The European Elections and Their Aftermath

What can we conclude from the 2014 Elections to the European Parliament? First, citizens continue to show little interest in EU governance, with voter turnout a disappointing 43 per cent. Evidently, the introduction of pan-European candidates for president of the European Commission failed to make the elections more exciting. This had to do with the similarity of the platforms of the two top candidates, Martin Schulz and Jean-Claude Juncker. Both espoused the idea of “more Europe” but neither offered inspiring ideas for the future. The second thing the elections made obvious was that of those who did vote, many used the occasion to voice their frustrations with government at home.

What do the elections mean for the EU’s future? The British prime minister’s strategy of undercutting the anti-EU UK Independence Party by stating his own criticisms of Brussels was a flop, the debate about whether the Brits should withdraw from the EU will continue. In the eurozone, the biggest challenge in coming years will be recovering from the economic crisis. National governments will play a key role in meeting this challenge. They need electoral support to advance much needed economic and social political reforms. But many of these reforms are saddled with short-term burdens that will be felt before their positive effects on growth and employment become apparent. This path is difficult enough as it is, and all but impossible to navigate without popular support. In Greece, not surprisingly, such support is lacking. Indeed, the victory of the radical left-wing party Syriza, with 26 per cent of the vote, and the relative success of the far-right Golden Dawn, with 10 per cent of the vote, may be enough to topple the current administration; already now, the opposition is calling for new elections. The results in France gave Europe a particularly nasty surprise. The victory of Front National has made the political changes France urgently needs – spending cuts, growth, the reappraisal of recent legislation and court rulings – very difficult, and will likely diminish France’s initiative in European politics.

Radical parties were less successful in other countries. In Portugal and Spain they played no significant role. In the Netherlands, the anti-EU party of Geert Wilders suffered a severe defeat. In Italy, the centre-left party of Prime Minister Matteo Renzi even came out on top. But even though Renzi wants to reform the country’s economy, he has also promised to abandon the country’s austerity policies. This may explain his party’s success at the polls. Whether he can keep his promise given the country’s large national debt is doubtful, however. And in Germany? The Alternative for Germany party had moderate success, but apart from that changes were minimal.

All in all, the establish parties in Europe suffered losses but the feared EU-wide rout by extreme forces did not occur. The moderate centre parties of Europe should not understand this as a mandate for business as usual, however. Politicians must be more honest with voters about the need for adjustments and reforms. Also, the EU should focus on policies that truly serve all of Europe, such as a common energy policy, the expansion of trans-European networks for transport and data, and the creation of a European army. The money for these projects could come from areas in which the EU does not provide added value, such as in agriculture and some regional policies. Between now and the next election in 2019, EU politicians must demonstrate their ability to rethink policies and correct past errors. If they, in addition to this, manage to put the EU on the road to economic recovery, then the recent success of populist parties will be a one-time thing.