Wednesday

18th May 2022

Column

Chance for Christian Democrats to draw line against extremism

The New Year is approaching and there is some reason for hope. Probably in a year's time, Covid-19 will have become a managed health risk rather than the massive threat it is now.

It is much harder to predict how the EU will look like in a year.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Become an expert on Europe

Get instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.

... or subscribe as a group

  • The Polish-Hungarian veto of the EU's budget and recovery funds has exposed chasms that were long in the making. How should the EU go forward with this?

The Polish-Hungarian veto of the EU's budget and recovery funds has exposed chasms that were long in the making. How should the EU go forward with this?

Clearly the two governments' positions are neither convincing nor acceptable.

They reject the planned rule-of-law mechanism, saying that courts, not member states, should rule on rule-of-law violations.

At the same time, they insist that only Article 7 of the EU Treaty should be used against rule-of-law violators. But Article 7 is also based on a vote by member states, its voting arrangements are just more favourable to violators.

During July's EU summit, Poland and Hungary agreed to a conditionality mechanism to protect the budget in the context of Article 2 of the EU Treaty, which mentions the rule of law, democracy and human rights.

Now they reject such a mechanism.

In essence they are telling the other 25 EU member states: "Even if all you are in favour and legally-entitled by the EU Treaty to adopt this mechanism, don't dare doing so, because we will then block the EU budget."

The rest of the EU is now witnessing the kind of legal-political brutalism that these two governments have been employing against their own judges, citizens, opposition and media for many years.

There are three thoughts of schools on this crisis.

The first, represented by the Hungarian and the Polish government, says that there is no rule-of-law problem and that the whole conflict has something to do with other countries trying to force different cultural values onto them.

As I have written here before, I don't think they themselves believe this.

Pretending that there is a civilisational conflict is a convenient smokescreen when what you really want to do is to concentrate power into your own hands.

Many governments in the EU adopt conservative policies, but they don't dismantle courts or turn public media into their mouthpieces.

One cannot revisit the many legal arguments in a column, but it is noteworthy that even generally conservative institutions of legal expertise, such as the Council of Europe's Venice Commission, have long explained in detail how the measures by these two governments violate norms of the rule of law and democracy.

The second school of thought sees itself as pragmatic. It understands full well that the two governments work against democracy and the rule of law in their countries.

But it suggests that it is in the interest of Europe's unity and ability to deal with many other problems to ignore these facts.

I don't consider this to be a pragmatic response, however, because internal democracy problems result in manyfold problems in external relations.

Extremists, not conservatives

The EU cannot be coherent and strong with member states whose governments portray the EU as the enemy. It cannot stabilise and support inclusive governance in other countries, when some of its members work towards the opposite goal.

Take one example: the Hungarian government appears to have put in place an operation to covertly fund media in North Macedonia with the objective of helping one party in the election.

The European Parliament recently discussed the case.

The EU cannot credibly demand democratic elections in a candidate country while some of its member states manipulate the electoral context in that same country.

The EU's stated aim is to strengthen a rule-based global order. It wants to fight back against the spreading anarchy in international relations, where might trumps right. But governments that favour might over right internally will not work in favour of rules at the international level.

The Polish and Hungarian governments' veto of the budget proves this point.

They play a destructive game of hardball with the EU's legal order for the same reason that they play hardball internally: they want to maintain as much power as possible for as long as possible.

The third school believes it is best for the other member states and EU bodies to stay the course.

It suggests that member states should now adopt the rule of law mechanism, inviting the Polish and Hungarian governments to bring the regulation to the European Court of Justice if they have legal concerns about its merits. This strikes me as the best and most pragmatic course of action.

Hungarians and Poles are deeply divided.

Only half of their respective electorates are favourable to their governments. Any compromise the EU makes is a betrayal of Hungarians and Poles who believe in democracy and the rule of law, and who expect the EU to defend it in each member state.

Ball in Berlin's court

The ball is in the court of the German government as the EU presidency to move on and to schedule a vote on the rule of law mechanism. The Commission too must do more to support the enforcement of decisions by the European Court of Justice.

Ultimately this remains a question of positioning by Germany's Christian Democrats (CDU) and the European People's Party. Both need to be firmer.

The CDU has drawn a strong line against Germany's extremist Alternative for Germany (AfD), but it has always accommodated Hungary's Fidesz.

With strong domestic resistance in Hungary and Poland and the election of Joe Biden there is a window of opportunity to make a decisive push against political extremism across the EU.

Hungary's Fidesz and Poland's Law & Justice (PiS) parties are not conservative. They are extremists. They have revived ghosts from the early 20th century, namely extreme nationalism and authoritarian government.

Christian Democracy was the answer to those experiences. The CDU and other Christian Democrats should use the opportunity and finally draw a firm line between themselves and extremism.

Author bio

Michael Meyer-Resende is the executive director of Democracy Reporting International, a non-partisan NGO in Berlin that supports political participation.

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author's, not those of EUobserver.

Von der Leyen tells Poland and Hungary to go to court

Poland and Hungary should ask the EU's top court to assess linking EU funds to the respect of the rule of law instead of blocking the budget and recovery package, the EU Commission chief said, most MEPs backed her up.

Hungary and Poland unfazed by EU outcry over budget block

France's EU affairs state secretary Clement Beaune said his country and Germany are looking into "technical clarifications" on rule-of-law conditionality to resolve the issue, but floated the idea of doing the recovery fund without Poland and Hungary.

EUobserved

European democrats, time to wake up

After the mob attack on Washington's Capitol Hill, we have to ask ourselves if it would be possible to see such a march on Brussels? The answer is: Yes. Europe is dealing with the same dark forces.

Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine - the case for granting EU candidacy

Granting EU candidacy status to Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine will firmly anchor their ties with Brussels — and enable the EU to secure its place in the Black Sea region, connecting Europe to China and energy-rich Central Asia, bypassing Russia.

Will 'Putin's Nato' follow Warsaw Pact into obscurity?

Valdimir Putin's equivalent to Nato — the Collective Security Treaty Organization of Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Armenia, Tajikistan, and Belarus — is convening in Moscow next week to give cover that Russia is not alone in its war against Ukraine.

The EU Parliament Covid inquiry: the questions MEPs must ask

A basic lack of transparency around the EU's vaccines procurement negotiations has prevented effective public and parliamentary scrutiny. It has also made it impossible to answer some of the key questions we put forward here.

News in Brief

  1. Germany shuts ex-chancellor Schröder's office over Putin ties
  2. Russia soldier pleads guilty to Ukraine war crime
  3. EU to protect Finland and Sweden until they join Nato
  4. Poland backs Hungary over frozen 'rule of law' EU funds
  5. EU to reduce size and scope of Mali military mission
  6. Band members testify about Bataclan attack
  7. German prosecutors want five years for alleged ex-Nazi guard
  8. UN urges Iran to halt execution of Swedish-Iranian academic

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic delegation visits Nordic Bridges in Canada
  2. Nordic Council of MinistersClear to proceed - green shipping corridors in the Nordic Region
  3. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic ministers agree on international climate commitments
  4. UNESDA - SOFT DRINKS EUROPEEfficient waste collection schemes, closed-loop recycling and access to recycled content are crucial to transition to a circular economy in Europe
  5. UiPathNo digital future for the EU without Intelligent Automation? Online briefing Link

Latest News

  1. Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine - the case for granting EU candidacy
  2. Watchdog calls for tougher curbs on 'problematic' revolving doors
  3. Borrell: EU arms flow to Ukraine amid 'record' Russian losses
  4. UK and EU edge closer to trade war over Northern Ireland
  5. Rescue crew face 20 years jail for saving migrants
  6. Roma refugees from Ukraine face Czech xenophobia
  7. EU not doing enough to help Ukraine, Yellen says
  8. MEPs raise ambition on EU carbon market reform

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us