS think tank.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry