Polls show that Europe is facing a potential shift to the right in elections set for June 6-9, when millions of EU citizens will vote to elect new members of the European Parliament, a body crucial for shaping the bloc’s policies. With far-right parties likely to win greater influence, the vote could significantly affect political dynamics within the EU and its policies abroad.
As the world’s second-largest democratic vote after India, the European elections have the power to reshape the political landscape across the continent and beyond. From June 6-9, approximately 400 million EU citizens will head to the polls to elect new members of the European Parliament (MEPs).
The 720 legislators in the new parliament will have the power to shape policies on climate, migration, industry, defence and security. But they will also vote on what should be prioritised in the EU budget, which can be essential to policies like providing aid for Ukraine.
Once elected, MEPs will join supranational parliamentary “groups” according to ideology (greens, socialists, centre-right, far-right, etc.). The two largest parliamentary groups are usually the centre-right European People’s Party (EPP) and the centre-left Socialists and Democrats (S&D). But right-wing parties have been making significant inroads and are expected to do well in 2024, with the far-right Identity and Democracy party possibly becoming the third-largest group in the European Parliament.
A coalition of centre-right Christian democrats, conservatives and right-wing MEPs could thus be on track to hold a majority for the first time.
Read moreEU parliament: Four things to know about the European elections
-
Foreign policy
The influence that the European Parliament has on foreign policy is overshadowed by the European Council, which is made up of leaders from the 27 members states and has the final say on foreign policy. It is up to member states to decide jointly on sending munitions to Ukraine or to agree on imposing EU sanctions against Russia, for example.
“MEPs can vote on resolutions and political groups can put out calls to try and push something in a certain direction, but as such they do not have much competence on foreign policy,” says Sebastien Maillard, associate fellow of the Europe programme at international affairs think-tank Chatham House.
That does not mean the European Parliament is powerless on foreign policy, however. And as one arm of the EU’s budgetary authority, it has a say on EU spending priorities.
If the assembly sees a large shift to the right after the elections in June, calls for the EU to supply military assistance to Ukraine or humanitarian aid to Gaza could dwindle.
Political groups setting the agenda in the next European Parliament are likely to maintain their current stance on Ukraine. Since Russia launched its full-scale invasion in February 2022, Western states have backed military, financial and strategic aid for Kyiv.
But with a growing number of right-wing MEPs likely to join the assembly this year, Europe's staunchly pro-Ukrainian stance may begin to falter, given that many on the right are sympathetic to Russia.
National parties may also weaken their backing for Ukraine as a response to the shift in voter attitudes in the European elections; if voters opt for more pro-Russian MEPs, European leaders may be less staunch on the decision to back Ukraine.
Broader shifts to the right across Europe could have even greater impact. “There will be national elections in Belgium on June 9th. There are upcoming elections in Austria. And there is a new government in the Netherlands," Maillard notes.
"In those three examples, the far-right is expected to be either at the head of, or involved with, the governments.”
-
Environmental policy
The direction of internal EU policy is largely shaped by the most powerful political groups, who generally make their demands known immediately following European elections. In 2019, for example, a Green Deal policy package was launched to tackle climate change and achieve EU-wide carbon neutrality by 2050. But with polls suggesting the new centre of gravity in the assembly will move away from the greens and towards more hard-right views, policy on issues like the environment are at risk of changing.
In line with the ambitious goal of reaching carbon neutrality, EU lawmakers last year agreed to phase out sales of fossil fuel-powered vehicles by 2035. Drivers would still be able to buy petrol and diesel cars second-hand, but carmakers could not introduce new polluting models into the market after the cut-off date in just over 10 years.
MEPs are going to reconfirm the 2035 ban in a vote the year after next, says Maillard. “If the greens lose out and the European Conservatives and Reformists group (ECR) make gains, as is predicted, conservatives will probably try to delay or postpone that cut-off date.”
The same goes for a shift to organic agriculture, Maillard says. After a recent EU-wide wave of farmers' protests put agriculture high on the political agenda, the new assembly will have the gargantuan task of finding a balance between policy reforms that work for farmers and minimising the damage agriculture could have on the environment.
Many of the EU votes on protecting the environment and combating climate change have been won by small margins. A landmark bill aimed at restoring damaged ecosystems across the continent was finally approved in February this year after being put in jeopardy by the conservative European People’s Party. The text was passed thanks to approval by 329 MEPs to the 275 voted who against; it will come into force once EU states formally adopt the measure.
“[If conservatives win], the whole de-carbonisation ... of our economies would be slowed down,” Maillard warns. “That is where MEPs have lots of power.”
-
Migration and asylum policies
Maillard predicts that other issues – like the respect of the rule of law, migration and EU integration – are also likely to be contentious topics with a shift to the right in parliament.
If the current centre-left majorities are overtaken by a new populist-right coalition, EU migration and asylum policies are likely to see an overhaul. This includes a near-definite reform of the asylum bill approved on May 14 that lays out rules for the 27 member states on how to handle unauthorised arrivals.
The new bill will enter force in 2026 and is already more restrictive than previous regulations, which have not been updated for about two decades. Its aim is to combat illegal migration and speed up the deportation process by issuing an automatic order to leave the territory once an asylum request is refused.
But almost as soon as the bill was adopted, a group of 15 member states led by Denmark sent a letter to the European Commission calling for even tighter regulations, including outsourcing migration and asylum screenings.
Read moreEU signs off on landmark migration and asylum policy reforms
“For many member states, Europe has not gone far enough on the security front. Migration will remain a key challenge for the next Parliament, with a clear divide between the left and right,” Ségolène Barbou des Places, director of the EU research network Euro-Lab, told FRANCE 24 in late May.
“There is one obsession: to do everything possible to prevent migrants from arriving on European soil,” she said.
The ECR, the far-right Identity and Democracy party, and some members of the EPP are also decidedly Eurosceptic and are likely to seek more economic freedom and less regulation. Such groups are not likely to back proposals from the European Commission for more common rules and integration. National governments like Hungary, Italy, Slovakia and Sweden are already calling for less interference from the EU in their national policies.
“Some believe in cooperation between European states, but do not favour integration,” Maillard says.
-
Choosing a new European Commission president
The outcome of the European elections will affect who becomes the next president of the European Commission, the EU’s executive arm in charge of proposing new legislation, considered the most powerful position at the EU level.
While it is the European Council that proposes a candidate for commission president, it is obliged to take “into account” parliamentary election results. And the candidate must then be approved by a majority vote at the European Parliament.
European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen, who is seeking a second term, comes from the largest group in the European Parliament, the European People's Party.
“For now, the EPP are leading in the polls and Ursula von der Leyen is part of that group. She is still the main contender,” says Maillard.
“Even if the two most right-wing groups (the ECR and Identity and Democracy) score well – and even if they end up merging, which looks almost impossible – they would still not have more seats than the EPP,” he explains.
However, in order for her to win a third term she will have to seek support beyond this – and her victory is not assured. A European diplomat told French daily Le Monde last week that she is missing “around fifty votes” – so right-wing groups winning a majority could still choose a Eurosceptic, anti-immigration or pro-Russian candidate to be the next European Commission president.
That is why von der Leyen has been courting right-wing EU leaders. While she has ruled out a pact with the most extreme-right Identity and Democracy group, she was more equivocal when it came to working with the far-right ECR. In April, she told a debate audience that a collaboration with ECR depends very much on what the composition of the new Parliament is, “and who is in what group”.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz warned von der Leyen last week not to seek support from far-right parties, a warning echoed by socialists, greens and liberals in the European Parliament.
“When the next European Commission is formed, it must not rest on the support of a parliamentary majority that also needs the support of right-wing extremists,” Scholz said after talks with his Portuguese counterpart Luis Montenegro in Berlin on May 24.
“I am very saddened by the ambiguity of some of the political statements that we have heard recently. But I am clear about this, and it will only be possible to establish a presidency of the European Commission that rests on the support of the traditional parties,” Scholz said.
“Anything else would be a mistake for the future of Europe,” he added.
