Defending democracy amidst the polycrisis: How the EU can counter the far-right 

Good morning and thank you for the invitation.

I flew to Edinburgh for Europe Day, which can seem a little contradictory as the UK left the EU a little more than 4 years ago. But when I received the invitation, I had to think of a speech Nicolas Sturgeon gave in Brussels approximately six years ago at the European Policy Centre, which was a fervent defence of the European Union. This was a rare occurrence in Brussels, where we tend to focus on the nitty-gritty and to criticise more than praise what the EU does.  

Another reason I came to Edinburgh is that I truly believe that civil society needs to continue to work together even if the official ties have been severed. After all, it is not because the UK left the EU that geography changed – Scotland and the United Kingdom are still very much in Europe. 

The topic I was asked to cover today is rather broad – how to defend democracy in Europe despite the multiple challenges we face – and what role the EU can play to counter the far-right.  

To unpack this, I’ll begin with the context we find ourselves in, then outline our vulnerabilities to authoritarianism and what the EU should do against the far-right surge. At the end, I’ll also share what we should collectively focus on.  

So where do we stand today? In 2025, we are in a situation which for many seemed unthinkable a few years ago. I remember the Brexit referendum in 2016 as the darkest time for the EU. It was hard to imagine that a few years later, we would live through a global pandemic, a Russian aggression war in Ukraine and the re-election of Donald Trump as US President. 

Even worse, I never thought that Europe would stand idly by as a genocide unfolds in Gaza – even supporting the far-right government that openly says they want to “cleanse” Gaza of its inhabitants. It is time we stop supporting Netanyahu, against which there is an ICC arrest warrant.  This is important if we want to continue to credibly defend EU values such as democracy, rule of law and human rights.

Despite what many media commentators and pundits predicted, the EU has not been destroyed because of these multiple crises – even if each crisis response puts to the test our “capacity to act” and potentially weakens the EU’s power.  

Instead, the EU made giant steps in the last years. First, there was the joint vaccines procurement and a new joint debt mechanism with NextGenerationEU package, to avert an economic recession. We have also managed to stay rather united in the first response against Russia’s aggression war, with several sanctions’ packages and an overall united line to support Ukraine.

This shows that the EU is more resilient than many predicted. But resilience should not be mistaken for long-term robustness. Rather than building on the momentum of a new integration step with NextGenerationEU – which many called the EU’s “Hamiltonian moment” -  we’ve slid back into reactive crisis management. Too often, there is still a “nationalist reflex” of member states who become more inward-looking when there is a crisis.

In addition, our internal unity remains fragile. Unfortunately, there is an increasing number of far-right politicians in governments in Europe. We have far-right forces in power in Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden and Slovakia – and maybe soon also in Romania.

This has direct implications for EU policymaking. Let me give you three examples:  

First, we’ve seen how Orbán has been deviating from the EU’s line with his pro-Russian stance and threats to veto any further support for Ukraine. The other member states and the European Commission seem to readily accept the blackmailing of EU funds to ensure a united line on foreign policy – knowing very well that this is not a sustainable solution. 

Second, on migration policy, the EU is already very aligned with the proposals of the far-right. The EU and its border agency Frontex are working with the Libyan Coast Guard, who are known to torture migrants in detention centres in Libya. There have been reports about sexual violence, forced labour and inhuman treatment.

Third, on climate policy, this means that there is a concerning rollback of green legislation under the banner of ‘simplification’. A few weeks ago, I was in a high-level roundtable and heard a parliamentarian explain that no country will disappear because of climate change. I wonder what the people in the Pacific Islands would have said had they been present in the room.

The success of the far-right is a danger for European cooperation and the EU’s ambition. It is even more dangerous because far-right forces – especially out of Hungary and Poland – have very solid plans to dismantle the EU from within and get help from the Heritage Foundation in the US, which was the initiator of Project2025. They want to turn the EU into an international organisation like the United Nations, reducing the Commission and the European Parliament to purely consultative bodies without any decision-making powers.  These plans need to be taken seriously. The EU needs a real defence strategy to ensure that such destructive plans cannot be implemented.

So what can the EU do to counter this far-right surge? It must act both at the national and EU level.

What we need first and foremost is resistance to the far-right at national level. The problem these days is that far-right parties do not even need to be in power to gain power. They won the public discourse and set the agenda already – especially on climate, gender and migration. They have won over the “cultural hegemony” to use Gramsci’s words, the famous Italian antifascist thinker. Democratic parties should stop paving the way for the far-right as they are currently doing.

To give you two examples: In Germany, the Social-Democrats and the Greens in the traffic-light coalition agreed to close borders – in clear breach of the Schengen agreement – and decided to send back migrants to Afghanistan and Syria – mind you the Taliban and Bachar Al-Assad were in power in those countries at the time, but they were considered “safe”.

In the UK, the Tories  - and even the current Labour government - pushed through a far-right agenda on migration without Reform UK in power. As the local elections have shown, this helps exactly one political force: the far-right. It also shows the danger of mainstream parties adopting far-right narratives and thus normalising radical political positions.

Besides the national level, the EU can also act to counter the far-right. I’d like to present three concrete proposals in this respect.

First, the EU institutions need to fully use their powers. There is tendency of decision-makers at EU level to be too prudent and scared to annoy member states, rather than tap into their competences. For instance, the EU did not yet start an infringement procedure against Hungary even though the country banned pride marches – which is against the Treaty on European Union (Article 2 – values).

This also means the EU needs to be quicker in accepting new realities and geopolitical shifts. For now, the EU institutions are too slow in responding to democratic backsliding in member states, and too slow in recognising when former partners become rivals – such as the US or Israel.

Secondly, the EU needs to be more ambitious in its proposals and stop doing things half-baked. For instance, decision-makers agreed to take on huge debts for the NextGenerationEU package, but did not agree how they would pay it back. The so-called “Own Resources Decision” has still not been adopted 5 years after the NextGenerationEU package was decided. This also applies to security and defence, where we still have too little European cooperation and too little joint funding. In the energy sector, where the “Energy union” is still not finalised; or in the financial sector, where the savings and investments union is still not implemented. While these are all difficult policy decisions which require compromise, the lack of effectiveness – and the overpromising by the European Commission - is bad for the EU’s legitimacy.

Third, the EU should also focus more intently on systemic crises that require urgent political action – such as the climate crisis and rising inequalities, which threaten the social fabric of our societies.

If this is currently not in the focus, it is because of the political context, but this remains problematic. It is also slightly contradictory, as polls show that many EU citizens are very much concerned about the climate crisis and wish for their politicians to take action. According to the European Investment Bank Climate Survey from August 2024, 94% of EU respondents believe it is important for their country to adapt to climate change, with 50% considering it a priority.

Besides national governments and the EU, resisting the far-right is first and foremost a collective undertaking by citizens. Here again, I would like to make three proposals.

 First, citizens should start actively resisting the far-right. There seems to be an increase in “mental gymnastics” by many people close to politics which bend their morals to continue to have access to power and save their careers – think how Columbia university acted in view of the Trump Presidency. What we need instead is to follow Harvard’s example – and stand up against authoritarianism. 

Citizens also need to put pressure on their decision-makers to not accept democratic backsliding at home and abroad, to stop funding extremist governments – whether it is Hungary or Israel and call them out when democratic parties start adopting far-right narratives.

We also need to focus on youth. The series Adolescence showed how deeply disturbing the manosphere is and what real-life consequences it can have on children. Regulating algorithmic amplification of hate and banning exploitative social media models for children would protect democracy at its roots. 

Second, we need to strengthen collective action and civic engagement. In the current political context, there is an urge to escape reality and retreat to the private sphere. But that allows fascism to progress. Instead, this is the time to act collectively, to engage in community work, to go protesting and to re-learn civil disobedience if necessary. Civil society has a foundational role to play to counter authoritarianism – the example of Poland is particularly striking in this respect. It is thanks to civil society that in the end Poland did not end up in the same situation as Hungary.

Thirdly, it is time to build a positive and peaceful vision for the future.  The far-right wants us to believe that it cannot get better anytime soon – losing hope for a better future is a political strategy to gain power, and they are achieving it if we retreat to the private sphere and lose hope for a better tomorrow.  

This week, we commemorate the 80th anniversary of the end of the Second World War. This is a good time to reflect upon what the EU stands for: Peace between nations that were once at war.  While we are building up our own military capabilities – for good reasons, as the US security umbrella is not available anymore – we need to ensure that this does not lead to warmongering and remilitarisation. We should not be rebuilding national armies but ensure that the military stays under strict democratic and European oversight.  

Only five years after the end of the Second World war, on 9 May 1950, Robert Schuman made a historical Declaration in the French Foreign Ministry. It would lead to the Treaty of Paris in 1951 and the establishment of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC). Schuman laid the first brick of a European cooperation amongst the worst enemies, France and Germany, which had fought against each other for over centuries. This was visionary and idealistic, but also deeply strategic. That is the spirit we must reclaim today. 

Thank you for your attention.