EUROSCEPTICS AND RADICALS SUCCEED

The results of the election to the European Parliament, the legislature of the European Union elected directly by EU citizens (using a proportional voting system), are quite remarkable and revealing for a number of reasons. First and foremost, eurosceptics and radicals have tangibly (although not decisively yet) strengthened their positions while the turnout was comparatively low. 

So, representatives of the following parties from 28 EU member states have become European Parliament members for the next five years: the European People's Party, the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats, the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe and the Greens. They will have a convincing majority taking 521 out of 751 seats. The European Conservatives and Reformists, the European United Left/Nordic Green Left, Europe for Freedom and Democracy and independent MPs will keep them company. 

Yet the main intrigue lies in the distribution of seats among the so-called "other" politicians (about 150 seats in the new parliament). They represent parties that previously had no factions of their own in the European Parliament: the ultra-radicals, radicals, eurosceptics and Europhobes. As can be seen though, the centrists still hold a majority, the nationalists and deniers of EU benefits have significantly improved their standing compared with the previous polls. Two countries - France and the UK - excelled the rest. 

The French National Front led by Marine le Pen gained 25 per cent of the vote leaving behind the Socialist Party of incumbent President Francois Hollande with 14 per cent. If you recall that Le Pen's had only 6 per cent in 2009, this is certainly an impressive success. Le Pen appears to be the most promising candidate for the 2017 presidential polls. 

The United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) standing for Britain's secession from the EU and limiting migration from Eastern Europe, gained over 30 per cent of the vote leaving behind the Labour and Conservative candidates for the first time ever. Support for this party has doubled over the past five years. "Who really runs this country? 75 per cent of our laws are now made in Brussels," UKIP posters demand while its leader Nigel Farage has described his success a "political earthquake" emphasizing that London will soon become "independent in decision making". 

Italy's populist Five Star Movement supporting the idea of giving up the euro gained 21.1 per cent while the eurosceptics from the North League got 6.2 per cent. The far-right parties from Austria, Hungary and Greece strengthened their positions in the European Parliament keeping company with Vlaams Belang (Flemish Interest) from Belgium and the Danish People's Party. The Polish Eurosceptic party gained 7.15 per cent of the vote placing fourth in that country, while its leader Janusz Korwin-Mikke announced his intention to take the European Union apart from the inside damning it as a "rotten structure". 

These victories are certainly not enough to feel a full-fledged political force at the European scale but the trend is obvious anyway. Europe is lucky that the radicals and eurosceptics still cannot reach consensus to form a single faction for which it is necessary to have at least 25 members from seven countries. Despite having common slogans, the radical parties' goals and ideological components sometimes differ very much. Therefore, most probably, there is a long way to go before they form a common platform. 

It is noteworthy that, according to EU legislation, there is a hurdle fluctuating within 5 per cent to prevent radical and fringe parties from being elected to the EU parliament and to reduce the risk of excessive fragmentation of the legislature. Yet it seems the hurdle was not high enough this time. 

The success of the right-wing radicals and eurosceptics is an occasion for the European Union to what is called "reflect on life" and behaviour. Most experts blame the whole thing on the economic crisis and the eurozone crisis, social unrest in some countries, unemployment especially among young people (totalling about 26m people) and migration (in the past 20 years, immigration in Europe has grown by 40 per cent). 

Indeed, disillusionment with the EU has significantly grown since the beginning of the crisis. People in some states believe that the austerity measures were imposed on them by Brussels which actually brings their national sovereignty to nought. The so-called creditor states - Germany, the Netherlands, Finland - are feeling nervous, and so are those countries, mostly in Eastern Europe, where economic affairs are not to good. The situation is aggravated by the fact that cheaper products from the EU have filled the agricultural markets in a number of Eastern European states (Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria). As a result their farmers are losing their sale markets. Economic problems clearly emphasize the heterogeneity and disunity of "united Europe". Thus for instance, the rate of unemployment exceeds 25 per cent in Greece and Spain, being only 5 per cent in Germany and Austria. 

Meanwhile the programmes of the winning people's parties and social democrats insist on continuing reforms and consolidating the single market and advocate austerity measures. They generally avoid talking about "sore points" such as for instance the Greek debt or debt obligations. Only the leftists insist on suspending the austerity measures. 

European society is also unhappy with demographic problems, the influx of immigrants from North Africa and the Middle East. Just a few days after the election, the French police started evicting illegal Asian and African migrants in Calais. According to a survey conducted by the NatGen organization, nearly one-third of Britons admit having racial prejudices returning this indicator to levels registered 30 years ago. Brussels is struggling to preserve freedom of movement, the fundamental principle of the EU, but again the UK has repeatedly encroached on it. For their part, the radicals differ from their more politically correct colleagues in offering to solve the problem openly, without hiding behind other principles. 

Another point is the people's desire to return to their national identity and undisguised weariness of multiculturalist ideas. The EU is an umbrella for countries too unlike one another and not all of them have the population ready to give up their own age-old values in favour of a common social and cultural code placing stake on equality and tolerance to such an extent that same-sex marriages or a bearded transvestite woman winning a prestigious international song contest are taken as a matter of course. 

The reasons certainly include purely technical points, too. Supporters of radicals are better organized and more likely to reach the polling stations. By the way, the turnout was 43.11 per cent which is a good result although the levels differ in different countries. The leaders are Luxemburg (90 per cent), Belgium (90 per cent) and Malta (74.8 per cent). Citizens of Central and Eastern Europe ignored the election. Slovenians, Czechs and Slovaks proved to be the most indifferent voters with 21, 19.5 and 13 per cent respectively. Residents of a small Greek island, Gavdos, refused to go to the European Parliament election in protest against the policies of the EU and the Greek authorities. 

Meanwhile the problem also lies in the fact that many Europeans treat the European Parliament with obvious mistrust. According to different polls, more than 60 per cent of the respondents believe that decisions are taken not by members of the European Parliament but by the governments of the EU member states. The tone is set here by the strong West-European states: Germany, France and the UK. As regards the European Parliament, it is rather a club for discussion and a nice place to make a career.  

Another painful moment is the European Union's foreign policy. One can hardly describe the Catherine Ashton's era of European diplomacy as brilliant. As a result, the EU foreign policy, although called common, is again determined at the level of the heads of the states having the casting vote and with the use of covert intergovernmental alliances. For instance, the ambitions and goals of London rarely fit into the system of common European policy. Especially after the relatively recent re-election of German Chancellor Angela Merkel who is called behind her back the true ruler of the EU. The defence policy is not too clear either. To be perfectly honest, the function of the defence department in the EU has for a long time been carried out by NATO where the dominant role is played by the USA… 

In this situation, one should certainly not expect any EU expansion in the near future. This process is now supported only by the Liberals. So Iceland, Macedonia, Montenegro and Serbia will have to wait. Not to mention Turkey and Ukraine which has nothing to hope for in this respect. 

Following the European Parliament election, the EU is unlikely to dramatically change its attitude to Azerbaijan as mostly the same politicians will remain in the EU. The changes mentioned above are rather a signal to Brussels itself. Either the process of euroscepticism and radicalism will grow or Europe will have to seriously engage in reforms.