Follow us on social

google cta
Olaf Scholz Emmanuel Macron

Right and left populists bringing down Euro elites in 2024

Ukraine war fatigue coupled with economic woes and immigration concerns fueled a tide of revolt

Analysis | Europe
google cta
google cta

Anti-establishment parties of populist right, and occasionally of the populist left, made inroads across Europe in elections of 2024, reflecting in part the waning confidence across societies that NATO’s aims for the war in Ukraine can be realized.

While continuing in general to support Ukraine, a growing share of the public has come to accept the case for a negotiated settlement. The idea of a united Europe independently taking on the full responsibility for funding and arming Ukraine seems highly improbable.

We have seen the inexorable decline in support for established parties of Europe’s center-right and, even more acutely, of its center-left. Nevertheless, these mainstream parties have tended to be able to hold onto power by forming coalitions embracing center-right and center-left, and sometimes accommodating some of the insurgent populists’ arguments, for example on immigration. However, by jointly taking responsibility for governing, mainstream parties demonstrate their fundamental convergence on most areas of policy and risk further defections of voters frustrated with the unsatisfactory status quo.

Effect of the realignment on support for Ukraine

The elections of 2024 that seem most evidently to challenge the consensus on Ukraine’s war aims and its eventual NATO membership are France’s parliamentary elections of June 2024, the German elections in three eastern states in September, and the June 2024 European Parliament elections. All three of these contests marked breakthroughs for anti-establishment parties of the right and left. In each case, the mainstream parties have held onto power but have not contained the populists’ growing influence.

Contested elections: Georgia and Romania

In Central and Eastern European countries, candidates and parties expressing reservations about support for Ukraine are accused of benefiting from covert Russian influence operations. This applies to the two cases in Europe where election results favoring antiwar candidates or parties have been challenged — Georgia and Romania.

According to the official count, Georgia’s governing party, Georgian Dream, won 53% of the vote on elections held October 26. International observers reported numerous violations, but it is difficult to establish that these invalidate the result. The incumbent Georgian Dream’s appeal to voters featured the familiar mix of nativism, religious traditionalism, and sensitivity to the plight of provincial and rural voters (have-nots) that characterizes programs of the populist right across Europe. They also relied on a good record of economic performance. Their stance on foreign policy — avoiding open conflict with Russia — has generated mass protests by the liberal, pro-EU opposition, with political stability hanging in the balance.

A nationalist right-wing candidate, Calin Georgescu, finished first with 23% in the first round of Romania’s presidential election on November 24, but the Constitutional Court invalidated this election in early December, citing alleged Russian funding of his campaign, including wildly popular TikTok posts. The election is to be re-run early next year, and Georgescu is likely to be disqualified.

Georgescu’s “breakthrough” can also be related to the indigenous historical roots of the nationalist right in Romania, which has occasionally had relatively strong showings in elections since 1989. Georgescu’s outsider status and insurgent campaign also drew upon popular frustration with the weak economy and official corruption, particularly among religious traditionalist voters in small towns and rural areas. It is unlikely that disqualifying Georgescu will affect the root causes of support by some voters for populist-nationalism.

Anti-populist alliances of the shrinking center

Austria’s mainstream parties across the left-right spectrum are working to form a governing coalition to exclude from power the populist-nationalist Freedom Party (FPO) which finished first in September elections. Freedom Party leader Herbert Kickl campaigned on opposition to supporting Ukraine. The other major parties favor continued humanitarian and diplomatic support.

France and Germany are the principal exemplars of the “firewall” strategy of quarantining populist challengers. This has so far not curbed the growth of support for these parties. The populist right and left blocs in the French parliament are unwilling to fall in line behind a government of the weakened center in France. Germany’s elections on February 23 are likely to produce a coalition of center-right and center-left, which risks building more popular support for the populist right and left, both of which oppose continued arming of Ukraine.

Populist right in government

In several cases, the populist right has been admitted to broad governing coalitions and has not evidently destabilized the status quo. This applies to the Netherlands, where the Freedom Party (PVV) of Geert Wilders surged to win the most seats of any party in the elections of November 2023, but has not significantly affected policy within the coalition government it has joined. Bulgaria, which has had repeated inconclusive elections, has allowed the populist right into coalitions, which have proved unstable and short-lived. Sweden and Finland have also been governed by coalitions where the populist right has been included. These cases brought greater resistance to immigration but have not had any effect on steadfast support for Ukraine.

Prime Minister Georgia Meloni, whose populist right Brothers of Italy party leads Italy’s government, has won favor in Brussels and in Washington by fully supporting NATO aims in Ukraine. This is so far the sole example of a full conversion of a populist party to the geopolitical mainstream. The other two right populists who hold power in Europe — Hungary’s Orban and Slovakia’s Fico — openly oppose the mainstream consensus on Ukraine.

What lies ahead?

The principal tests in the coming year for the mainstream parties’ effort to curb, co-opt or accommodate the populist challenge will be the German elections of February, the September presidential election in Poland, and possible new parliamentary elections in France by next fall.

Slow economic growth and tight fiscal constraints obviously make for a restive and disgruntled electorate. Moreover, Europe’s turbulent external environment is not conducive to curbing the momentum of anti-establishment parties. Europe is in the crosshairs of new U.S. tariffs, which would deepen the economic slump and could challenge some EU member countries’ commitment to the union itself. Fracturing of the EU would harm Europe’s ability to mount a credible conventional deterrent to counter any renewed Russian challenge to follow the war in Ukraine.

The significance of the crises in France and Germany is hard to exaggerate. Together, these two countries account for almost 40% of the GDP of the EU as a whole, and they are the two largest net contributors to the EU budget. This hard reality limits the scope of attempts by Poland, the Nordics, and Baltics to form an alternative bloc for European leadership. However, as Poland prepares to take on the rotating presidency of the EU in January, it stands to play a prominent role in a crucial period for diplomatic efforts to end the war in Ukraine.


Top image credit: German Chancellor Olaf Scholz welcomes French President Emmanuel Macron before a meeting with U.S. President Joe Biden at the Chancellery in Berlin, Germany, October 18, 2024. REUTERS/Lisi Niesner
google cta
Analysis | Europe
As Iran strikes loom, US and UK fight over Indian Ocean base
TOP IMAGE CREDIT: An aerial view of Diego Garcia, the Chagossian Island home to one of the U.S. military's 750 worldwide bases. The UK handed sovereignty of the islands back to Mauritius, with the stipulation that the U.S. must be allowed to continue its base's operation on Diego Garcia for the next 99 years. (Kev1ar82 / Shutterstock.com).

As Iran strikes loom, US and UK fight over Indian Ocean base

QiOSK

As the U.S. surges troops to the Middle East, a battle is brewing over a strategically significant American base in the middle of the Indian Ocean.

President Donald Trump announced Wednesday that he would oppose any effort to return the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, arguing that a U.S. base on the island of Diego Garcia may be necessary to “eradicate a potential attack by a highly unstable and dangerous [Iranian] Regime.” The comment came just a day after the State Department reiterated its support for the U.K.’s decision to give up sovereignty over the islands while maintaining a 99-year lease for the base.

keep readingShow less
Bill White Belgium
Top photo credit: US ambassador to Belgium Bill White talks to the press after a meeting at the offices of the Foreign Affairs department of the Federal Government in Brussels, Tuesday 17 February 2026. BELGA PHOTO MARIUS BURGELMAN

US diplomat accuses Belgian officials of anti-semitism on X

QiOSK

A number of Donald Trump's ambassadors have very questionable experience for the jobs they are doing. That is not unusual — presidents throughout history have given out posts as favors for fundraising or other political or personal supports. The problem with some of these diplomats is they seem to forget they actually have a job to do — and it's not ingratiating the boss by insulting his host country because they think that is what the boss wants to hear.

Case in point: Bill White, who worked for and ran a museum for the USS Intrepid before quitting abruptly amid a pay-for-pay state pension scandal for which he eventually paid a $1 million settlement in 2010. He used to raise money for Democrats. Then he shifted to raising money for Trump in 2016 and was installed as Trump's ambassador to Belgium four months ago. It's not going so well.

keep readingShow less
New US cluster bombs pose ‘severe, foreseeable dangers’
Top image credit: A US soldier carries a 155mm cluster munition

New US cluster bombs pose ‘severe, foreseeable dangers’

Military Industrial Complex

A coalition of human rights organizations, anti-war groups, and Christian churches are urging the U.S. to cancel its $210 million purchase of next-generation cluster munitions from an Israeli state-owned company, citing the “severe, foreseeable dangers” these weapons pose to civilians.

In an open letter shared exclusively with RS, the organizations write that cluster munitions “disperse submunitions across broad areas, making it exceedingly difficult to confine their impact to lawful military targets.” By expanding its cluster munitions stockpiles, the U.S. is putting itself “dramatically out of step with civilian protection practices,” the groups argue.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.