Call it the real nuclear option for bringing Viktor Orbán's Hungary to heel — but also call it a risky thought experiment. Tom Theuns of Leiden University wants to empower the EU to sever ties with a rogue member state like Hungary, where Orbán has fashioned an autocracy and set about cultivating the EU's strategic rivals. Introducing an expulsion threat could push EU autocrats like Orbán to show more respect for rule of law and democracy, says Tom, while the current lack of any such mechanism has instead emboldened them. For now, Tom's ideas still are legally theoretical, not to mention politically delicate. In his new book, Protecting Democracy in Europe, Tom envisages democratic states each leaving the EU and then immediately re-founding the Union — an EU 2.0 — minus any autocratic states. More than two dozen countries would need to coordinate national consents in advance, using the same EU treaty article that Britain used in Brexit. But if all doesn't go to plan — think obdurate legislators, sudden calls for referendums, or a even French demand for more subsidies — the exercise could usher in the kind of political warfare that sinks the EU for good. Tom's goal is, above all, to end what he calls fatalistic and defeatist thinking — that the EU must remain stuck in perpetuity with Orbán's brand of kleptocratic illiberalism. "Supranational union with an autocratic state is a choice," insists Tom. "EU member states can also choose to disengage." In this episode Tom also reflects on what happened a quarter-century ago, when European authorities failed to block Austria's far-right Freedom Party (FPÖ) from government, to elucidate a pattern of insufficient EU responses in the Hungarian context. 

Support the show

Musk, Zuckerberg and Vance have stomped into the EU's canteen, overturned the tables, smashed the glasses, and drawn their pistols. They are scanning a crowd of bewildered Eurocrats and asking menacingly: who really wants a fight over what belongs online? It wasn't meant to be this way. Three years ago the EU agreed a landmark law, the Digital Services Act, or DSA. Hopes were high that hate speech, content that harms minors — as well as fake news and weaponised social media — could be reined in. The biggest platforms would be fined up to 6 percent of global annual turnover if they failed to deal with issues like election interference that amount to a systemic risk. Since then the transatlantic far right has stepped up a campaign to discredit the EU's rules, and often in fanatical terms. Under this new form of McCarthyism, any impediment to online expression is branded as a form of censorship. That is patently absurd. Bans on speech linked to the Nazi period have been in place in parts of Europe for decades. But concerns are growing that the European Commission's ongoing cases against X and Meta under the DSA could become bargaining chips or even get traded away to ease standoffs with the Trump administration. Already the Commission is reportedly lowballing digital markets fines against Silicon Valley giants and talking about simplifying its range of digital regulations — including the DSA. That looks like complying in advance with US intimidation. On the other hand, the Commission could use the Trump administration's bullying tactics to invoke another law — the so-called Anti-Coercion Instrument. That could restrict aspects of Musk's businesses as well as the services of some US digital companies — and it would amount to a more muscular response. In this episode: two prominent MEPs urge the European Commission to hold firm on enforcement of the DSA after their mission to Washington, where they met MAGA hardliners like Congressman Jim Jordan and where they witnessed the kind shocking disdain for Europe echoed most recently in Signal messages shared with The Atlantic. "Everything we are doing in EU is seen as an attempt to be anti-American," says Christel Schaldemose, the Danish social democrat who is a vice president of the European Parliament and an architect of DSA. "That was very, very scary." Christel also is a coordinator on plans to combat foreign influence with a so-called Democracy Shield, which she suggested could allow for suspension of social media in the run up to elections. Sandro Gozi, the Italian liberal who is a former member of French and Italian governments, says the EU must show it has the nerve to impose its laws in the face of U.S. coercion. Sandro says lawmakers would never agree to sacrifice the DSA, which he characterises as "non-negotiable," in exchange for lower tariffs. Sandro also excoriates Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and her party for retreating from previous enthusiasm for Ukraine — and for the DSA.

Support the show

Following the horrors of Nazism, the post-war far right needed to proceed strategically, and patiently, if it was ever to stage a comeback. Some far-right actors in Europe and in particular the French Nouvelle Droite took the Italian political philosopher Antonio Gramsci as their guide. Gramsci's teachings — culture first, politics later — were eventually absorbed by the US radical right. And in recent weeks US Vice President JD Vance and Trump adviser Elon Musk have brought such tactics back to Europe. It's a great irony of political thought that​ the most assiduous students of Gramsci — a Marxist jailed by Mussolini in 1920s and 1930s — would come to include so many on the far right. The history of how Gramscian thinking has flowed back and forth across the Atlantic is of particular interest to Philipp Adorf at the University of Bonn. Philipp is the author of two books on the radicalisation of the US Republican Party and he's a leading analyst of the rise of the far right Alternative for Germany, the AfD. Philipp also has closely analysed how groups including a "Vorfeld" or vanguard, which supports the AfD, are drawing on Gramscian principles to prepare Germany for a far-right future. Such tactics are helping to make what was once unthinkable for Germans — such as mass deportations and "remigration" of naturalised citizens — something that many of them now are prepared to vote for. 

Support the show

There are many more politicians and policymakers from the far right on our TVs, in our social media feeds, and in our legislatures. They have a new swagger and an even more conspicuous disdain for their adversaries. "They act like they own the place," observes Raquel García Hermida-van der Valle, a liberal member of the European Parliament for the Dutch D66 party. Two far-right groups, the Patriots and Sovereigntists, still face a so-called cordon sanitaire. But another, the European Conservatives and Reformists, has been welcomed into a right-wing mainstream that includes the party of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. And, in reality, all three far-right groups have much in common, from xenophobia, to distrust of state institutions, and a fixation on free speech. In this episode: Raquel talks about her recent showdowns with increasingly combative far-right lawmakers including a race-baiting Bulgarian and a conspiracy theorist from Hungary. Raquel speculates that some far-right MEPs have "gone down the rabbit hole" and actually believe the EU is replacing white Christians with Muslims and people of colour. Others, says Raquel, are probably following Steve Bannon's notorious battle plan, "to flood the zone with shit," so as to disorient the media and voters. Raquel also talks about how she's looking to better coordinate with other MEPs to counter a European far right that appears to be growing more openly radical as it grows in size and influence. Also in this episode, snapshots of MEPs from the three far-right blocs: Stephen Nikola Bartulica, Zsuzsanna Borvendég, Jorge Buxadé Villalba, Ivan David, Geadis Geadi, Sarah Knafo, Rada Laykova and Jaak Madison.

Support the show

Big Tech bosses. Their immensely profitable corporations. And the fabulously wealthy venture capitalists who fund them. They are gaining power over the destinies of nations. Yet they also contribute to injustice and inequality, even in areas like Silicon Valley that are typically celebrated for generating wealth and innovation. The Valley's crumbling infrastructure and its stark disparities form part of The Tech Coup, a new book by Marietje Schaake, a former member of the European Parliament for the liberal Dutch D66 party. Since leaving the Parliament in 2019, Marietje has spent considerable time at the Cyber Policy Center and the Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence at Stanford University in the heart of Silicon Valley. Her book is packed with concrete and compelling examples of how the tech industry, in its quest for power and profit, undermines democracy, civil liberties, the environment, and even national security. But the book is not a counsel of despair. Marietje lays out proposals such as revamping public procurement, banning rogue cryptocurrencies, and trialling Artificial Intelligence models before letting them loose on the public. To be sure, the new transatlantic era complicates the challenges posed by the Tech Coup. Donald Trump and Vice President-Elect JD Vance ran campaigns funded by tech magnates who will want to leverage US power to resist unfavourable regulations, including those from the EU. But Marietje says there's still time to develop alternative technology models that uphold liberal democratic values and that avoid capitulating to Silicon Valley — and to its mythologisers. 

Marietje Schaake serves as one of four chairs leading the development of the first Code of Practice for the European Union's A.I. Act and is a senior fellow at the Centre for Future Generations, which partnered with EU Scream in producing this episode. 

Support the show

Close your eyes. Imagine a young person you know and care about. Picture them at age 90. And then think about the kind of world you want to leave them. Is it ridden by conflict and chaos? Or is it peaceful and habitable? Such thought experiments can lead us to change behaviour and priorities. But they also have wider application to government and policymaking, says social philosopher Roman Krznaric who wrote The Good Ancestor and is Senior Research Fellow at Oxford University’s Centre for Eudaimonia and Human Flourishing. Roman's thinking has become part of a push to get governments and leaders to make better policy choices by taking a far longer perspective. That push seems to be bearing fruit. President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen may create a portfolio for intergenerational fairness for her next five-year term, and UN Secretary-General António Guterres seems set to appoint a Special Envoy for Future Generations at a summit this month in New York. But how a focus on future generations works in practice raises thorny questions, among them: how many generations of descendants should we plan for, and over what time spans? And how can the focus on future generations be kept separate from controversial ideas like Longtermism and Effective Altruism that are associated with jailed cryptocurrency mogul Sam Bankman-Fried? Also in this episode: Roman introduces his new book History for Tomorrow in which he explores the role of so-called radical flank movements, like Extinction Rebellion. "It's too late to leave the problems of our time to simmer on the low flame of gradualism," he says. "You need the disruptive movements to accelerate things." 

Music this episode by border.

Listen to part one of this series with Elizabeth Dirth of the ZOE Institute. 

Support the show

There's a lot of talk right now about future generations. Ursula von der Leyen of the European Commission says she'll create a portfolio with responsibilities for intergenerational fairness. A Summit of the Future to be held in September at the United Nations also helps explain the buzz. In this, the first of two episodes, a conversation with Elizabeth Dirth, member of a real-life network for the future described in Kim Stanley Robinson's bestselling novel The Ministry for the Future. In the book the Ministry helps to push nations beyond a series of dystopian events to bring climate change under control. Elizabeth says it's time to move that approach to the real world, and to give future generations a voice in reshaping the economy, curbing disease outbreaks, and sustaining action on climate change. The ZOE Institute, a German economics think tank where Elizabeth is managing director, is among the organisations pushing the UN Secretary General to appoint a Special Envoy for Future Generations, a role Elizabeth describes as "a potential minister for the future at the UN level." Elizabeth says her ideas are markedly different from that of tech titans like Elon Musk who have a penchant for the future. For Musk and his acolytes, protecting future generations means putting resources into highly speculative technologies that could be highly profitable. They also seem to be betting on colonising Mars — ahead of preserving life on Earth. Listen out for Part Two of this series: a conversation with author and philosopher Roman Krznaric on how far into the future we should plan for, and on whether controversial concepts like Longtermism and Effective altruism have a role to play. Music this episode by Maarten Lichtert. 

Support the show

Border violence. Hostage diplomacy. Vaccine purchases. Just some of the areas where opaqueness in EU decision-making can erode public trust and ultimately democracy. These also are areas where accountability journalism like freedom of information requests can help uncover undue influence by lobbies and foreign powers as well as abuses by security services. One of the highest profile cases of accountability journalism in Europe to date is the decision by The New York Times to sue the European Commission for access to phone messages — messages in which the Commission's president, Ursula von der Leyen, and the chief executive of Pfizer, Albert Bourla, reportedly negotiated vaccine purchases during the Covid-19 pandemic. Matina Stevis, the outgoing Brussels bureau chief for the Times, who is part of that lawsuit, says such scrutiny would be comparatively banal in jurisdictions like the US where news media and government regularly wrangle in court over the line between an executive's ability to govern and the public's right to know. But in the EU such scrutiny still can arouse accusations of euroscepticism and even sympathies with Brexit. Matina says the EU's accountability muscles need "deepening and flexing and exercising" but she also suggests reporters working EU corridors may need to do more to avoid "falling into the traps of access journalism" and "going, going softly so that people keep answering their phones when you call." Also in this episode, the pros and cons of reporting on the case of Johan Floderus, the EU official recently released from captivity in Iran. And a hard and harrowing look at the evidence of deadly actions by the Greek coastguard toward migrants on the Mediterranean Sea — and at the half-hearted attempts by Brussels to rein in such abuses amid tectonic shifts in refugee law and policy. These include calls for the so-called externalization of migration where refugees and asylum seekers must have their applications to enter the EU assessed offshore in countries like Albania or even Rwanda. Such shifts also entail discussions on reforming and even abandoning the 1951 Refugee Convention that was a key plank of postwar humanitarianism.

Support the show

How did politics long deemed unacceptable go mainstream so quickly? Pundits have blamed disinformation, social media and growing distrust of elites. But these factors don't adequately explain how illiberalism and identitarian ideologies have spread so rapidly even to countries thought to be immune. It's a puzzle Portuguese political scientist Vicente Valentim set out to solve. In this episode Vicente discusses his findings against the backdrop of European Parliament elections that are expected to deliver more seats than ever for radical right lawmakers. Vicente's research demonstrates that a larger proportion of the population than previously assumed already had views at odds with liberal democracy. Initially these individuals kept these views latent, or private, falsifying their preferences for fear of social disapproval like losing a job. But a trigger event for example an influx of migrants emboldened some of these individuals to break with social norms and to air their views more publicly. Political entrepreneurs then spotted an opportunity to win elections by amplifying these views, and these first successes at the ballot box prompted even more skilled and savvy politicians also to promote a radical right agenda. As the shame and stigma at expressing pre-existing radical right views fell away there was a rapid normalisation of the radical right. Vicente also discusses the phenomenon of feminationalism in light of the rise of Giorgia Meloni of Italy and Marine Le Pen of France. These leaders cultivate an "aura of ambiguity" to gain mainstream acceptance and to continue to connect with their more extreme bases. Vicente says trying to keep radical right preferences latent may seem appealing but masks the dangers to groups like vulnerable minorities. Better to have long-term strategies at the level of civics and education and to instil liberal democratic values early. Vicente's forthcoming book The Normalisation of the Radical Right has been lauded by leading political scientists like Daniel Ziblatt of Harvard and Catherine E. de Vries of Bocconi who calls it "an instant classic for anyone interested in the future of our democracies.” 

Support the show

Ireland and Spain are to grant formal recognition to a Palestine state as soon as this month. The move puts Dublin and Madrid at odds with most other EU states and with the United States. Sweden is the only other state to have recognised Palestine during its membership of the EU, and that was a decade ago. In this episode, Tony Connelly, the Europe editor for the Irish public broadcaster RTE, describes the historical and political backdrop to Ireland's decision. Reasons include pressure from the left-wing party Sinn Féin, the former political wing of the Irish Republican Army that had operational ties with the Palestine Liberation Organisation. Recognition is a way to give moral support to Palestinians particularly in Gaza where the Israeli military has killed around 35,000 people in response to the attack by Hamas terrorists on Oct. 7 that killed around 1,200. Recognition also marks a significant break with the long-established view that Palestinian statehood only should come after a two-state agreement with Israel. But who Dublin would recognise as the representatives of a Palestinian state remains an open question, and there's little expectation of any immediate impact on the Gaza conflict. The move also adds to bad blood between Dublin and Tel Aviv that's been aggravated by recent spats involving former prime minister Leo Varadkar and the Eurovision performer Bambie Thug. While a shared struggle for independence helps explain Irish readiness to lend Palestinians support, how modern Irish history maps onto Palestine is far from straightforward. During the 1920s some 700 Irish police were deployed to British-administered Mandatory Palestine to support a mostly British police force with a reputation for brutality, the Black and Tans. And in the 1940s Jewish militants fighting the British in Palestine actually identified with the IRA and its leaders like Michael Collins. An ambiguous Irish relationship with Zionism can be seen in novelist James Joyce's masterwork Ulysses. Joyce's protagonist Leopold Bloom proclaims unity among "all, jew, moslem and gentile" even as he must contend with virulent antisemitism in Dublin. Read Tony's recent reporting from the West Bank and watch the trailer for his TV documentary about his grandfather.

Support the show

Abortion is a deal breaker for some voters. That's the case in the US where Joe Biden is making Donald Trump pay a political price for his role in overturning Roe vs. Wade. That's also been the case in Poland where a wellspring of pro-choice sentiment helped remove the ultraconservative Law and Justice party last year. So could that same dynamic have an impact on voter choice across Europe? Yes, says Nika Kovač, the coordinator of the My Voice, My Choice campaign, which recently launched a petition for a million signatures using a European Citizens Initiative. My Voice, My Choice proposes a new EU fund to backstop abortion rights in Europe no matter what EU member state they live in. Women still could afford to go to other EU states offering the procedure — assuming crossing EU state lines isn't called into question. But for Nika and team members like Kristina Krajnc and Maria Mayrhofer, their campaign is not just a health or feminist matter. It's also about turning the spotlight on abortion rights to diminish the electability of the hard-right and ultraconservative theocrats in the European elections next month, in legislative elections in Austria this fall, and in other upcoming contests.

Support the show

What's the best approach to fighting the hard right? Suppressing toxic views? Or contesting them publicly? The answer lies in the middle of course — an open society must retain the means to reject intolerance and hate. But what's clear from recent events in Brussels is that hasty and ham-fisted bans on the hard right can amplify rather than diminish their message. In this episode the Charlemagne columnist at The Economist Stanley Pignal describes how Brussels mayors sought to shutout a conference organised by the National Conservativism movement. Those efforts backfired spectacularly. Not only did the hard-right's show go on (albeit at a down-at-heel dancehall and events venue) but the National Conservatives garnered global media attention. The likes of Nigel Farage, Viktor Orbán and Éric Zemmour lined up to claim they were victims of cancel culture. But the deleterious effects of their policies on Ukraine's war effort, women's health, the LGBTQI community and racialised communities got far less attention. Read Stanley's Charlemagne column about how the NatCon conference morphed into a crisis for liberalism. 

Support the show

Some people love Eurovision. Others don't get it. But beyond the camp and kitsch of the annual song contest there's much to observe about the politics of Europe and the wider region. In this episode, author and broadcaster Dave Keating starts with discord between Sweden and France over language. The sourest notes were struck in the mid-1970s after the Swedish group ABBA won with a song in English alluding to the historic French defeat at Waterloo. The French then stepped up their campaign against contestants using lyrics other than in their national languages. The so-called ban on English was only lifted in 1999 just as Sweden was once again emerging as a pop music powerhouse and as Eastern and Central Europe states were emerging from behind the Iron Curtain. They too were keen to sing in English. Since the turn of the century Eurovision has been buffeted by tensions between Russia and countries like Georgia and Ukraine that have used their performances to denounce Moscow. The dissonance has sorely tested the European Broadcasting Union, the state and public media alliance covering 56 countries behind Eurovision. Russia has traditionally been a major TV market for the contest and the Union only excluded Russian participation in 2022, after the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. In the build-up to this year's contest in Malmö, Sweden, on May 11, the focus has been on Israel's entrant Eden Golan amid the ongoing bloodletting in Gaza. Despite an outcry from artists and performers against the participation of Israel — and despite accusations of double standards now that Russia has been excluded — Golan looks set to perform. Israeli visitors to Malmö have been advised to keep a low profile while Swedish authorities have said they're well prepared for protests, including inside the contest arena. Read Dave's latest Substack about Eurovision.

Support the show

Opposition to French-Malian singer Aya Nakamura performing at the Paris Olympics is whipped up by the "fachosphère" in France. The former head of the EU Border and Coast Guard joins the far-right and accuses former colleagues of a "project" to encourage migration. Those are just two recent examples of the kinds of prejudice and conspiracy theory that Julie Pascoet confronts at the European Network Against Racism, ENAR. In this episode Julie, who is based in Brussels, talks about poor representation of racialised groups at the only directly elected EU institution, the European Parliament. A recent study commissioned by ENAR shows that the proportion of racialised lawmakers stands at just 3.3 percent since the departure of British members. That compares to an estimated proportion of racialised people in Europe of around 10 percent, says Tina Magazzini of Integrim Lab, which conducted the study. Tina now expects the percentage at the parliament to sink even lower following EU elections in June. Also in this episode: European Commissioner for Home Affairs Ylva Johansson answers questions about the infiltration of law enforcement by extremist forces, gang violence in Sweden, and police brutality in France — and she encourages much greater diversity in policing. "What we also see is a very male, white police force” but “it’s important that the police also reflect the whole society." 

Support the show

Donald Trump wanted to buy it; Mette Frederiksen said it wasn't for sale. Greenland and its ownership is for Greenlanders to decide, the Danish prime minister told President Trump five years ago. In this episode Karin Axelsson, EU correspondent for the respected Danish daily Politiken, reflects on why the world's biggest island, which gained autonomy from Denmark 45 years ago and then withdrew from the European Union, is back in the headlines. Reasons include the visit by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to the Greenlandic capital Nuuk to inaugurate an EU office. High on her agenda: accessing the island's abundant deposits of critical metals and minerals for industries of the future. Karin also discusses growing unease over the threat posed by Russia. Jitters in Denmark were exacerbated by French President Emmanuel Macron's comments about putting European boots on the ground in Ukraine — and by Prime Minister Frederiksen's comments evoking World War Three. On the topics of migration and asylum, Karin explains how Prime Minister Frederiksen's plan to outsource controls to Rwanda went beyond what was envisaged by similarly hawkish leaders in Britain. That Danish plan is now stalled, says Karin, but it would go as far as blocking people granted asylum from choosing to come to Denmark. Such Rwanda-style plans were previously seen as too extreme by EU policymakers. But that may be changing. An election manifesto put forward by von der Leyen's center-right European political family would outsource such controls to non-EU countries while capping the numbers of people granted asylum eligible to come to the EU.  

Support the show

Frontex, the EU border and coast guard, is the bloc's best funded agency costing upwards of a billion euros a year. There are plans for a standing corps of 10,000 uniformed personnel this decade. But something is badly amiss. Migrants keep drowning in large numbers under Frontex's watch. That includes what is thought to be the worst disaster of its kind when the fishing vessel Adriana capsized in June last year in Greek waters with some 750 people aboard. An estimated 600 people perished in that catastrophe. In response, the European Ombudsman, Emily O'Reilly, looked under the hood at Frontex and at its relations with national coast guards. She found an institution that calls itself a border and coast guard but that lacks the power to carry out some of the basic duties that come with such an important job. Frontex must check with national authorities like the Hellenic Coast Guard before rescues and even before conducting additional surveillance. As for issuing emergency Mayday alerts — something Frontex can do — the agency still has no set protocol. You might say that weaker-than-advertised EU institutions are a reality of a European project where member states are reluctant to cede sovereignty. But in the case of Frontex the results are so lethal and inhumane that EU claims to uphold fundamental rights are undermined on a daily basis. In this episode Emily describes her inquiry into the Adriana and lays out her recommendations for fixing some of what ails Frontex. Emily also discusses the move by France to enshrine abortion rights in the constitution. She does so from the perspective of a former journalist who wrote about reproductive rights in Ireland in the 1980s and 90s, including in her book Masterminds of the Right. 

Support the show

The world is growing more violent. Worst affected countries include Myanmar, Syria and Mexico as well as those experiencing more obvious crises like Gaza and Ukraine. That's according to the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project or ACLED. But there's also growing concern about more developed countries with longer established democratic traditions like the United States. In this episode ACLED chief of external affairs Hugh Pope talks about how data can give a uniquely accurate and new perspective on unfolding events and help anticipate where conflicts will worsen and where peace building efforts should be targeted. "One of the reasons that people miss what they think are unexpected ‘black swans’ is they weren't watching the data," says Hugh, who notes that current ACLED early warning data show conflict in countries including Lebanon and Sudan at alarming levels. Among other recent findings: the upsurge in conflict in West Bank Palestinian territories last summer that may have presaged the attack by Hamas in October; and how peaceful Black Lives Matters protests were in the United States in 2000 relative to the gatherings involving armed militias. Among European findings: and the very high number of protests by German farmers in January compared to neighbouring countries like France. That suggests the potential for German farmers to mobilise again — especially if cost-of-living issues continue to bite and the far-right Alternative for Germany takes advantage of the movement. Hugh also recalls his warnings against the rush to war in Iraq in the early 2000s when he was a correspondent for The Wall Street Journal — and when he discovered how an astrologer's guidance could prove more compelling than his own reporting. There is a strong case, says Hugh, for promoting "data for a more peaceful world."

Support the show

Markus Becker of Der Spiegel describes a developing situation in Germany where the popularity of the far-right AfD party has surged over the past year. Revelations that members of the AfD discussed deportations of non-assimilated people and of those with non-German backgrounds has prompted a huge backlash including mass demonstrations. The AfD has created further headaches for itself by calling for a so-called Dexit, or an exit from the European Union. Markus says that's likely to turn off large swathes of voters in a country where industry and exports underpin prosperity. Markus also discusses his powerful editorial laying out how to fortify Germany's constitution in the event that the AfD acts to dismantle democracy in future. In our news review we assess Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán's threat to veto EU aid for Ukraine a second time. Orbán quickly dropped that idea after finding himself effectively isolated in the European Council facing threats serious enough to impact his grip on power. But Orbán was active on other fronts in Brussels. He met with Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and reportedly deepened his Fidesz party's ties with her Brothers of Italy. Orbán also filmed himself among ranks of tractors showing support for a large and unruly protest by farmers. Shortly afterwards the farmers tore down a 19th century statue in a square opposite the European Parliament. The monument, to a steel mechanic, was left cracked and partly melted by fires. Amid the disorder Europe's leaders were quick to offer further concessions — just the latest sign of the grossly disproportionate power farmers exercise in Europe.

Support the show

Terry Reintke unhesitatingly describes some EU lawmakers with anti-European and far-right views as fascists. Her directness stands in sharp contrast to bland circumlocutions more common to Brussels. Now Terry, a German who co-heads the Greens in the European Parliament, wants the chamber to launch an inquiry into whether its extreme right Identity and Democracy Group, or ID Group, adheres to European values. That inquiry, she says, should run in parallel to efforts in Germany to determine whether to ban one of the ID Group's main members, the Alternative for Germany or AfD. Terry made her proposal on Thursday, on the same day Marine Le Pen sought to put some distance between her far-right Rassemblement National and the ID Group. Terry's proposal and Le Pen's jitters come against the backdrop of mass demonstrations in Germany against the AfD. The demonstrations were prompted by a report that AfD members discussed deportations of non-assimilated people and of those with non-German backgrounds in what amounted to a disturbing echo of Nazi-era practices. The EU-level inquiry proposed by Terry would be based on Article 2 of the EU treaty. Any findings leading to restrictions or a ban on the ID Group would need to stand up in court, says Terry, who is widely expected to be a lead candidate in upcoming European elections. Also in this conversation: Terry discusses the basis of her antifascism; her vulnerability as a highly visible lesbian politician; how to manage conflicting priorities between Berlin and Brussels; and the divide with the US Green party over Ukraine.

Support the show

The prospect of a wider conflict with Russia under a scenario where Donald Trump is back in the White House has spooked Europe. Thierry Breton, a European commissioner, is among those sounding the alarm. This month Breton made headlines by recalling how Trump said NATO was dead and the United States would never come to Europe's rescue. The journalist talking to Breton when he made those remarks is Teri Schultz. Teri has focused on European security for three decades, and her reports for National Public Radio and Deutsche Welle are often the first and last word on NATO and defence. In this episode, Teri discusses her exchange with Breton as well as key moments when Trump shook NATO to its core. Teri also reviews the announcement that NATO will hold its largest military exercise for decades. And she assesses her own readiness to follow NATO Military Committee chief Rob Bauer's advice to stock up on a flashlight, a radio, batteries, and water. Such items, says Bauer, are needed to survive the first 36 hours of a conflict of the kind that Swedish officials have been warning citizens about. "It's not a given that we are in peace," Bauer told a news conference. In addition: why Dutch caretaker Prime Minister Mark Rutte is likely to beat Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas in the race to succeed Jens Stoltenberg as the next NATO secretary general. 

Support the show

Mario Draghi is the obvious candidate to be the next president of the European Council. The job involves leading the meetings of EU heads of state and government. And it's wide open since incumbent Charles Michel announced he's quitting. But despite Draghi's notable achievements, including saving the euro and crafting game-changing policies on vaccines and sanctions, "Super Mario" seems unlikely to make the final cut. That's down to the reluctance of EU national leaders to be overshadowed by someone like Draghi who could truly command the world stage, says journalist David Carretta. David has worked with the Italian newspaper Il Foglio and Italian station Radio Radicale for more than two decades, and he's just launched an excellent morning newsletter with colleague Christian Spillman. In this episode, David discusses other runners and riders for the European Council job. He also talks about why the political centre is likely to hold, in one form or other, even if far-right parties make strong gains in the European Parliament elections in June. And then there's the story behind the Acca Laurentia rally in Rome on January 7, the failure of Italy to deal with its past, and how both help to explain the ascent of Giorgia Meloni and her neofascist Brothers of Italy party. Meloni, warns David, could easily revert to being pro-Putin if the war in Ukraine turns in Russia's favour and Donald Trump returns to the White House. Subscribe to David's and Christian's newsletter in Italian or French. 

Support the show

Jacques Delors passed away this week. He was the longest serving president of the European Commission. But what made Delors such a towering figure was his headlong rush to unify the continent. Monetary union. Free movement. The Single Market. Delors is the preeminent architect of the modern European project. Fast forward three decades and that architecture acutely concerns admirers of Delors. Among them is the well-known liberal lawmaker Sophie in ‘t Veld. Sophie has a lot to say about how the present-day Commission led by Ursula von der Leyen has grown timid in the face of pressures from national governments. Sophie also says those weaknesses have helped extremists like Viktor Orbán tighten their grip on power. In this year-end news review, Sophie talks about von der Leyen's appeasement of Orbán; the mess made by Brussels at the outbreak of the Israel-Hamas war; and the dangers Geert Wilders poses for Europe. You may not agree with all of Sophie's views on, well, more Europe. But her experience and passion and eloquence mean her warnings about the dangers of our political moment cannot be ignored. We are, says Sophie, "sleepwalking" into a new era of autocracy and repression. As for Sophie herself, she plans to run for a fifth term as a member of the European Parliament. Her decision has been welcomed by those who robustly support democracy and want more oversight of the EU by elected lawmakers. However, she will run from Belgium, not Holland, and as part of a new pan-European movement called Volt, instead of D66, the party that's long been her home. It's time for a change. Volt, says Sophie, is not as prone to the cliquishness found in some political groups, nor is it beholden to those EU decision-makers that continue to accommodate Europe's autocrats and kleptocrats.

Support the show

Big Meat had a good year in Europe. Plans to set emission limits for large-scale cattle farms were scrapped. Rules requiring landowners to restore wetlands were mostly gutted. And a keenly anticipated reform of the animal welfare rules was mostly consigned to the deep freeze. Among those promised animal welfare reforms: legislation to End the Cage Age. The idea was that hens, pigs, calves, rabbits, and quail would no longer be reared in conditions that inflict suffering and that underpin industrial farming, which is responsible for large amounts of greenhouse gases and other pollution. The campaign to end cages was the result of a European Citizens Initiative that garnered 1.4 million signatories and was backed by key European commissioners, parliamentarians, and scores of environmental and consumer rights and animal protection advocates. But in her state of the union speech, in September, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen made no mention of animal welfare, let alone cages. And by October, the European Commission was in full retreat. So, what happened? In this episode: a deep dive into the activities and influence of a group called European Livestock Voice with Andrea Bertaglio, who is a journalist and the group’s campaign manager. Also in this episode: Thin Lei Win, the lead food systems reporter for Lighthouse Reports that oversaw the investigation; Arthur Neslen, a freelance journalist for The Guardian; Silvia Lazzaris, editor at Food Unfolded; and Olga Kikou, the head of Compassion in World Farming in Brussels. “This takes us far beyond animal welfare,” says Olga. “It’s a democracy issue.”

Support the show

EU industrial policy for silicon chips to space technologies to electric vehicles too often seems to rely on Europeans prevailing in a global race to mine. The phrase "drill, baby, drill" applies as much to metals and minerals as oil and gas these days. But the EU's industry hawks are in denial. This is a race Europe can't ever win. The EU has relatively few metals and minerals of its own and little capacity to process the vast quantities it will require. To make matters worse, the short-term approach risks alienating the partners Europe says it needs for a sustainable energy transition. But the voices questioning the coherence and viability of the EU strategy are easily drowned out — and so that's why we tracked them down for this episode on rethinking the race to mine. MEP Mohammed Chahim says the EU's forthcoming Critical Raw Materials Act should do more to allow supplier countries and regions to get enough value from their resources to industrialise and give people better lives. Diego Marin of the European Environmental Bureau explains why reuse is one of the most important strategies for mitigating demand and reducing the negative social and environmental impacts of mining. Elle Merete Omma of the Saami Council says mining should only be permissible within environmental limits — and only with the full consent of indigenous people like the Sámi. Together they show how misaligned Europe is becoming with parts of the world like Africa, the High North and South America on which it will be relying for supplies in future — and how a more cooperative and mutually beneficial approach is needed with the Global South if Europe wants reliable access to the building blocks of its industrial future. This episode was made in partnership with the Open Society Foundations. 

Support the show

The problem of X as a source of hate and a threat to democracy is back at the top of the policy agenda. Elon Musk's social media platform circulated a large amount of false information as well as images of extreme violence during the recent terror attack in Israel. A European Commissioner, Thierry Breton, said that content probably was illegal in Europe and threatened X with fines. That standoff is likely to drag on for a while. But there's another European on Musk's case. His name is Imran Ahmed and he's already done much to hold X, and Musk, to account. Imran, who's British, runs a research and advocacy non-profit: The Center for Countering Digital Hate. The Center campaigns to get social media platforms to suspend or remove harmful accounts and stop advertisers spending money at sites spreading harmful content. And whereas Musk has kept his exchanges with Breton cordial, Musk has treated Imran like, well, vermin. The tension between Musk and Imran began after the Centre published its Toxic Twitter report in February. That report said that Musk had allowed large numbers of bad actors — Neo-Nazis, white supremacists, misogynists and conspiracists — back onto the platform with the goal of getting more eyeballs and advertising dollars. Now X is suing Imran's Center for losses amounting to tens of millions of dollars in advertising and other costs. How X's lawsuit in a California court pans out remains to be seen. But the discomfort Imran has already inflicted on Musk shows that David still can take on Goliath. And Imran's approach also holds lessons for regulators, like Mr. Breton, for the battles ahead. By way of disclosure: a board member at EU Scream also serves as a member of the board of the Center for Countering Digital Hate. 

Support the show