Adam Boulton: Could this be Europe’s ‘Trump moment’? Why EU vote matters for UK

Published

10 months ago

June 9, 2024

admin

2024 is known as the year of elections because in these 12 months more voters in more countries than ever before will exercise their right to cast a vote to choose who governs them.

That is the march of democracy – even if nobody was convinced when President Putin was elected, again, in Russia.

The UK is in the throes of a general election campaign which could end 14 years of Conservative rule. Americans will decide whether Donald Trump returns to the White House in November.

In India, a victorious Prime Minister Narendra Modi is licking his wounds after his Hindu nationalist BJP underperformed in the world’s largest election.

Right now, the world’s second-largest election is taking place; this weekend and just over the seas surrounding Great Britain.

It has attracted little attention here, even though the UK took part in it right up until 2019. Even though previous elections of this kind kept Nigel Farage alive as a political force. And even though its outcome may be the most directly consequential for the UK, at least in the short run.

This election is also part of a unique experiment. Voters in many countries are electing members of the world’s only functioning trans-national parliament in which MEPs from different countries come together in blocs according to their political ideologies.

Since Thursday, nearly 400 million citizens in the European Union’s 27 member states have had the chance to elect a total of 750 members to the European Parliament (EP).

Appropriately, the EP election started on the 80th anniversary of D-Day, 6 June, in the Netherlands, with Ireland voting on Friday, and most other member states at the weekend, including Belgium which is also holding a national election on Sunday.

This seems appropriate because the parliament is designed to be a peaceful unifier of democratic Europe. It is ironic because some of the parties expected to do well this year have links going back to Franco, Mussolini and Hitler.

The parliament is the only directly elected EU institution. It is less powerful than most national parliaments. EU policy is directed by the Council of Ministers, who are the elected leaders from individual member states. Plans are carried forward by the Commission, an appointed bureaucracy.

The parliament debates, amends and puts proposals into law, as well as overseeing the Commission’s budget, actions and appointments from current president Ursula von der Leyen.

Lots of politicians move between the EP and their national parliaments. Whether they are candidates standing or not, the results of these elections often have a major impact on what happens in home countries.

For example, during Britain’s membership of the EU, Nigel Farage failed seven times to win first-past-the-post elections to become an MP at Westminster.

Thanks to proportional representation however, he served continuously as an MEP for South East England from June 1999 to January 2020, when the UK left the EU as a result of the Brexit referendum. He made full use of the salary and expenses available to him from the EP.

Farage has the distinction of having led two different British parties to victory in the EP elections – with very serious consequences.

In 2014, UKIP beat Labour and the Conservatives, panicking David Cameron, the then-Conservative leader, into holding the EU referendum.

Five years later in 2019, when the UK had still not completed its exit from the EU, Farage led what was then called the Brexit Party to first place in the EP election. The Conservatives came fifth. Theresa May fell and Boris Johnson became prime minister with his slogan “get Brexit done”.

The UK is no longer part of the EU. We have our own general election to choose MPs, not MEPs. Farage’s latest party, Reform UK, is standing in the general election.

Across the rest of Europe, the radical right is on the rise. There is talk of Europe’s “Donald Trump moment” amid cost of living concerns.

Populist parties are widely expected to make gains according to opinion polls. If they do, the shakeout between rival blocs on the right will impact on issues including the Ukraine war, mass migration, climate change, and trade.

All matters on which whoever wins the UK election will be hoping for greater co-operation with European neighbours.

The results of the EP elections in France, Germany and Italy will greatly influence the direction in which the internal politics of those major UK allies develops.

The contest can also be seen as a battle for the soul of euro-populism – pro-Russia or pro-NATO – between its two feuding queens: Marine Le Pen of the French National Rally (NR), formerly the National Front, and Giorgia Meloni, prime minister of Italy and leader of Fratelli di Italia (FdI).

In Germany, the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AFD) is on course to come second ahead of Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s Social Democrats.

NR, led in the EP by the charismatic Jordan Bardella, is expected to win 33% of the votes in France, much more than President Emmanuel Macron’s party. And Le Pen is already the most popular candidate ahead of the presidential election in 2027 – when Macron must stand down.

Radical right parties are already in power or supporting governments in eight EU countries and are expected to come back in Austria’s election due this month.

In total populist parties may end up with more MEPs than the centre-right European Peoples Party (EPP), which has long dominated the parliament, and the struggling Socialists and Democrats.

But it is not clear that the warring factions on the right will unite to act together or work with the mainstream EPP, made up of conventional conservative and Christian Democratic parties.

They have in common ethnic nationalism, anti-wokeism, Islamophobia, hostility to migrants and net zero, and suspicion of climate change and multilateral institutions including the EU, UN and NATO. They differ on the economy – free markets and state intervention – and, above all, on Russia.

Giorgia Meloni’s FdI, Poland’s Law and Justice party and others European Conservatives and Reformists group are giving strong backing to Ukraine.

But the Identity and Freedom group, dominated by Le Pen’s FR, support a settlement handing territory to Russia, while the AfD, Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban and Austria’s Freedom party belong openly to the Putin fan club.

The radical right will only be able to exert its full influence in the parliament if Meloni and Le Pen can reach an accommodation on such matters as Ukraine or whether von der Leyen should be given a second term as Commission president.

This seems unlikely but it has not stopped von der Leyen touring the EU seeking support and making it clear that Europe will give less priority to green policies in the next parliament than it did in the current one.

The largest grouping in the EP recommends who the Commission president should be. In practice, national leaders in the council have usually imposed their own candidate.

Increasing factionalism is preventing the EP from having the influence it would like. Ten groups have official status giving them funding and status on committees, with a further three unofficial groups.

After this election, there may be no sufficiently dominant group emerging to take up a leadership role.

The split in the mainstream right in the EU is in part a legacy of Britain’s membership of the EU. The ECR only came into existence when David Cameron defied Angela Merkel and pulled the Conservative Party out of the EPP.

Whether the UK is in or out, neither the UK nor the EU are sheltered from the winds of radical right-wing populism.

We here may be too busy to pay much attention to the world’s second-largest election. We won’t be able to ignore its consequences.

World

Two Chinese citizens captured during fighting in eastern Ukraine, Zelenskyy says

Published

1 hour ago

April 8, 2025

admin

Two Chinese citizens captured during fighting in eastern Ukraine, Zelenskyy says

Volodymyr Zelenskyy says two Chinese citizens have been captured while fighting in eastern Ukraine.

He said his forces had fought six Chinese soldiers and two of them had been taken prisoner. He added he had ordered officials to obtain an explanation from Beijing.

“We have information that there are many more Chinese citizens in the occupier’s units than just two. We are now finding out all the facts,” he added.

As it happened: Zelenskyy demands reaction from US

China is an ally of Russia and has been accused of helping its war in Ukraine, though Beijing has repeatedly denied allegations that it has supplied Kremlin forces with weapons.

“Russia’s involvement of China in this war in Europe, directly or indirectly, is a clear signal that Putin is going to do anything but end the war,” Mr Zelenskyy said. “He is looking for ways to continue the war.”

Mr Zelenskyy described China as having joined Russia’s war against Ukraine and said he expected the US to react.

There was no immediate comment from China.

How many Chinese are actually fighting for Russia?

John Sparks

International correspondent

@sparkomat

Were they volunteers – or mercenaries – who had signed up to fight in the Russian army on their own?

Alternatively, does the Chinese government sanction their involvement – or even encourage it? That would make the situation far more serious.

The capture of these Chinese nationals in Donetsk begs another question – how many Chinese are actually fighting for Russia? In his written post on social media platform Telegram, Volodymyr Zelenskyy said “there are many more Chinese citizens” other than these two.

Still, the Ukrainian president works hard to suggest the Chinese, officially at least, are blameless.

“Russia’s involvement of China in this war… is a clear signal that [Russian President Vladimir] Putin is going to do anything but end the war,” he writes on Telegram.

This is a generous interpretation of China’s approach to the conflict, which is quite openly contradictory.

World

What we learn from video of captured Chinese national in Ukraine – and the serious questions it raises

Published

7 hours ago

April 8, 2025

admin

What we learn from video of captured Chinese national in Ukraine - and the serious questions it raises

In a carefully written post on social media platform Telegram, Volodymyr Zelenskyy accused the Russian army of deploying Chinese citizens on the battlefield in eastern Ukraine.

What about the proof? Well, the Ukrainian president says his security services captured two people from China in the Donetsk region – along with identity documents, personal data and their bank cards.

Follow latest: Zelenskyy demands reaction from US

A video of a man in military fatigues who had been captured by Ukraine was pinned to the bottom of the statement.

We get snippets of a conversation where the alleged combatant seems to be talking about the events that led to his capture.

“When we arrived at the place… and then my commander.” The man gestures at the floor and ceiling, making shooting noises. “I was also injured.”

These details will make it difficult for the Chinese government to deny the incident out of hand, although they are highly unlikely to supply additional information.

Important details like, who are they? What function(s) do they fulfil in Ukraine’s occupied territories?

Were they volunteers – or mercenaries – who had signed up to fight in the Russian army on their own?

Alternatively, does the Chinese government sanction their involvement – or even encourage it?

That would make the situation far more serious.

The capture of these Chinese nationals in Donetsk begs another question – how many Chinese are actually fighting for Russia? In his post, Mr Zelenskyy said “there are many more Chinese citizens” other than these two.

Still, the Ukrainian president works hard to suggest the Chinese, officially at least, are blameless.

“Russia’s involvement of China in this war… is a clear signal that [Russian President Vladimir] Putin is going to do anything but end the war,” he writes on Telegram.

This is a generous interpretation of China’s approach to the conflict, which is quite openly contradictory.

On one hand, Chinese President Xi Jinping describes China as a neutral party to the conflict, while simultaneously offering Mr Putin long-term political and economic support.

In fact, he described their partnership as a “no limits” one in a phone call with Mr Putin on the third anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Mr Zelenskyy then, is making a point with this post – but he does not want to make the situation any worse.

World

What China could do next as Trump’s tariff war ramps up

Published

10 hours ago

April 8, 2025

admin

What China could do next as Trump's tariff war ramps up

The severity cannot be overstated, if an additional 50% tariffs are levied on all Chinese goods it will decimate trade between the world’s two biggest economies.

Remember, 50% would sit on top of what is already on the table: 34% announced last week, 20% announced at the start of US President Donald Trump’s term, and some additional tariffs left over from his first term in office.

In total, it means all Chinese goods would face tariffs of over 100%, some as high as 120%.

It’s a price that makes any trade almost impossible.

China is really the only nation in the world at the moment that is choosing to take a stand.

While others are publicly making concessions and sending delegations to negotiate, China has clearly calculated that not being seen to be bullied is worth the cost that retaliation will bring.

The real question, though, is if the US does indeed impose this extra 50% tomorrow, what could or would China do next?

It has said it will “fight to the end”, but what does that mean?

In reality, there are few good options.

There are some obvious measures that China will almost certainly enact.

👉 Follow Trump 100 on your podcast app 👈

Further export controls on rare earth minerals (crucial for the development of high-tech products) are one example. China controls a huge proportion of the world’s supply, but the US would likely find workarounds in time.

Hiking tariffs on high-impact US products such as agricultural goods is another option, but there is only so far this could go.

The potentially more impactful options have significant drawbacks for Beijing.

It could, for instance, target high-profile American companies such as Apple and Tesla, but this isn’t ideal at a time when China is trying to attract more foreign investment, and some devaluation of the currency is possible, but it would also come with adverse effects.

Other options are more political and come with the risk of escalation beyond the economic arena.

In an opinion piece this morning, the editor of Xinhua, China’s state news agency, speculated that China could cease all cooperation with the US on the war against fentanyl.

This has been a major political issue for Mr Trump, and it’s hard to see it would not constitute some sort of red line for him.

Other options touted include banning the import of American films, or perhaps calling for the Chinese public to boycott all American products.

Anything like this comes with a sense that the world’s two most powerful superpowers might be teetering on the edge of not just a total economic decoupling, but cultural separation too.

There is understandably serious nervousness about how that could spiral and the precedent it sets.