EU and populism: remedy or cause? 1/1/2019 EU and populism: remedy or cause? John Morijn

General scholarly and policy assumption The EU was created in the late 1950s following extreme (and extremely sad) experiences with actions based on populist ideology, i.e. totalitarianism. So for that reason alone the EU actually is, could or should be structured, positioned and effectively work to help contain, counter and preferably remedy today’s national and EU-level populism. Plausible, right?

Outline I. Populism & Article 2 TEU II. Confronting national populist action at EU-level III. Confronting EU populist action at EU-level IV. Countering populism & introspection: 4 elements

I. Populism and Article 2 TEU (1/4) | 5 I. Populism and Article 2 TEU (1/4) What is “populism”? Brubaker (2017) [N]ational populism [is] the polarized opposition between “us” and “them” in both vertical and horizontal dimensions. In the vertical dimension … the opposition is between “the people” and “the elite”... In the horizontal dimension, the opposition is between insiders and outsiders: between “people like us”, those who share our way of life, and those on the outside who are said to threaten [it], [including] “internal outsiders”: those living in our midst who … are not seen as belonging to the nation. The “outside” also includes impersonal forces or institutions seen as threatening..

I. Populism and Article 2 TEU (2/4) | 6 I. Populism and Article 2 TEU (2/4) Mueller Populism is anti-elitism and anti-pluralism combined Council of Europe “Populism damages democracy by: (1) limiting debate, delegitimising dissent and reducing political pluralism; (2) dismantling democratic checks and balances, including the rule of law, parliamentary authority, free media and civil society; (3) undermining individual human rights and minority protection; and (4) challenging international checks on unrestrained state power.”

I. Populism and Article 2 TEU (3/4) | 7 I. Populism and Article 2 TEU (3/4) What forms of populism (where) in Europe? 20% of votes on average nationally in 28 MS EU aspect: EP (25% seats), Commission, Council Populists’ different points of substantive focus Fear of Islam/civilisationalism Focus on safeguarding traditional (Catholic) values (in context of limited recent experience with democracy) Economic austerity / political corruption (EU itself)

I. Populism and Article 2 TEU (4/4) | 8 I. Populism and Article 2 TEU (4/4) Article 2 TEU The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail. Points of tension with populism(s)?

II. EU action v national-level populism (1/2) | 9 II. EU action v national-level populism (1/2) Article 7 TEU Commission RoL dialogue on basis of “framework” v Hungary and Poland Triggering of Article 7(2) v Poland (Dec. ’18) Council European Parliament (So why doesn’t it work well (yet)?)

II. EU action v national-level populism (2/2) | 10 II. EU action v national-level populism (2/2) Related issues Mutual recognition v. EAW/Dublin system v. independence of national judges ECJ in Aranyosi and calls to codify it Some pending ECJ cases (preliminary references) Linking issuance of EU funding (e.g. cohesion funds) to national-level Article 2 TEU compliance Recent COM-proposal

Break

III. EU action v EU-level populism (1/5) | 12 III. EU action v EU-level populism (1/5) National and EU-level populism are substantively linked in many ways, EU-level action limited to EP Case-study: Regulation 1141/2014 (statute and funding of European Political Parties)

III. EU action v EU-level populism (2/5) Context: functioning of EP EPP (political families) and Foundations Requirements for establishment (Reg. 1141/2014) Minimum representation from 7 MS Political groups (practical division) Requirements for establishment (EP RoP) Similar, but including number of seats Large, not full overlap EPPs and political groups

III. EU action v EU-level populism (3/5) | 14 III. EU action v EU-level populism (3/5) Where are national-level populists in EP’s EPPs? Fidesz -> European People’s Party SMer-direction -> Socialists & Democrats Syriza -> Greens/Free Alliance PiS / The Finss -> ECR UKIP / M5S/AfD -> ADDE Front National/Lega Nord/FPO/Vlaams Belang -> MENL PVV (Wilders Party -> ENL Golden Dawn/Jobbik -> APF

III. EU action v EU-level populism (4/5) | 16 III. EU action v EU-level populism (4/5) Substantive content of Regulation 1141/2014 Only EPP/EPFs which register with an independent authority (APPF) and certify that in programme and actions Article 2 TEU are guaranteed get funding At the request of one of 3 EU institutions (at least 3 political groups in EP) or MS, a separate independent committee of experts can verify whether it continues to do so If it does not, and both Council and EP agree with analyse, EU funding will be discontinued

III. EU action v EU-level populism (5/5) | 17 III. EU action v EU-level populism (5/5) Analysis: will it work? Who will invoke it? Council? Member State? EP? Commission? Which EU-level populists could it touch? Which national level populisms? Who would decide? (Why only EPP, and not also political groups?)

V. Introspection (1/5) “the EU … actually is, could or should be structured, positioned and effectively work to help contain, counter and preferably remedy today’s national and EU-level populism” Is assuming (good) enough? 3 avenues for more thorough exploration, 1 for better exploitation

Regulation v deregulation v. other policy choices V. Introspection (2/5) Regulation v deregulation v. other policy choices Should we regulate the EU political arena, or deregulate it? Why? Is it possible to have different approaches nationally and at the EU level? Should we codify case-law on stricter fundamental rights requirements in applying mutual recognition, or leave it to judges? Should we link EU funding of national projects to EU values compliance in the future? On what reasoning?

Democracy versus technocracy V. Introspection (3/5) Democracy versus technocracy (Sheri Berman: “technocracy and populism are evil political twins”.) Is establishing independent overview always convincing? What is the cumulative effect of multiple external and independent reviews of RoL aspects? How can political commitment to the outcome be assured? Are there areas where we should stop depoliticisation or actually move to create more space to repoliticise? At what level? EU or national?

EU: cause or remedy? Or both? V. Introspection (4/5) EU: cause or remedy? Or both? Is there a role for the EU in containing, countering and remedying EU- and national level populism if the EU is itself seen as an important cause of it? Does that matter in the first place? If so, should we better justify when and why the EU is the optimal actor?

(Better) communicate and explain values V. Introspection (5/5) (Better) communicate and explain values How can we better (learn) to communicate the rationale of Article 2 values, and their connections, in a new political and media context? Is it possible (better) to counter argumentative structures used so often by populists in an equally intuitive fashion? Do we know what works in that regard, and why? (Is there a role for the EU there?)

Thank you for your attention j.morijn@rug.nl 1/1/2019 Thank you for your attention j.morijn@rug.nl