Pro-Europeans hold firm” “Eurosceptics divided and different

The first unquestionable fact regarding the elections for the renewal of the European Parliament is the prevalence of pro-European forces. In the cumbersome quest for criteria to interpret the 22-25 elections, the fact that in the next legislature the EPP, Socialists & Democratis, Liberal Democrats and Greens together are represented by 520 MEPs (on a total of 751) is being overlooked. In other words, the forces that over the past years constituted a cross-party majority (albeit not always well-matched), enjoying the support of the Commission, notably its attempts to address the economic crisis, gained 70% of the votes. In particular, the EPP and to a lesser degree the Social Democrats show a decline, but they remain the pillar of the EU Parliament. A second, equally evident aspect, are the big gains of so-called ‘eurocritical’ parties, which include a wide range of nationalistic, anti-European and populist parties. In Strasbourg they will count on at least 150 representatives, although the models of Europe – or non-Europe – they intend to pursue in the coming years largely differ. In fact, it won’t be an easy task to get the French National Front, the British UKIP independence deputies, the Italian Five Star Movement and Northern League, the Greek Tspiras (radical left) and Golden Dawn (radical right), Jobbik’s neo-fascists, the Spanish “indignados”, the MEPs from various nationalistic parties elected in Austria, Finland, Sweden, Poland, Bulgaria… to adopt a shared strategy. In fact, the European Parliament is bound to be more erratic (MEP’s registration in political groups and/or the creation of new ones will take place in the coming weeks, not before the new Parliament takes office); maybe also for this reason fulfilling one of the Assembly’s new responsibilities, namely, the election of the future President of the Commission, won’t be an easy task. Election results show that the candidate of the majority party in Strasbourg – the EPP -, Jean-Claude Juncker, has a head start for the succession of José Manuel Barroso; but nothing can be taken for granted. The Council of Heads of Government and State convened in Brussels on May 27 for a preliminary analysis of election results. In the end-of-June summit the Council will submit the official name of the candidate at the lead of the Commission, who will need to obtain a majority vote in Parliament: but there could be unexpected alliances on this matter. Indeed, veritable politics – made of electoral consensus, political parties, programs, leaders, strategies, alliances – is expected to invade the EP seat. And the choice of the candidate for Commission Presidency will be a token of it. In addition to this “evidence” emerged from the ballot boxes, various elements on the table deserve further and deeper reflections in the coming days. For example, for the first time since 1979, when the European Parliament was directly voted by citizens, abstention rates remained the same. Moreover, the turnout is still low (43%), but it hasn’t changed compared to five years ago. This is partly due to those very euro-critical forces, which perhaps despite themselves, re-awakened on both fronts – pro and against the EU – a yearning to go to the polls. It is equally true that European elections juxtapose national and Community matters, and therefore the outcomes of the elections should be read with extreme caution, seeking to identify the mix of reasons underlying European citizens’ vote, along with the “national” and “European” motivations. Indeed, in the present circumstances the usual interpretative categories are not enough. It would be too simplistic to divide voters in right-wing and left-wing groups, in those pro or against European integration, those siding with national government forces or against them. Today’s citizens – chagrined by the social and economic crisis, overwhelmed by political complexities, terrified by progressing globalization, submerged by media drumbeat -, are seeking new representatives. The Socialists led by President Hollande have been defeated in France, the same happened for the Conservatives of premier Cameron in London; the parties in Angela Merkel’s coalition in Germany hold firm, in Italy the Prime Minister’s party was the winning political force; in Spain the government’s Popular Party and the Socialist opposition declined. Indeed, results are even less clear when compared to analyses of the vote in Poland, Ireland, Romania, Lithuania, Greece or Czech Republic… The heritage passed on to us by the 2014 elections confirms that the gap separating politics – both national and European – from citizens is growing wider. On the whole, this means that democracy in Europe is reaching a stage of concerning tiredness, which can be responded to only with increased authoritativeness and credibility of politics as a whole, with a recovered will to participate on the part of the citizens: a “new politics”, understood as a regulatory and propulsive force, at the service of European populations. There are no shortcuts. This is the place and time for a fresh start.