Get set for this year’s most consequential election in the EU. Hungary’s campaign stepped up a gear this week, with populist nationalist Prime Minister Viktor Orbán facing the toughest challenge yet to his 15-year grip on power. The long-suffering opposition hopes that Péter Magyar — conservative leader of the opposition Tisza party, which is running 12 points ahead in the polls — can overturn what Orbán himself styles as Hungary’s “illiberal democracy.” For many Hungarians, the election is a referendum on Orbán’s model. Under his leadership the government, led by Orbán’s Fidesz party, has tightened its grip on the media and state companies — sparking accusations of cronyism — while weakening judicial independence and passing legislation that sent Hungary plunging down transparency rankings. It now sits at the bottom of the World Justice Project’s rule-of-law index for EU countries. The 62-year-old Orbán is the EU leader closest to Russian dictator Vladimir Putin and proves a continual obstacle to efforts by Brussels to build a united front against the Kremlin. He has repeatedly clashed with the EU on topics ranging from LGBTQ+ rights to migration. Predicting the end of the liberal multilateral order, Orbán kicked off the year by saying the EU would “fall apart on its own.” But can Magyar — whose surname literally means “Hungarian” — really topple his former ally? And even if he does, how far could he realistically guide Hungary back toward liberal democracy with Orbán’s state architecture still in place? POLITICO breaks down the five key questions as Hungary heads toward the seismic April 12 vote. 1. WHY SHOULD I CARE? Hungary may be relatively small, with a population of 9.6 million, but under Orbán’s leadership it has become one of the EU’s biggest headaches. He has long weaponized Budapest’s veto in Brussels to block Russia-related sanctions, tie up financial aid to Ukraine and repeatedly stall urgent EU decisions. He is also a key — and sometimes leading — member of a group of right-wing populists in EU capitals, who unite on topics such as opposition to migration and skepticism toward arming Ukraine. Without Orbán, Czechia’s Andrej Babiš and Slovakia’s Robert Fico would cut far more isolated figures at summits of the European Council. Brussels has often resorted to elaborate workarounds to bypass Hungary’s obstructionism, and Orbán’s persistent defiance has led to calls to ditch the unanimity rule that has been in place for decades. “You have heard me 20 times regret, if not more, the attitude of Viktor Orbán, who, every time we had to move forward to help Ukraine … has used his veto to do more blackmail,” EU liberal party chief Valérie Hayer told journalists Tuesday. 2. WHAT ARE THE MAIN BATTLEGROUNDS? Magyar accuses Orbán and Fidesz of nepotism and corruption — of weakening the country’s economy by favoring oligarchs — and of missing out on EU funds by antagonizing Brussels. Orbán wants to frame his arch-nemesis Magyar as a puppet controlled by Brussels. Hungary’s campaign stepped up a gear this week, with populist nationalist Prime Minister Viktor Orbán facing the toughest challenge yet to his 15-year grip on power. | Zoltán Fischer/Hungarian PM Communication/EPA In the past year, Fidesz has launched public debates aiming to divide Magyar’s base — which spans green and left-wing voters to disenchanted former Orbán loyalists — on subjects such as the LGBTQ+ Pride ban. Tisza’s strategy has been to avoid positioning itself on controversial issues, in an effort to garner an absolute majority that will grant the party power to reform electoral law, which they say Orbán rigged to his benefit, and enable constitutional changes. Tisza’s No. 2, Zoltán Tarr, told POLITICO he expected Orbán’s government to deploy “all possible dirty tricks.” “State propaganda smears, AI-generated fakes, doctored videos, potential staged incidents, blackmail, and exploiting the rigged electoral system. They will mobilize everything because they have so much to lose,” Tarr said. Speaking at Fidesz’s party congress on Saturday, Orbán lambasted Tisza as a pro-EU stooge. “If you vote for Tisza or DK [the social-democratic Democratic Coalition], you are voting against your own future. Tisza and DK will carry out Brussels’ demands without batting an eyelid. Do not forget that Tisza’s boss is Herr Weber, Europe’s biggest warmonger,” Orbán said, referring to the German chief of the European People’s Party, Manfred Weber. 3. HOW AND WHEN DOES THE ELECTION TAKE PLACE? The national elections will take place on Sunday, April 12. Voters will choose a new 199-seat National Assembly under Hungary’s mixed electoral system, with 106 MPs elected in single-member constituencies and 93 from national party lists. The long-suffering opposition hopes that Péter Magyar — conservative leader of the Tisza party — can overturn what Orbán himself styles as Hungary’s “illiberal democracy.” | Noémi Bruzák/EPA POLITICO’s Poll of Polls shows Tisza leading with 49 percent support ahead of Fidesz at 37 percent — with Orbán’s party having been trailing for almost a year now. Although the official campaign period begins Feb. 21, the race has effectively been in full swing for months. Other notable parties in the race are the Democratic Coalition (DK); the far-right Mi Hazánk (Our Homeland) movement; and the satirical Hungarian Two-Tailed Dog Party (MKKP), largely created to mock Orbán’s policies. But these are fighting for survival as they may not meet the threshold of support for winning seats in parliament — meaning the Hungarian legislature could be exclusively controlled by two right-wing parties.  4. CAN THE ELECTION BE FREE AND FAIR? Challengers to the ruling party face a system designed to favor Fidesz. In 2011 Orbán’s government redrew electoral districts and overhauled the voting system to maximize its chances of winning seats. “There is no direct interference with the act of voting itself, yet the broader competitive environment — both in terms of institutional rules and access to resources — tilts heavily in favor of the governing parties,” said political analyst Márton Bene at the TK Institute of Political Science in Budapest. In addition to controlling roughly 80 percent of the media market, the government allows ethnic Hungarians in neighboring countries (who tend to favor Fidesz) to vote by mail, whereas those living abroad who have kept their Hungarian addresses must travel to embassies to cast their ballots. “One side enjoys access to the full resources of the state, while the challenger receives no public campaign funding and has virtually no presence in state-controlled media,” said political scientist Rudolf Metz from the TK Institute, adding that this imbalance is partially offset in the digital sphere. But even the unfair conditions don’t preclude a Magyar victory, Bene says, as long as the integrity of the voting process is preserved. 5. HOW MUCH WOULD A MAGYAR WIN REALLY CHANGE? The Brussels establishment is praying for Magyar to win, hoping a Tisza government will deepen ties with the EU. Centrist chief Hayer said her party supported “any candidate who will carry pro-European values, who will be able to beat” the incumbent Hungarian prime minister. Conservative boss Weber quickly welcomed Tisza into the center-right family to secure influence in Budapest and to give them resources to develop their electoral platform. He has repeatedly framed Magyar as the man who will save Hungary from Orbán. While viewed as a potential bridge-builder for the strained Brussels-Budapest relationship, Magyar is by no means an unwavering EU cheerleader. He has been noncommittal about Brussels, considering that any rapprochement could be used by Orbán against him. In an interview with POLITICO in October 2024 he said “we certainly don’t believe in a European superstate.” Conservative boss Manfred Weber quickly welcomed Tisza into the center-right family to secure influence in Budapest and give them resources to develop their electoral platform. Filip Singer/EPA On the domestic front, Tarr — Tisza’s No. 2 — told POLITICO the party wants to “keep [the] border fence, oppose mandatory migration quotas and accelerated Ukraine accession, pursue peace, fight Russian propaganda, strengthen V4 [Hungary, Poland, Czechia and Slovakia] and Central Europe without being Europe’s bad boy.” That echoes the prognosis of political scientist Metz, who said a victory by Magyar “would not mean a radical U-turn or a return to some idealized past.” “Hungary’s role as the EU’s permanent disruptor would probably fade, not because national interests disappear, but because they would be pursued through negotiation and institutional engagement rather than constant veto politics and symbolic conflict,” Metz added. Analysts also cautioned that change at home could be slow. Zoltán Vasali of Milton Friedman University said dismantling the current system would be “legally and institutionally challenging.” “Core constitutional bodies will retain their mandates beyond the upcoming elections, and key positions remain held by individuals aligned with the current government, limiting near-term change,” Vasali said. The scale of a Magyar victory could be decisive. A two-thirds parliamentary supermajority, which would allow the new government to change the constitution, Metz said, would be “a game-changer.” “It would give a Magyar government the legal capacity to restore core elements of the rule of law, rebuild checks and balances, and introduce safeguards such as term limits for key offices,” he said. Kinga Gál, Fidesz’s leader in the European Parliament, did not reply to a request for comment by the time of publication.

Josep Borrell is the former high representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and former vice-president of the European Commission. In too many corners of the world — including our own — democracy is losing oxygen. Disinformation is poisoning debate, authoritarian leaders are staging “elections” without real choice, and citizens are losing faith that their vote counts. Even as recently as the Jan. 3 U.S. military intervention in Venezuela, we have seen opposition leaders who are internationally recognized as having the democratic support of their people be sidelined. None of this is new. Having devoted much of his work to critiquing the absolute concentration of power in dictatorial figures, the long-exiled Paraguayan writer Augusto Roa Bastos found that when democracy loses ground, gradually and inexorably a singular and unquestionable end takes its place: power. And it shapes the leader as a supreme being, one who needs no higher democratic processes to curb their will. This is the true peril of the backsliding we’re witnessing in the world today. A few decades ago, the tide of democracy seemed unstoppable, bringing freedom and prosperity to an ever-greater number of countries. And as that democratic wave spread, so too did the practice of sending impartial international observers to elections as a way of supporting democratic development. In both boosting voter confidence and assuring the international community of democratic progress, election observation has been one of the EU’s quiet success stories for decades. However, as international development budgets shrink, some are questioning whether this practice still matters. I believe this is a grave mistake. Today, attacks on the integrity of electoral processes, the subtle — or brazen — manipulation of votes and narratives, and the absolute answers given to complex problems are allowing Roa Basto’s concept of power to infiltrate our democratic societies. And as the foundations of pluralism continue to erode, autocrats and autocratic practices are rising unchecked. By contrast, ensuring competitive, transparent and fair elections is the antidote to authoritarianism. To that end, the bloc has so far deployed missions to observe more than 200 elections in 75 countries. And determining EU cooperation and support for those countries based on the conclusions of these missions has, in turn, incentivized them to strengthen democratic practices. The impact is tangible. Our 2023 mission in Guatemala, for example, which was undertaken alongside the Organization of American States and other observer groups, supported the credibility of the country’s presidential election and helped scupper malicious attempts to undermine the result. And yet, many now argue that in a world of hybrid regimes, cyber threats and political polarization, international observers can do little to restore confidence in flawed processes — and that other areas, such as defense, should take priority. In both boosting voter confidence and assuring the international community of democratic progress, election observation has been one of the EU’s quiet success stories for decades. | Robert Ghement/EPA I don’t agree. Now, more than ever, is the time to stick up for democracy — the most fundamental of EU values. As many of the independent citizen observer groups we view as partners lose crucial funding, it is vital we continue to send missions. In fact, cutting back support would be a false economy, amounting to silence precisely when truth and transparency are being drowned out. I myself observed elections as chair of the European Parliament’s Development Committee. I saw firsthand how EU observation has developed well beyond spotting overt ballot stuffing to detecting the subtleties of unfair candidate exclusions, tampering with the tabulation of results behind closed doors and, more recently, the impact of online manipulation and disinformation. In my capacity as high representative I also decided to send observation missions to controversial countries, including Venezuela. Despite opposition from some, our presence there during the 2021 local elections was greatly appreciated by the opposition. Our findings sparked national and international discussions over electoral conditions, democratic standards and necessary changes. And when the time comes for new elections once more — as it surely must — the presence of impartial international observers will be critical to restoring the confidence of Venezuelans in the electoral process. At the same time, election observation is being actively threatened by powers like Russia, which promote narratives opposed to electoral observations carried out by the organizations that endorse the Declaration of Principles on International Election Observation (DoP) — a landmark document that set the global standard for impartial monitoring. A few years ago, for instance, a Russian parliamentary commission sharply criticized our observation efforts, pushing for the creation of alternative monitoring bodies that, quite evidently, fuel disinformation and legitimize authoritarian regimes — something that has also happened in Azerbaijan and Belarus. When a credible international observation mission publishes a measured and facts-based assessment, it becomes a reference point for citizens and institutions alike. It provides an anchor for dialogue, a benchmark against which all actors can measure their conduct. Above all, it signals to citizens that the international community is watching — not to interfere but to support their right to a meaningful choice. Of course, observation must evolve as well. We now monitor not only ballot boxes but also algorithms, online narratives and the influence of artificial intelligence. We are strengthening post-electoral follow-up and developing new tools to verify data and detect manipulation, exploring the ways in which AI can be a force for good. In line with this, last month I lent my support to the DoP’s endorsers — including the EU, the United Nations, the African Union, the Organization of American States and dozens of international organizations and NGOs — as they met at the U.N. in Geneva to mark the declaration’s 20th anniversary, and to reaffirm their commitment to strengthen election observation in the face of new threats and critical funding challenges. Just days later we learned of the detention of Dr. Sarah Bireete, a leading non-partisan citizen observer, ahead of the Jan. 15 elections in Uganda. These recent events are a wake-up call to renew this purpose. Election observation is only worthwhile if we’re willing to defend the principle of democracy itself. As someone born into a dictatorship, I know all too well that democratic freedoms cannot be taken for granted. In a world of contested truths and ever-greater power plays, democracy needs both witnesses and champions. The EU, I hope, will continue to be among them.

PARIS — A court appeal begins on Tuesday that will determine whether Marine Le Pen or her protégé Jordan Bardella will head into next year’s presidential election as favorite from the far-right National Rally party. While Le Pen has been a decisive force in making the anti-immigration party the front-runner for the presidency in 2027, she is currently unable to succeed Emmanuel Macron herself thanks to a five-year election ban imposed over her conviction last year for embezzling European Parliament funds. She is now appealing that decision in a case that is expected to last one month, although a verdict is not due until the summer. Le Pen looks set to fight her appeal on technical legal objections and an argument that the ban is disproportionate, rather than going out all-guns blazing and insisting she is the victim of a political hit job. If she does overcome the very steep hurdles required to win her case, she will still have to deal with the political reality that the French electorate are leaning more toward Bardella. The party’s supposed Plan B is starting to have the air of a Plan A. A poll from Ipsos in December showed the 30-year-old overtaking Le Pen as the French politician with the highest share of positive opinions. And a survey from pollster Odoxa conducted in November showed Bardella would win both rounds of the presidential contest.  The National Rally continues to insist that Le Pen is their top choice, but getting her on the ballot will likely require her to win her fast-tracked appeal by setting aside her personal grievances and perhaps even showing a measure of uncustomary contrition to ensure this trial does not end the way the embezzlement case did.  Le Pen is not famous for being low-key and eating humble pie. Shortly after her conviction, she said her movement would follow the example of civil rights’ icon Martin Luther King and vowed: “We will never give in to this violation of democracy.” That’s not the playbook she intends to deploy now. Her lawyers will pursue a less politicized strategy to win round the judges, according to three far-right politicians with direct knowledge of the case, who were granted anonymity to discuss it freely.  “We’ll be heading in with a certain amount of humility, and we’ll try not to be in the mindset that this is a political trial,” said one of trio, a French elected official who is one of the codefendants appealing their conviction.  LINE BY LINE Le Pen and 24 other codefendants stood trial in late 2024 on charges they illicitly used funds from the European Parliament to pay party employees by having them hired as parliamentary assistants. But those assistants, the prosecution argued, rarely if ever worked on actual parliamentary business.  The National Rally’s apparent defense strategy back then was to paint the trial as politicized, potentially winning in the court of public opinion and living with the consequences of a guilty verdict.  The attorneys representing the defendants could did little to rebut several pieces of particularly damning evidence, including the fact that one assistant sent a message to Le Pen asking if he could be introduced to the MEP he had supposedly been working with for months.  Given how severely the defense miscalculated the first time around, lawyers for many of the 14 codefendants in court this week will pursue more traditional appeals, going through the preliminary ruling “line by line” to identify potential rebuttals or procedural hiccups, the trio with direct knowledge of the case explained.   A survey from pollster Odoxa conducted in November showed Bardella would win both rounds of the presidential contest.  | Telmo Pinto/NurPhoto via Getty Images Defense lawyers also plan to tailor their individual arguments more precisely to each client to avoid feeding the sentiment that decisions taken at the highest levels of the National Rally leadership are imposed on the whole party. The prosecution during the initial trial successfully argued that National Rally bigwigs hand-picked assistants at party headquarters to serve the leadership rather than MEPs.  Le Pen’s lawyers will also argue that her punishment — barring a front-running presidential candidate from standing in a nationwide election — was disproportionate to the crime for which she was convicted.  The appeals’ court ruling will have seismic consequences for French politics and Europe ahead of one of the continent’s most important elections. The path toward the presidency will be nearly impossible for Le Pen if her election ban is upheld. Le Pen has indicated in past interviews that she would throw in the towel if she received the same election ban, given that she wouldn’t have enough time to appeal again to a higher court.   Should Bardella replace her and win, the consequences for the French judicial system could be profound. One of the codefendants floated the possibility of a response along the lines of what U.S. President Donald Trump did to those who prosecuted him before his reelection.   “The lingering sense of injustice will remain and can eventually evolve into a quest for revenge,” the codefendant said.

Mujtaba Rahman is the head of Eurasia Group’s Europe practice. He posts at @Mij_Europe. 2026 is here, and Europe is under siege. External pressure from Russia is mounting in Ukraine, China is undermining the EU’s industrial base, and the U.S. — now effectively threatening to annex the territory of a NATO ally — is undermining the EU’s multilateral rule book, which appears increasingly outdated in a far more transactional and less cooperative world. And none of this shows signs of slowing down. In fact, in the year ahead, the steady erosion of the norms Europe has come to rely on will only be compounded by the bloc’s weak leadership — especially in the so-called “E3” nations of Germany, France and the U.K. Looking forward, the greatest existential risks for Europe will flow from the transatlantic relationship. For the bloc’s leaders, keeping the U.S. invested in the war in Ukraine was the key goal for 2025. And the best possible outcome for 2026 will be a continuation of the ad-hoc diplomacy and transactionalism that has defined the last 12 months. However, if new threats emerge in this relationship — especially regarding Greenland — this balancing act may be impossible. The year also starts with no sign of any concessions from Russia when it comes to its ceasefire demands, or any willingness to accept the terms of the 20-point U.S.-EU-Ukraine plan. This is because Russian President Vladimir Putin is calculating that Ukraine’s military situation will further deteriorate, forcing Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to capitulate to territorial demands. I believe Putin is wrong — that backed by Europe, Zelenskyy will continue to resist U.S. pressure on territorial concessions, and instead, increasingly target Russian energy production and exports in addition to resisting along the frontline. Of course, this means Russian aerial attacks against Ukrainian cities and energy infrastructure will also increase in kind. Nonetheless, Europe’s growing military spending, purchase of U.S. weapons, financing for Kyiv and sanctions against Russia — which also target sources of energy revenue — could help maintain last year’s status quo. But this is perhaps the best case scenario. Activists protest outside Downing street against the recent policies of Donald Trump. | Guy Smallman/Getty Images Meanwhile, European leaders will be forced to publicly ignore Washington’s support for far-right parties, which was clearly spelled out in the new U.S. national security strategy, while privately doing all they can to counter any antiestablishment backlash at the polls. Specifically, the upcoming election in Hungary will be a bellwether for whether the MAGA movement can tip the balance for its ideological affiliates in Europe, as populist, euroskeptic Prime Minister Viktor Orbán is currently poised to lose for the first time in 15 years. Orbán, for his part, has been frantically campaigning to boost voter support, signaling that he and his inner circle actually view defeat as a possibility. His charismatic rival Péter Magyar, who shares his conservative-nationalist political origins but lacks any taint of corruption poses a real challenge, as does the country’s stagnating economy and rising prices. While traditional electoral strategies — financial giveaways, smear campaigns and war fearmongering — have so far proven ineffective for Orbán, a military spillover from Ukraine that directly affects Hungary could reignite voter fears and shift the dynamic. To top it all off, these challenges will be compounded by the E3’s weakness. The hollowing out of Europe’s political center has already been a decade in the making. But France, Germany and the U.K. each entered 2026 with weak, unpopular governments besieged by the populist right and left, as well as a U.S. administration rooting for their collapse. While none face scheduled general elections, all three risk paralysis at best and destabilization at worst. And at least one leader — namely, Britain’s Keir Starmer — could fall because of an internal party revolt. The year’s pivotal event in the U.K. will be the midterm elections in May. As it stands, the Labour Party faces the humiliation of coming third in the Welsh parliament, failing to oust the Scottish National Party in the Scottish parliament and losing seats to both the Greens and ReformUK in English local elections. Labour MPs already expect a formal challenge to Starmer as party leader, and his chances of surviving seem slight. France, meanwhile, entered 2026 without a budget for the second consecutive year. The good news for President Emmanuel Macron is that his Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu’s minority government will probably achieve a budget deal targeting a modest deficit reduction by late February or March. And with the presidential election only 16 months away and local elections due to be held in March, the opposition’s appetite for a snap parliamentary election has abated. However, this is the best he can hope for, as a splintered National Assembly will sustain a mood of slow-motion crisis until the 2027 race. Finally, while Germany’s economy looks like it will slightly recover this year, it still won’t overcome its structural malaise. Largely consumed by ideological divisions, Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s government will struggle to implement far-reaching reforms. And with the five upcoming state elections expected to see increased vote shares for the far-right Alternative for Germany party, pressure on the government in Berlin will only mount A historic truth — one often forgotten in the quiet times — will reassert itself in 2026: that liberty, stability, prosperity and peace in Europe are always brittle. The holiday from history, provided by Pax Americana and exceptional post-World War II cooperation and integration, has officially come to an end. Moving forward, Europe’s relevance in the new global order will be defined by its response to Russia’s increased hybrid aggression, its influence on diplomacy regarding the Ukraine war and its ability to improve competitiveness, all while managing an increasingly ascendant far right and addressing the existential threats to its economy and security posed by Russia, China and the U.S. This is what will decide whether Europe can survive.

PARIS — Marine Le Pen and her troops are making it clear that they’re not jumping into bed with U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration despite their shared ideology. The far-right National Rally has in recent days gone out of its way to tamp down any hint of a political romance with the White House after German news outlet Der Spiegel reported that team Trump considered sanctioning the French judges who convicted Marine Le Pen of embezzlement and handed her a five-year election ban, effectively barring her from next year’s presidential race. After the verdict was handed down, U.S. President Donald Trump likened Le Pen’s judicial woes to his own and said her conviction was an example of “using Lawfare to silence Free Speech.” Le Pen will be back in court next week to appeal the verdict. Though the State Department has since denied the Spiegel report as “stale and false,” the mere hint of a National Rally-MAGA liaison was enough to quickly put the party on the defensive — especially given that Washington sanctioned a French judge at the International Criminal Court that issued an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In a press release dated Wednesday, the National Rally said it condemned the sanctions against the ICC judge and watches closely for “any pressure of unacceptable nature on the judicial branch.” In the same statement, it slammed the initial Spiegel report as “fake news” and chastised the press for picking it up. Three National Rally officials contacted by POLITICO also expressed unease at the unconfirmed report. “We have always rejected foreign interference from one side or the other,” Renaud Labaye, a close adviser to Le Pen and high-ranking member of her party, the National Rally, said Thursday. “We stand by that.” Alexandre Sabatou, a member of the France-U.S. friendship group in the National Assembly who traveled across the Atlantic for Trump’s inauguration, said Tuesday that “as a staunch defender of France as a sovereign nation, it bugs me.” The National Rally has been forced to play a delicate dance when it comes to support from Trump, whose administration last month hinted that it was ready to throw its weight between “patriotic European parties” in its bombshell national security strategy. However, Trump is largely unpopular in France, even among the far-right party’s supporters, and many voters recognize that his administration is pursuing economic and geopolitical policies that aren’t in France’s interest. Overtures from the White House to intervene in French and European politics also run counter to the National Rally’s pledge to protect French geostrategic independence — especially from American hegemony — rooted in the politics of legendary Gen. Charles De Gaulle. The debate around potential foreign interference comes as the country’s judicial branch is already under intense political pressure over high-profile cases, including the trial of former President Nicolas Sarkozy and Le Pen’s appeal.

Winter vacation can’t start soon enough for Pedro Sánchez. Spain’s governing Socialist Party is being battered by a deluge of sexual harassment scandals that is prompting the resignation or dismissal of mayors, regional leaders and even officials employed in the prime minister’s palace. Within the party, there’s open recognition that its self-proclaimed status as the country’s premier progressive political entity is being severely undermined. The scandals are also provoking major fractures within Sánchez’s coalition government and parliamentary alliance, with even his most reliable collaborators demanding he make major changes — or call snap elections. Deputy Prime Minister Yolanda Díaz, whose far-left Sumar party is the junior partner in Sánchez’s coalition government, said on Friday that a “profound Cabinet reshuffle” was needed to make a clean break with the rot. Aitor Esteban, president of the Basque Nationalist Party — one of the government’s most reliable parliamentary partners — said if the Socialists fail to halt the “daily hemorrhage of news stories,” snap elections must be held. Spain’s Socialists are no strangers to scandal, having spent the past two years dealing with endless headline-grabbing revelations detailing the alleged embezzlement of public funds by former Transport Minister José Luis Ábalos and party boss Santos Cerdán — both of whom maintain their innocence. Sánchez has so far weathered the storms by insisting the corruption cases are limited to just a few bad apples, and arguing that only his government can keep the country on a socially liberal track. But the scale of the sexual harassment scandals revealed in recent days — which have coincided with anti-corruption raids in government buildings — represent an unprecedented challenge for the prime minister. There are serious doubts that Sánchez’s “stay-the-course” playbook will suffice to see his government through this latest political earthquake. GROWING SKEPTICISM When Sánchez came to power in 2018 he boasted that he led “the most feminist government in history,” with 11 of the country’s 17 ministries led by women. Over the past seven years his successive administrations have passed legislation to ensure gender balance in key sectors, fight gender-based violence and promote gender equality abroad. But the actions of some of Sa´nchez’s fellow Socialists are fueling growing skepticism about whether the governing party truly respects women. Last summer the prime minister apologized to supporters and expressed his “shame” after the release of wiretaps on which the Spanish police alleged former Transport Minister Ábalos could be heard describing his trysts with female sex workers. Ábalos, for his part, claims the recordings have been manipulated and the voice they capture is not his. Weeks later, sexual harassment complaints against another of the prime minister’s long-time collaborators, Francisco Salazar, forced his resignation on the very day he was meant to assume a new role as one of the party’s top leaders. That scandal resurfaced this month after Spanish media revealed the party had slow-walked its investigation into the alleged abuses committed by Salazar, who maintains his innocence. Last week Sánchez said he took “personal responsibility” for the botched investigation and apologized for not reaching out to Salazar’s victims. He also ordered the dismissal of Antonio Hernández, an official employed in the prime minister’s palace whom Salazar’s victims had singled out as the harasser’s alleged “accomplice.” Hernández denies the accusation. Sánchez’s attempts to contain the situation don’t appear to have quelled indignation over the party’s failure to address Salazar’s alleged abuses, and the frustration has resulted in a version of the #MeToo movement within the Socialists’ ranks. Deputy Prime Minister Yolanda Díaz, whose far-left Sumar party is the junior partner in Sánchez’s coalition government, said on Friday that a “profound Cabinet reshuffle” was needed to make a clean break with the rot. | Perez Meca/Getty Images Over recent days, the party’s boss in Torremolinos has been suspended from his post after being denounced for sexual harassment by an alderman, who also accused the Socialists of failing to act when she first reported the alleged abuses last summer. Belalcázar’s mayor has also stepped down following the publication of sexually explicit messages to a municipal employee, and the launch of an investigation for alleged harassment has prompted the Socialists’ deputy secretary in the province of Valencia to leave the party. The three officials deny the accusations against them. So, too, does José Tomé, who insists the multiple sexual harassment complaints that resulted in his resignation as president of the Provincial Council of Lugo this week are completely unfounded. The admission of regional leader José Ramón Gómez Besteiro that he had been aware of the allegations against Tomé for months prompted the party’s regional equality czar to step down in disgust, and are generating doubts regarding the Socialists’ political future in the Galicia. TROUBLED TIMES The barrage of sexual harassment complaints are a major problem for Sánchez. Women are a key segment of his party’s voter base: Female voters tend to participate in elections to a greater extent than men, and have historically mobilized in favor of the Socialists. But surveys by the country’s national polling institute reveal that women are becoming increasingly disenchanted with the party. In a poll carried out shortly after the Ábalos recordings were released, support for the Socialists among female voters dropped from 26.2 percent to 19.4 percent. Pilar Bernabé, the party’s equality secretary, admitted on Friday that the wave of harassment complaints marked a “before and after” moment for the Socialists, who now had to prove that they have zero tolerance for abuse. “Sexism is incompatible with Socialism,” she added. The challenges to the party’s bona fides are less than welcome at a moment when it faces multiple corruption investigations. In addition to the ongoing probes into Ábalos and Cerdán — both of whom were ordered jailed without bond last month — this week former Socialist Party member Leire Díez along with Vicente Fernández, the former head of the state-owned agency charged with managing Spain’s business holdings, were arrested for alleged embezzlement and influence peddling. At their respective bail hearings, Díez invoked her right to remain silent, while Fernández denied any wrongdoing. Days later, the elite anti-corruption unit of Spain’s Civil Guard raided several agencies managed by the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Ecological Transition and the Demographic Challenge, as well as the headquarters of the Spanish Postal Service, as part of a related investigation into the alleged rigging of public contracts. CAN SÁNCHEZ CARRY ON? During a campaign event headlined by Sa´nchez on Sunday, party members urged the prime minister to act. “Take a firm hand to the harassers, the womanizers, the chauvinists!” said Irene Pozas, head of the Socialist Youth in the province of Cáceres. “Don’t hold back, Pedro: The women of the Socialist Party must not have any cause for regret!” Pedro Sánchez may be hoping for relief from the scandals during the upcoming holiday break in Spain, but it’s unclear if his party, and the weak coalition government it leads, will be able to recover. | Marcos del Mazo/Getty Images While admitting shortcomings in the party’s internal mechanisms for handling complaints, Sánchez defended the Socialists’ determination to “act decisively and transparently” to tackle sexism and corruption. The prime minister also defiantly asserted his will to carry on, telling supporters that “governing means facing the music and staying strong through thick and thin.” Sánchez may be hoping for relief from the scandals during the upcoming holiday break in Spain, but it’s unclear if his party, and the weak coalition government it leads, will be able to recover. Although the prime minister insists he intends to govern until the current legislative term ends in 2027, his inability to pass a fresh budget and wider difficulties in passing legislation jeopardize that goal. The Socialists’ parliamentary allies are reluctant to see Sánchez fall because they know snap elections will almost certainly produce a right-wing government influenced by the far-right Vox party. But they are also wary of being associated misogyny and fraud — especially if voters may soon be heading to the polls. “Stopping the far right and the extreme right is always a non-negotiable duty, but it is not achieved merely by saying it, but by demonstrating that we are better,” tweeted the president of the Republican Left of Catalonia, Oriol Junqueras. “Those who abuse and become corrupt cannot regenerate democracy.”

EUROPE’S CENTER ISN’T HOLDING ANYMORE Despite recent election wins for moderates in the Netherlands, Germany and the U.K., the far right is stronger than ever. By TIM ROSS in Jaywick, England Illustration by Merijn Hos for POLITICO In recent elections, voters in Europe have given hope to embattled centrist politicians across the Western world.   Donald Trump may have romped back into the White House, but the international movement of MAGA-aligned populists has run into trouble across the Atlantic. At elections in the U.K., France, Germany, the Netherlands, Romania — and in a sprawling vote across 27 EU countries for the European Parliament — mainstream candidates defeated populist hardliners and far-right nationalists.  “There remains a majority in the center for a strong Europe, and that is crucial for stability,” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said, after the EU Parliament elections last year. “In other words, the center is holding.”   Sixteen months later, that hold is looking anything but secure.    Hard-right and far-right politicians are now leading the polls in France, the U.K. and even Germany. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s approval rating is a dire 21 percent. His French counterpart, Emmanuel Macron, is even lower, at 11 percent — and the mood is so grim that this fall’s spectacular theft at the Louvre is being treated by some as a giant metaphor for a country unable to manage its challenges.   Even von der Leyen’s own EU conservatives now rely on the votes of far right lawmakers to get her plans approved in Brussels. One outraged centrist likened the shift to those German politicians who enabled Adolf Hitler to take power. Populists at the extremes, meanwhile, cast themselves as the obvious alternative for populations that want change. And now they can expect Trump to help: In a brutal rupture of transatlantic norms, a new U.S. National Security Strategy aims to use American diplomacy to cultivate “resistance” to political correctness in Europe — especially on migration — and to support parties it describes as “patriotic.” Trump himself told POLITICO he would endorse candidates he believed would move Europe in the right direction. On that rightward trajectory, in the next four years the political map of the West faces its most dramatic upheaval since the Cold War. The implications for geopolitics, from trade to defense, could be profound.   “What [Europeans are] getting from Trump is the strategy of maximum polarization that hollows out the center,” said Will Marshall from the Progressive Policy Institute, the centrist American think tank that backed Bill Clinton in the 1990s. “The old established parties of left and right that dominated the post war era have gotten weaker,” he said. “The nationalist or populist right’s revolt is against them.”  Nowhere is this recent transformation more dramatic than in the U.K.   As the sun sinks toward the horizon over a calm sea one Thursday evening in November, half a dozen regulars huddle around the bar in the Never Say Die pub, a few yards from the beach at Jaywick Sands, on the east coast of England.   Built in the 1930s as a resort 70 miles from London, Jaywick is now the most deprived neighborhood in the country. The area had such a bad image that in 2018 a U.S. MAGA ad used a photograph of a dilapidated Jaywick street to warn of the apocalyptic future facing America if Trump’s candidates were not elected.   Jaywick was named England’s most deprived neighbourhood in October — for the fourth time since 2010. | Tolga Akmen/EPA It is here among the pebbledashed bungalows and England flags hanging limp from lampposts that a new political force — Nigel Farage’s rightwing Reform UK — has built its heartland.   At the bar, Dave Laurence, 82, says he doesn’t vote, as a rule, but made an exception for Farage, who was elected to represent the area last year. “I quite like him. He’s doing the best he can,” Laurence says as he sips his pint of lager, with ’80s pop hits playing in the background. “I’ll vote for him again.”  Laurence freely describes himself as “racist” and says he would never vote for a Black person, such as the center-right Conservative Party’s leader Kemi Badenoch. What troubles him most, he says, is the number of immigrants who have arrived in the U.K. during his lifetime, especially those crossing the Channel in small boats. Soon, Laurence fears, the country will be “full of Muslims and they’ll fucking rebel against us.”  With its anti-establishment, immigration-fighting agenda, Farage’s Reform UK offers voters a program tightly in tune with far-right parties that have gained ground across the West. According to opinion polls, Farage now has a real chance of becoming the U.K.’s next prime minister if the vote were held today. (A general election is not due until 2029).   It’s startling to note that as recently as July 2024, Starmer’s Labour Party won a historic landslide and some of his triumphant election aides traveled to the U.S. to advise Democrats on strategy. Today, Starmer is derided as “First Gear Keir” as he fights off leadership rivals rumored to be trying to oust him. And Reform isn’t the only force remaking British party politics. To the left of Labour, the Greens have also made recent gains in the polls under a new leader calling himself an “eco-populist.”   Farage’s stunning rise from the sidelines to the front of a political revolution carries lessons well beyond Britain’s borders. Europeans raised in the old school of mainstream politics fear that the traditional centerground — their home turf — will not hold.   ‘DURABLY UNSTABLE’   Macron, for his part, tried to counter the rise of the hard right by calling a snap election for the French National Assembly last year. The gamble backfired, delivering a hung parliament that has been unable to agree on key economic policies ever since. Macron is now historically unpopular.   French lawmakers’ clashes over the budget have toppled three of Macron’s picks as prime minister since the summer of 2024. A backlash against his plan to raise the pension age has forced ratings agencies to mull a damaging downgrade. Macron, who himself became president by launching a new centrist movement to rival the political establishment, now has no traditional party machinery to help bolster his position. “He’ll leave a political landscape that is perhaps durably unstable. It’s unforgivable,” said Alain Minc, an influential adviser and former mentor to the French president.  The chaos gives populists their chance. The main politicians making any running in conversations about the next presidential election belong to the far-right National Rally of Marine Le Pen and its youthful party president Jordan Bardella, who are riding high in the polls at 34 percent.   In Germany, too, the center ground is steadily eroding.   Though Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s conservatives won a snap election in February, his ideologically uneasy coalition, which consists of his own conservative bloc and the center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD), holds one of the slimmest parliamentary majorities for a government since 1945, with just 52 percent of seats. That leaves the Merz coalition vulnerable to small defections within the ranks and makes it hard for him to achieve anything ambitious in government. The far-left Die Linke party and the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) both surged at the last election, too, with AfD winning the best result in a national election for any far-right party since World War II.  Merz’s attempt to defang the AfD by moving his conservatives sharply to the right on the issue of migration seems to have backfired. The AfD has only continued its rise, surpassing Merz’s conservatives in many polls.   The rise of the far-right is a cultural shock to many centrist Germans, given the country’s deeply entrenched desire to avoid repeating its past. “For a long time in Germany we thought with our history, and the way we teach in our schools, we would be a bit more immune to that,” one concerned German official said. “It turned out we are not.”   Even in the Netherlands, where centrist Rob Jetten won a famous but narrow victory over the far-right firebrand Geert Wilders in October, there are reasons for mainstream politicians to worry. Wilders’ Freedom Party is still one of the biggest forces in the land, winning the same number of seats as Jetten’s D66. He could well return next time, just as Trump did in the U.S.   WHERE DID ALL THE VOTERS GO?   According to polling firm Ipsos, a large proportion of voters in many Western democracies now have little faith in the political process. While they still believe in democratic values, they are dissatisfied with the way democracy is working for them.   A large survey questioning around 10,000 voters across nine countries found 45 percent were dissatisfied, fueling support for the extremes. Among voters on the far left (57 percent) and the far right (54 percent), levels of dissatisfaction were highest of all.   The countries with the highest rates of dissatisfaction in the Ipsos study were France and the Netherlands, where political upheaval has taken its toll on faith in the system.   Anti-riot police officers stand next to a demonstration called by far-right activist Els Rechts against the Netherlands’ current asylum policy, in September in The Hague. | Josh Walet/ANP via Getty Images Alongside the coronavirus pandemic and the aftermath of lockdowns, the biggest drivers of dissatisfaction were the cost of living, immigration and crime, according to Gideon Skinner from Ipsos. Trust in politics fell in the 90s and took another hit in the late 2000s at the time of the financial crash, he said.   “There may be specific things that have made it worse over the last couple of years but it’s also a long-term condition,” Skinner told POLITICO. “It’s something we do need to worry about and there is not a silver bullet that can fix it all.”  Perhaps the greatest problem for incumbent centrists is that in most cases their economies are so moribund that they lack the fiscal firepower to spend money addressing the issues disillusioned voters care about most — like high living costs, ailing public services and migration.  THE INEQUALITY EMERGENCY   The financial crisis of 2008 and the coronavirus lockdowns of 2020-21 left many governments strapped for cash. In the U.K., for example, the economy was 16 percent smaller than it should have been a decade after the 2008 crash if prior growth trends had continued, according to Anand Menon, professor of European politics at King’s College London.   “Crucially, the impact of the financial crisis, like the impact of so much else in our politics, was massively unequal,” Menon said. “Prosperous places with high productivity, with well-educated workforces suffered far, far less than poorer parts of the country.”   Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz submitted a study to the G20 in November warning that the world was facing an “inequality emergency.” Fueled by war, pandemic and trade disruptions, the crisis risks preparing the ground for more authoritarian leaders, his report said.   In many Western countries, the centerground is more than just a metaphor. It is in capital cities like London, Paris and Washington that power and money accumulate and the economic and political elites seek to maintain their grip on the status quo.   The further you travel from these centers out to areas in decline, the more likely you are to find support for radical politics.   As Menon notes, Britain’s 2016 revolution — the referendum vote to leave the European Union after almost half a century of membership — can be mapped onto the culinary geography of the country.   “Pret a Manger” is a smart national chain of sandwich and coffee shops, catering for hungry commuters and office workers in wealthy, successful British cities. “Places that had a Pret voted Remain,” Menon said. Parts of the U.K. where median wages were lower were disproportionately likely to vote to leave the EU.   IMMIGRATION, IMMIGRATION, IMMIGRATION   After the Brexit vote in 2016, immigration slid from the top of the priority list for British voters and Farage himself took a step back. Both have now returned, as Farage rides a wave of headlines about irregular migrants landing in small boats from France.   From January to May this year, there were a record 14,800 small boat crossings, 42 percent more than in the same period in the previous year, according to Oxford University’s Migration Observatory.   For Laurence, in the Never Say Die pub, the small boats represent the biggest issue of all. “What’s going to happen in 10 years’ time? What’s going to happen in 20 years’ time when the boat people are still coming over?” he asked.   A decade ago, German Chancellor Angela Merkel opened the doors to hundreds of thousands of refugees arriving into Europe from Syria, as well as Afghanistan and Iraq. The AfD surged in the months that followed, permanently changing German politics. At February’s election, the AfD won a record 21 percent of the vote, finishing in second place behind Merz’s conservative bloc.  “The fundamental failure that is common to the whole [centrist] transatlantic community is on immigration,” said Marshall from the Progressive Policy Institute. “All of the far-right movements have made it their top issue.”   It is the perceived threat that waves of migration pose to traditional national cultures which drives much of the support for the far right. Trump’s White House is now primed to join the European nationalists’ fight. According to a new U.S. National Security Strategy document released in December, Europe is facing “civilisational erasure” from unrestricted immigration, as well as falling birthrates. The analysis draws on the so-called great replacement theory, a racist conspiracy theory. Free speech — in the MAGA definition, at least — is another casualty of conventional centrist rule in Europe, as political correctness veers into “censorship,” the U.S. document said. Protesters demostrate under the motto “Loud against Nazis” in early February in Berlin. After years of decline, The Left party  pulled off a stunning revival in the general election later that month. | John MacDougall via AFP/Getty Images In his interview with POLITICO earlier this week, Trump aligned himself fully with the strategy paper. European nations are “decaying” and their “weak” leaders can expect to be challenged by rivals with American support, he said. “I’d endorse,” he added. In Brussels, the double-punch of the president’s interview and the strategy document left diplomats and officials feeling bruised and alarmed all over again, after a period in which they allowed themselves to hope that the transatlantic alliance wasn’t dying. One EU diplomat was blunt in assessing Trump’s new method: “It’s autocracy.” THE STOLEN JEWELS  Sometimes, it takes a random news event — ostensibly unconnected to politics — to crystalize the national mood. In Paris, the theft of France’s priceless crown jewels from the Louvre provided just such an opportunity, morphing into an indictment of an establishment that can’t get the job done, even when the job simply involves thoroughly locking the windows at the world’s most famous museum. National Rally leader Jordan Bardella called the incident a “humiliation” before asking: “How far will the breakdown of the state go?”   In Britain, just a month after Starmer’s victory last year, riots broke out across the country, fueled by far-right extremists. The catalyst was the murder of three young girls aged 6, 7 and 9, in Southport, northwest England, by a Black teenager wrongly identified at the time on social media — in posts amplified by the far-right — as a Muslim.   At the time, Farage suggested the police were withholding the truth about the suspect, earning him the fury of mainstream politicians. While stressing he did not support violence, Farage railed against what he called “two-tier policing,” a phrase popular among far-right commentators who claim police treat right-wing protesters more harshly than those on the left.  It’s an opinion that resonates in Jaywick. Chennelle Rutland, 56, is walking her two dogs along the beachfront, admiring the view as the sun sets, flaring the sky orange, then purple. The colors catch the surface of the flat sea. “It’s one rule for one and one rule for the other,” she says. “The whites have got to shut up because if you do say anything, you’re ‘racist’ and ‘far right.’”   Far-right activist Tommy Robinson invited his supporters to attend the “Unite The Kingdom” rally in September. | Christopher Furlong/Getty Images It would be wrong to characterise residents of Jaywick as simply ignorant or full of rage. Many who spoke to POLITICO there were cheerful, happy with their community and up to speed with the news. But, just as they’d soured on their country’s centrist establishment, they were also tuning out its favored news sources.   In Jaywick, some of Farage’s voters prefer GB News, Britain’s answer to Fox News, which launched in 2021, or learn about current affairs from YouTube and other social media. The BBC — for decades the mainstay of the British media landscape — has lost a portion of its audience here. Right-wing commentators and politicians attack it as biased. Trump has lately joined in, threatening to sue over a BBC edit that he said deceptively made it look as if he was explicitly inciting violence. The BBC’s director general and head of news both resigned. In the process, another piece of Britain’s onetime centerground was giving way.   WHAT NEXT?   There are reasons for centrists to hope. In Rome, Giorgia Meloni’s hard-right Brothers of Italy party has become less extreme in power, and the worst fears of moderates about a group with its historic roots in neo-fascism have not come to pass. She remains popular, and while pushing a culture war at home, she has avoided the wrath of the EU leadership and kept Trump onside.   Populists and nationalists don’t always win. Trump lost in 2020. In the Netherlands, Wilders lost in October this year, though only by a whisker. Romania’s Nicușor Dan won the presidency as a centrist in May, but again only narrowly defeating his far-right opponent.   Structural obstacles may also slow the radicals’ progress. The U.K.’s first-past-the-post voting system makes it hard for new parties to do well. The two-round French system has so far stopped Le Pen’s National Rally from gaining power as centrists combine to back moderates. In Germany, a similar “firewall” exists under which center parties keep the far-right out.   After the Brexit vote in 2016, immigration slid from the top of the priority list for British voters and Farage himself took a step back. Both have now returned. | Tolga Akmen/EPA Even as he enjoys a sustained lead in the polls and wins local elections in the U.K., Farage has not convinced voters that Reform would do a good job. Even some of his supporters worry he will be out of his depth in government.   The problem, for the centrists who are in power, is that a lot of voters seem to think they, too, are out of their depth. And, whether that involves dealing with migration, combatting inequality, or just boosting the security around the Mona Lisa, it’s a reputation they’ll need to fix in order to survive — no easy task given the intractability of the challenges facing the rich world.  The next year will see more elections at which the centrists — and their populists rivals — will be tested. In Hungary Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, long seen as the far-right bad boy of EU politics, is fighting to keep power at an election expected in April. There are regional votes in Germany where the AfD is on track to prosper. France may require yet another snap election to end its political paralysis. Trump’s diplomats and officials will be ready to intervene. Farage’s party, too, will be on the ballot in 2026: It is expected to make gains in Wales, Scotland and local votes elsewhere next spring. After that, his sights will be on the U.K. general election expected in 2029, by which time European politics may look very different.   “Of course I know Mr. Orban and of course I know Giorgia Meloni, of course I know these people,” Farage told POLITICO at a recent Reform rally. “I suspect that after the next election cycle in Europe there will be even more that I know.” Natalie Fertig in Washington, Clea Caulcutt in Paris and James Angelos in Berlin contributed to this report.  

LONDON — Donald Trump has launched a crusade to convert European politics to his cause, mobilizing the full force of American diplomacy to promote “patriotic” parties, stamp on migration, destroy “censorship” and save “civilization” from decay.  The question is whether Europe’s embattled centrists have the power, or the will, to stop him. In its newly released National Security Strategy document, the White House set out for the first time in a comprehensive form its approach to the geopolitical challenges facing the U.S. and the world. While bringing peace to Ukraine gets a mention, when it comes to Europe, America’s official stance is now that its security depends on shifting the continent’s politics decisively to the right. Over the course of three pages, the document blames the European Union, among others, for raising the risk of “civilizational erasure,” due to a surge in immigrants, slumping birth rates and the purported erosion of democratic freedoms.  “Should present trends continue, the continent will be unrecognizable in 20 years or less,” it says. “As such, it is far from obvious whether certain European countries will have economies and militaries strong enough to remain reliable allies.” With its talk of birth rates declining and immigration rising, the racial dimension to the White House rhetoric is hard to ignore. It will be familiar to voters in Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands and Germany, where far-right politicians have articulated the so-called “great replacement theory,” a racist conspiracy theory falsely asserting that elites are part of a plot to dilute the white population and diminish its influence. “We want Europe to remain European,” the document says. “Over the long term, it is more than plausible that within a few decades at the latest, certain NATO members will become majority non-European,” the document reads — making it “an open question” whether such countries will continue to view an alliance with the U.S. as desirable. The policy prescription that follows is, in essence, regime change. “Our goal should be to help Europe correct its current trajectory,” the strategy document says. That will involve “cultivating resistance” within European nations. In case there is any doubt about the political nature of the message, the White House paper celebrates “the growing influence of patriotic European parties” as a cause for American optimism. In other words: Back the far right to make Europe great again. FIGHTING SHY Since Trump returned to the White House in January, European leaders have kept up a remarkable performance of remaining calm amid his provocations, so far avoiding an open conflict that would sever transatlantic relations entirely. But for centrist leaders currently in power — like Emmanuel Macron in Paris, Keir Starmer in London and Germany’s Friedrich Merz — the new Trump doctrine poses a challenge so existential that they may be forced to confront it head-on.  “We are facing the same challenges, or versions of the same challenges, and we do talk about it,” Starmer said. | Jeff J. Mitchell/Getty Images That confrontation could come sooner rather than later, with high-stakes elections in parts of Britain and Germany next year and the possibility of a snap national vote ever-present in France. In each case, MAGA-aligned parties — Reform U.K., the Alternative for Germany and the National Rally — are poised to make gains at the expense of establishment centrists currently in power. America, it is now clear, may well intervene to help.  On current evidence, European officials whose job it is to protect their elections from foreign interference have little appetite for a fight with Trump. The European Commission recently unveiled its plans for a “democracy shield” to protect elections from disinformation and foreign interference. Michael McGrath, the commissioner responsible for the policy, told POLITICO recently that the shield should be drawn widely as Russia is “not the only actor” that may have “a vested interest” in influencing elections. “There are many actors who would like to damage the fabric of the EU, and ultimately undermine trust in its institutions,” he said.  In light of the new National Security Strategy, Trump’s America must now surely count among them.  But McGrath played the diplomat when asked, before the strategy was published, if he would rather U.S. leaders stopped campaigning in European elections and criticizing European democracy.  “They’re entitled to their views, but we have our own standards and we seek to apply our own values and the European approach to international affairs and international diplomacy,” McGrath replied. “We don’t comment or interfere on the domestic matters of a close partner like the United States.” PATHETIC FREELOADERS Even before the strategy was published, Trump administration figures had already provided ample evidence of its disdain for Europe’s political center ground. So far this year, Vice President JD Vance launched a broadside against Europe over free speech and democracy; Elon Musk intervened in the German election to back the far-right Alternative for Germany; and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth privately savaged “pathetic” Europeans for “freeloading” on security.  The difference this time is that Trump’s National Security Strategy is official. “It was one thing for them to think it and say it to each other (or in a speech in Munich),” said one EU diplomat, granted anonymity to speak candidly. “It’s something else to put it into a policy document.” What is worse for leaders like Macron, Merz and Starmer is that the Trumpian analysis — that a critical mass of voters want their own European MAGA — may, ultimately, be right.  These leaders are all under immense pressure from the populist right in their own backyards. In Britain, Nigel Farage’s Reform U.K. is on track to make major gains at next year’s regional and local elections, potentially triggering a leadership challenge in the governing Labour Party that could force Starmer out.  In Paris, Marine Le Pen’s National Rally tortures Macron’s struggling administrators in parliament, while the Alternative for Germany breathes down Merz’s neck in Berlin and pushes him to take ever harder positions on migration.  The British prime minister disclosed in an interview with The Economist this week that he spoke to Merz and Macron at a recent private dinner in Berlin about the shared threat they all face from the right. “We are facing the same challenges, or versions of the same challenges, and we do talk about it,” Starmer said.  If America makes good on Trump’s new strategy, private dinner party chats among friends may not be enough.

Andrej Babiš, the right-wing populist who on Monday formed Czechia’s next government, wants to derail EU plans on curbing emissions, according to the government’s coalition program, seen by POLITICO’s Brussels Playbook. Babiš and his ANO movement formed a coalition with the right-wing Motorists for Themselves party and the nationalist Freedom and Direct Democracy. Babiš is expected to make his return to the European Council table at the next gathering of EU leaders in Brussels on Dec. 18-19. Critics fear that Czechia could become a new bête noire for the EU alongside Viktor Orbán’s Hungary and Robert Fico’s Slovakia. “I believe that if we look at his statements and his allies in Europe — like Viktor Orbán and what he has done with Hungary — he [Babiš] will start pushing the Czech Republic toward the margins,” Czech Foreign Minister Jan Lipavský told POLITICO. While Babiš still needs to be formally nominated as prime minister by the Czech president, he already has grand plans for his EU comeback: unraveling the bloc’s green policies. “The Green Deal is unsustainable in its current form, which is why we will promote its fundamental revision,” the draft coalition program reads.   The new government plans to push back against the implementation of a new market that would put a price on heating and fuel emissions (dubbed ETS2). The new emissions trading system is a cornerstone of the EU’s efforts to slash planet-warming emissions from the building and transport sectors and achieve climate neutrality by 2050. The Czech plan also states the government “will initiate a European-level reassessment” of the original emissions trading scheme, ETS1, which covers pollution from heavy industries and the energy sector. EU governments have already voted in favor of ETS2 and it is due to come into effect in 2027. However, the draft Czech government program includes a threat not to enact the rules: “In the case of ETS2 emission allowances for households and transport, we are prepared not to implement this system into Czech legislation and to prevent highly negative social impacts on society.” The draft also reveals that a future Babiš government views an EU ban on the sale and production of cars with combustion engines from 2035 as “unacceptable.” “The European Union has its limits — it does not have the right to impose decisions on member states that interfere with their internal sovereignty,” the draft reads. The ban was approved in 2023 by all member countries (despite last-minute resistance from Germany) but has proven controversial. Babiš is not alone in wanting to challenge EU Green Deal rules. The previous Czech government also requested a delay in ETS2 implementation, and Estonia called for it to be scrapped. Babiš may find an ally in Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, who trumpeted his success in inserting a “revision clause” into the EU plans to extend a carbon-trading system at a leaders’ gathering last month.  While the revision clause demanded by EU leaders does not explicitly call for a weaker ETS2, Tusk believes it will open the door to a delay of the measure. Babiš intends to personally oversee EU policy — abolishing the role of minister for European affairs and placing responsibility for EU matters in a department “subordinate” to the prime minister. The parties in the coalition will be expected to sign off on the government program. Then comes a period of wrangling as Babiš is expected to try to install Filip Turek, the controversial honorary president of the Motorists’ party, as foreign minister — a move President Petr Pavel may oppose, according to an EU diplomat.  Czech news outlet Deník N reported last month that Turek — a former member of the European Parliament and racing driver — had made racist, sexist and homophobic comments on Facebook before entering politics. Turek denied being behind the posts in a video posted on Facebook.

The Dutch GreenLeft-Labor alliance has elected Jesse Klaver as its new leader to succeed Frans Timmermans after slumping to defeat in last week’s election. Timmermans resigned on election night immediately after exit polls put his party in fourth place with a loss of five seats — a major setback for a party that had been an election favorite ahead of the vote. “Sometimes, leadership means taking a step back,” Klaver, in a nod to his predecessor’s decision, said following his appointment Monday. “But sometimes you also have to take a step forward when the situation calls for it. That’s what I did today,” Klaver added, according to a local media report. Timmermans, a former European commissioner, quit Brussels politics in 2023 to return to the Dutch political scene and take the reins of the newly formed alliance between the GreenLeft and Labor parties. Klaver, who is 39, previously led the GreenLeft party and was Timmermans’ second-in-command over the past two years.  The centrist liberal D66 party is in pole position to form a new Dutch coalition after its narrow victory in the election. One possible coalition would include GreenLeft-Labor, as well as the center-right Christian Democratic Appeal and the conservative liberal People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD). That’s far from a done deal, however, as VVD leader Dilan Yeşilgöz had repeatedly ruled out governing with GreenLeft-Labor.