Main Edition
US
FR
July 13, 2024 - 5:00pm
All eyes are currently on America and whether Joe Biden can make it through the next week. But in Europe, the fates of two presidents — Ursula von der Leyen and Emmanuel Macron — also hang in the balance.
On Thursday, the European Parliament will vote on whether to reappoint von der Leyen to a second five-year term as president of the European Commission. She needs a simple majority in the 720-seat body, but it’s a sign of her team’s nervousness that the vote has been brought forward — conveniently, before any supportive MEPs fly off early for their summer holidays. Clearly, a close result is feared.
In theory, she should be home and dry. The parliament is controlled by an alliance of the centre-right European People’s Party plus the social democrats and liberals. Thanks to populist gains, the establishment parties aren’t as dominant as they used to be, but jointly they still have 401 MEPs. Von der Leyen’s problem is that not all of them will vote for her. For some social democrats she’s too conservative; for some conservatives she’s too wet; and, as for the liberals, they’re in a state of flux.
If more than 40 of these MEPs defect, then she risks losing the vote which would end her presidency. That’s why she’s been looking for support beyond the establishment parties. For instance, there was a political flirtation with Giorgia Meloni earlier this year (which has since soured). Von der Leyen is now looking Leftwards for allies — specifically to the Green group of MEPs. However, any deal there could undermine her support on the centre-right, where opposition to what they regard as eco-zealotry is hardening.
Meanwhile in France, Macron finds himself in much the same position as von der Leyen. He too is a centrist who’s chosen to cooperate with the Left — including elements of the hard-Left — rather than the populist Right.
It was an arrangement that limited the advance of Marine Le Pen’s National Rally earlier this month. But Macron now faces a tougher challenge: working with the Left to form a stable government. The New Popular Front (NFP), a broad church of centre-left and Left-wing parties that won the highest proportion of seats in the recent elections, has called for a prime minister who will implement its policies, such as a 90% wealth tax. Macron will certainly find it tricky to play ball with those sorts of demands.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeSo let me get this straight, the New Popular Front is left wing and not far left, even though it includes communists, antisemites and wants a 90% wealth tax. Yet the National Rally is far right, even though it wants increased govt spending and to lower the age of pension eligibility.
Europe is a basket case. They’re all left wing. It’s just a matter of degree.
The NPF is a coalition that ranges from centre left to far/hard left, so it would be wrong to call the entire thing far/hard left. Though it can never last anyway.
According to Sky, it’s not a wealth tax but a tax on income above €400,000. Still very left but not as left as a 90% wealth tax, which is actually impossible to pay – how could anyone pay 90% of the value of a large property, for example?
50 shades of red, actually!
Does the headline writer understand the meaning of the phrase ‘existential threat’? It’s the sort of language favoured by the TRAs.
“The New Popular Front (NFP), a broad church of centre-left and Left-wing parties that won a majority in the recent elections,”
Correction: “ The NFP failed to win a majority in the recent elections but is the largest block of MPs in parliament”.
Article now says “The New Popular Front (NFP), a broad church of centre-left and Left-wing parties that won the highest proportion of votes in the recent elections,”
Still wrong. They got the largest proportion of seats in Parliament but still got fewer votes than the national socialist NR of Le Pen.
Agreed that gives a fuller picture but it was the absurd suggestion that the NFP had a majority that provoked my comment.
“The ability of the centre and the Left to cooperate is key to holding back the radical Right.”
Alternative : “ The ability of the centre and not particularly radical right to cooperate is the key to holding back the very radical left”.
Two stupid articles by Biden fans who are also Trump haters.
Now an article with advice to Macron and the leftists on how to defeat Le Pen.
One gets the impression that either someone really scared the editors of UnHerd, or, which is much more likely, they were never right-wingers, nor centrists, nor even left-centrists, but only slightly more sane wokists.
Your comment is spot on. I also had the same thought today and reconsidering my Unherd subscription crossed my mind . Whe I subscribed I did it because I liked the idea of getting information from all sides, however it seems that the spectrum is shrinking.
In the end, I’m getting more information and food for thought from the comments section than from the articles themselves.
I no longer read the articles much, but I like Helen Johnson and Tom McTague. It’s just much more considered stuff.
But . . . since they’re also on Apple podcasts, UnHerd is looking like the excess dance partner – once again.
You do suspect their stances are little more than performative, with an aim to maintaining visibility and looking to the next gig.
A bit like Dan Wootton but perhaps not quite so blatant.
Regarding the headline: GOOD. Maybe Europe is regaining sanity.
The NFP didn’t win the highest proportion of votes. In both the first and second round ballots, RN outpolled the NFP. The NFP did however receive more parliamentary seats.
Stop this one sided articles, do read them in the mainstream. Otherwise no sense to continue with the subscription