Coronavirus vaccine: Hungary to produce China′s Sinopharm jab

The Hungarian goverment on Monday announced plans to produce the Chinese-developed Sinopharm COVID-19 vaccine locally.

Hungary is the only EU country to inoculate its citizens with the Chinese jab after domestic regulators approved its use.

Speaking in China, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said officials would open a planned €157 million ($193 million) vaccine plant in the eastern town of Debrecen.

Read more at Coronavirus digest: Hungary to produce China′s Sinopharm jab | News | DW | 31.05.2021

Hungary's PM Viktor Orbán vaccinated against COVID with Chinese Sinopharm vaccine

Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán has been inoculated against COVID-19 with the vaccine from the Chinese laboratory Sinopharm after Hungary become the first EU country to approve its use.

"I am vaccinated," said a message published on Sunday on Orbán's official Facebook page, accompanied by photos and a video showing him being injected with a dose of the vaccine by a health worker holding a Sinopharm box.

Hungary began using the Sinopharm vaccine on Wednesday, after having already having given the Russian Sputnik V vaccine emergency authorisation for use without waiting for the green light from the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

Read more at: Hungary's PM Viktor Orbán vaccinated against COVID with Chinese Sinopharm vaccine | Euronews

Covid-19 Vaccine: Turkey, Serbia, Bosnia and Hungary Put Trust in Russian, Chinese Vaccines - by Hamdi Firat Buyuk, Danijel Kovacevic, and Milica Stojanovic

While the majority of countries in Central and Southeast Europe have brokered deals to obtain Western-manufactured COVID-19 vaccines, Turkey, Hungary, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia are keeping their options open and also obtaining Chinese and Russian vaccines – despite concerns about their reliability.

Some health experts have warned that the effectiveness of these vaccines is still not fully researched, and note that their delivery dates are also still uncertain.

“Unfortunately, Turkey could not purchase a vaccine in which all three phases of research had been completed. Furthermore, there are no plans to bring [Western] Moderna or AstraZeneca vaccines [to Turkey],” Emrah Altindis, a Turkish professor of Biology at Boston College, wrote on Twitter.

Turkey said earlier that it would purchase 50 million doses of China’s CoronaVac vaccine, which is still in third of phase of research. After various delays, only 3 million doses arrived on December 31. So far, Turkey has vaccinated 1.2 million of its more than 82 million citizens.

Note EU-Digest: At a press conference in Beijing a state taskforce announced the vaccine had exceeded World Health Organization standards and would help establish effective immunity in China.

Health officials said vulnerable groups would be prioritised ahead of the general population. Key groups have already been receiving vaccines under emergency approvals, including about a million receiving the Sinopharm vaccine.

Read more at: Turkey, Serbia, Bosnia and Hungary Put Trust in Russian, Chinese Vaccines | Balkan Insight

EU: The Costs of Merkel’s Surrender to Hungarian and Polish Extortion - by George Soros

The European Union is facing an existential threat, and yet the EU’s leadership is responding with a compromise that appears to reflect a belief that the threat can simply be wished away. Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s kleptocratic regime in Hungary and, to a lesser extent, the illiberal Law and Justice (PiS) government in Poland, are brazenly challenging the values on which the European Union has been built. Treating their challenge as a legitimate political stance deserving of recognition and a compromise solution will only add – massively – to the risks that the EU now faces.

Orbán has stolen and misappropriated vast sums during his decade in power, including EU funds that should have gone to benefit the Hungarian people. He cannot afford to have a practical limit imposed on his personal and political corruption, because these illicit proceeds are the grease that keeps the wheels of his regime turning smoothly and his cronies in line.

Threatening to torpedo the EU’s finances by vetoing its budget was a desperate gamble on Orbán’s part. But it was a bluff that should have been called. Unfortunately, Merkel has, it appears, caved in to Hungarian and Polish extortion.

Read more at: The Costs of Merkel’s Surrender to Hungarian and Polish Extortion by George Soros - Project Syndicate

EU breaks deadlock (by caving in to Hungary and Poland ?) on budget, coronavirus recovery fund

European Union leaders on Thursday reached agreement on a long-term budget and coronavirus recovery package, after weeks of resistance from Poland and Hungary, according to EU Council President Charles Michel.

"Now we can start with the implementation and build back our economies. Our landmark recovery package will drive forward our green and digital transitions,'' Michel said in a tweet.

No details of the agreement were immediately available, however ahead of the summit, EU diplomats and officials said there would likely be a declaration that the rule of law mechanism would only be used after a ruling from the European Court of Justice — a process that could take a year.

Read more at: EU breaks deadlock on budget, coronavirus recovery fund | News | DW | 10.12.2020

EU Counter Measures To Be Taken- Article 7: Hungary and Poland maintain united front blocking EU COVID-19 recovery fund

The leaders of Hungary and Poland have vowed to maintain a united front and uphold their veto of the EU's budget and its massive pandemic relief fund.

They continue to oppose the mechanism that ties funding for countries to rule of law principles, arguing that the EU plan risks derailing the bloc.

" Note EU-Digest: Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union should be applied, which is a procedure in the treaties of the European Union (EU) to suspend certain rights from a member state and consequently stop all funding to these two countries within this legal framework".

Read more at: Hungary and Poland maintain united front blocking EU COVID-19 recovery fund | Euronews

EU - Opinion on Hungary and Poland: The E.U. Puts Its Foot Down on the Rule of Law - editorial board

After years of passively watching nationalist governments in Hungary and Poland undermine democratic rule, the European Union finally drew the line this year and declared that disbursements from the E.U. budget and a special coronavirus relief fund would be contingent on each member’s adherence to the rule of law. Hungary and Poland have shamelessly retaliated by threatening to veto the Union’s next seven-year budget, emergency funds and all, unless the condition is scrapped.

The governments in Budapest and Warsaw couched their defiance with their usual plaints that the bloc was behaving like their former Soviet overlords. “This is not why we created the European Union, so that there would be a second Soviet Union,” declared Viktor Orban, the proudly illiberal prime minister of Hungary. But such posturing has long been discredited, especially as both right-wing governments have happily reaped huge subsidies from the European Union.

The cynical reactions of Mr. Orban and the right-wing Law and Justice government in Warsaw demonstrated how far they have strayed from the fundamental principles they signed on to when they joined the European Union. They make no bones about it: Hungarian and Polish officials recently met to set up a joint institute to combat the “suppression of opinions by liberal ideology.”

Mr. Orban in particular has systematically worked to curtail the independence of the judiciary, bring the press to heel and curb civil society. With Fidesz, his nationalist party, in full control of Parliament, he took advantage of the coronavirus pandemic in March to assume broad and open-ended emergency powers that effectively allow him to rule by decree for as long as he wants.

Note EU-Digest: "Hungary and Poland want all the benefits of the EU, but do not want to comply with the rules - it's hight time for the EU Commission to give them an ultimatum- live up to the rules of the EU or lose your membership"

Read more at: Opinion | The E.U. Puts Its Foot Down on the Rule of Law - The New York Times

EU: We need to call Orbán's bluff by going ahead without him - by Guy Verhofstadt

By vetoing the EU's recovery financing, Viktor Orbán and Jarosław Kaczyński are putting at risk the lives of all Europeans threatened by a needlessly prolongued Covid-19 crisis, as well as the livelihood of everyone whose job or business is harmed as a result, only because they want the EU to continue to fund their increasingly corrupt power grab. We must not let them.

Luckily, the EU Treaties provide other options. We need to call their bluff and we need to do it now.

Financing the recovery through enhanced cooperation of the 25 other member states is the way to do it.

Read moe at: We need to call Orbán's bluff by going ahead without him

EU - former Eastern bloc Nations: ‘Work, family, fatherland’: populist social policies in central and eastern Europe – by Mitchell Orenstein and Bojan Bugaric

The rise of authoritarian populists in Hungary and Poland has shocked the European Union, forcing it to contemplate new procedures to ensure compliance with the rule of law. But these regimes have an enduring electoral appeal to many voters, including those naturally inclined to the left. Why?

Our research shows that central and east European populists have developed a new approach to social policy, based on past conservative models, which can be encapsulated in the old Vichy slogan, ‘work, family, fatherland’. Developed in Hungary and Poland, it is now spreading across Europe. Hungary, Poland, populistsBojan Bugaric

Responding to decades of neoliberal economic policies, these populist parties advance a nationalist programme. This seeks to build up domestic as against foreign capital, and support indigenous versus migrant workers, addressing native population loss through ‘pro-family’ measures. The pitch is to protect ‘ordinary people’ from ‘liberal elites’, while growing the economy through economic self-rule and a conservative developmental state.

Read more at: ‘Work, family, fatherland’: populist social policies in central and eastern Europe – Mitchell Orenstein and Bojan Bugaric

EU: Budget deal struck, with Hungary threat still hanging - by Eszter Zalan

After what negotiators described as "tough" and "long" talks, MEPs and diplomats from the German EU presidency struck a deal on Tuesday (10 November) on the long-term EU budget and the coronavirus recovery package.

Momentum on the budget talks picked up after the European Parliament and the EU presidency agreed on how to link EU funds to the respect of rule of law in separate talks last week.

Read more at: Budget deal struck, with Hungary threat still hanging

US Elections: Trump's Turkish Ally Erdogan and other populists/authoritarian leaders around the world Stay Mum on Biden Victory

Erdogan, along with the leaders of Russia, Israel, Iran, Hungary, Saudi Arabia and China, offered no initial congratulations to the president-elect.

Read more at: Trump's Turkish Ally Erdogan Stays Mum on Biden Victory | Greek Reporter Europe

Hungary - EU Relations: New ‘tool’ to protect EU budget and uphold EU values

Member states jeopardizing the rule of law or failing to tackle fraud and corruption will risk losing EU funds, according to a draft law endorsed by MEPs of the European Parliament, according to the European Parliamentʼs official website.

Assisted by a panel of independent experts, the EU Commission would be tasked with establishing “generalized deficiencies as regards the rule of law” and decide on measures that could include suspending EU budget payments or reducing pre-financing.

The decision would only be implemented once approved by parliament and council. Once the member state remedies the deficits identified by the EU Commission, parliament and EU ministers could unlock the funds.

The plenary session endorsed the rules by 397 votes to 158, with 69 abstentions. MEPs are now ready to enter negotiations on the final wording of the regulation with EU ministers, who have not adopted their position yet, europarl.europa.eu says.

Read more: New ‘tool’ to protect EU budget and uphold EU values | The Budapest Business Journal on the web | bbj.hu

The new emerging face of "Democracy": Taking democracy for granted is a fatal flaw - by Hasan Suroor

Professor of Politics and International Studies at Cambridge University, David Runciman provides in his book an interesting insight to Modi’s India  and Democracy.

I am not sure that many in the Modi Government would be familiar with the name of David Runciman, professor of Politics and International Studies at Cambridge University.

But this week’s crackdown on civil rights activists and dissidents is the biggest endorsement of his new book, “How Democracy Ends”, in which he lists India as among the countries where democracy is being upended in the name of protecting it from supposedly undemocratic forces. India, according to him, illustrates the threat that democracy is facing from “executive aggrandisement” and “strongmen chipping away at it while paying lip service to it”.

It represents the new emerging face of democracy where it all appears tickety-boo on the surface, but is haemorrhaging from inside. Indians might find it embarrassing that he lumps their country with such authoritarian democracies as Hungary, Poland, Turkey and the Philippines where too “strongmen” are “chipping away” at democratic institutions while paying lip service to them.

Runciman sees Narendra Modi as part of a growing cast of “ever more characterful performers” alongside Donald Trump, Recep Erdogan, and Lech Kazcynski, among others, who have converted democracy into an “elaborate performance” to engage public attention while quietly wrecking it from inside. Like them, he has developed a “personality cult” operating through networks of private interests and hardline followers .

Read more: Taking democracy for granted is a fatal flaw | National Herald

EU Citizens under threat from populist right-wing local and foreign politicians who are endangering the EU's unity and economic stability - by RM

Right-wing populist politicians destabilizing the EU

Democratic and Cultural Fortress Europe is under attack, by devious right-wing populist politicians and their followers

These include, but not limited to, (see picture insert) from top left to right: Donald Trump (USA), Steve Bannon (USA), Marine Le Pen (France), Nigel Farage (Britain), Benjamin Netanyahu (Israel), Geert Wilders (the Netherlands), Dr.Jörg Meuthen (Germany), Jarosław Aleksander Kaczyński (Poland), Viktor Mihály Orbán (Hungary),Thierry Henri Philippe Baudet (the Netherlands) Luigi Di Maio (Italy), and Sebastian Kurz (Austria)

It is not a question anymore of how to come to terms with this threat, but how this threat can be eliminated effectively.  Tthe majority of Europesn citizens certainly do not want Europe to fall apart into a feuding group of nations, and easy prey for China, Russia and the US.

This issue certainly must, if it is not so already, become the number one objective on the agenda of the EU Commission, the EU Parliament and each individual EU Nation state.

Maybe, in this context it might help to refresh our memory as to the importance of the EU among the world of nations, with some historic background on the EU, and the benefits its citizens enjoy.

The European Union was set up with the aim of ending the frequent and bloody wars between neighbours in Europe, which culminated in the past, and more recently in the First and Second World Wars.

Europeans were determined to prevent such killing and destruction from ever happening again.

After the Second world war, Europe was split into East and West,  resulting in a 40-year-long Cold War.

To counter this political problem, West European nations created the Council of Europe in 1949.

It was a first step towards cooperation between them, but six countries even wanted to go further.

As of 1950, the European Coal and Steel Community begins to unite European countries economically and politically in order to secure lasting peace.

The six founding countries were Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands.

The 1950s were dominated by a cold war between east and west. Protests in Hungary against the Communist regime are put down by Soviet tanks in 1956. ’

On the 8 of May 1950 French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman presents a plan for deeper cooperation. This historic event is celebrated every 9th of May as ' Europe Day'

On 18 April 1951 based on the Schuman plan, six countries signed a treaty to run their heavy industries – coal and steel – under a common management. In this way, none can on its own make the weapons of war to turn against the other, as in the past.

In 1957, the Treaty of Rome created the European Economic Community (EEC), or ‘Common Market

One thing led to another, making the EU what it is today, operating as a single market with 28 member countries, one of the major global trading powers.

EU economic policy seeks to sustain growth by investing in transport, energy and research – while minimising the impact of further economic development on the environment.

In terms of the total value of all goods and services produced (GDP), it is bigger than the US economy. EU GDP in 2017 was €15.3 trillion

Over 64 % of EU countries’ total trade is done with other countries in the EU bloc.

On January 1, 2017, the population of the European Union (EU) was estimated at 511.8 million, compared with 510.3 million on 1 January 2016. During the year 2016, as many births as deaths were recorded in the EU (5.1 million), meaning that the natural change of the EU population was neutral.

With just 6.9 % of the world’s total population, EU trade with the rest of the world accounts for some 15.6 % of global imports and exports.

Consequently, together with the United States and China, the EU is one of the 3 largest global players in international trade.

The 28 EU countries had the second largest share of global imports and exports of goods in 2016.

For individual EU citizen some of the benefits include:

    1) Eligibility to live and work everywhere within the EU without further permission.

    2) Eligibility to take part in local elections of the community where you are a resident. So if you       are a Frenchman living in Munich you can vote for in the election of the Munich
city council, which chooses the mayor. You can even run for a seat in that local municipality.
   
   3) Eligibility to vote in the EU parliamentary elections, and you can even run for a seat.
   
    4) Coming from another EU member country one may not be discriminated against, in relation to local citizen in your place of residence. That means: If local residents are allowed to send their children to public school for free, you are also allowed. If they receive social security payments, you may also receive them.
   
    5) Say you want to run a workshop in Germany, you may even have benefits over and above those of local German citizens. If you are a German running a car repair workshop, you either need a master certificate as a trained car mechanic, or you have to employ somebody who has such a certificate. If, however, you are coming in from another EU country, you only have to show proof that you are a car mechanic with a work experience.
   
    6) As an EU citizen you also have diplomatic protection. If you are in a country where your home country does not have its own embassy, every EU embassy of a member state is obliged to help you if you need help.
   
    7) EU citizens also have the right to communicate with every administrative office within the EU in your own language - and you have the right to receive an answer in your own language.

Bottom line - don't let these right-wing Populists mislead you with vague and confusing arguments, Ask for specifics, like how they would set up things differently, and what the benefits would be for you as a citizen.

And if this results in more garbled rhetoric, like we so often hear from those populist politicians,  make sure you tell them they are not convincing you.

There is no way EU citizens would benefit from going back to their own currency, border controls, banking regulations, and nationally protected local trade.

Probably the most remarkable success for the EU has been that, apart from its economic prominence, following the ‘Schuman Declaration’, on 9 May 1950, there have been 68 years of peace across the continent, following this declaration.

The European project, known as the EU is the best thing that ever happened for peace, economic stability and prosperity on  the European continent. Another positive is that since it is still a project under development, it can only get better.

We must therefore use all means at our disposal to protect and safeguard it from the destabilizing forces which are presently attacking its existence.

© This article can be republished only if EU=Digest is mentioned as the source

EU-Digest 

Hungary;: viktor Orban calls for Right Wing Union in Europe

Hungary's Viktor Orban calls for right wing union in Europe

Read more at:
http://flip.it/2pvhN3

The EU Refugee problem: The George W. Bush refugees - and the mess -- including populism - the U.S. played such a large part in creating

George W.Bush "the mission is over" - who was he kidding?

On September 18, 2015 Andrew Bacevich wrote in Politico something which not only the US Government, but also its European NATO partners have never openly admitted.

"As migrants have poured into Europe, Americans must bear the blame".

"if you break it you own it.” Colin Powell’s Pottery Barn Rule, warning George W. Bush of the consequences of invading Iraq.

Bush broke it — “it” being a swath of the greater Middle East. But the U.S. and their European NATO partners, the so-called "coalition of the willing" adamantly refused to accept anything like ownership of the consequences stemming from Bush’s recklessly misguided act.

Not least among those consequences is the crisis that finds refugees fleeing Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and other parts of the Islamic world in search of asylum in the West. The European nations most directly affected have greeted this wave with more hostility than hospitality — Germany, for a time, at least offering a notable exception.

For its part, the U.S. has responded with pronounced indifference and silence. In a gesture of undisguised tokenism, the Obama administration announced it would admit a grand total of 10,000 Syrians — one-eightieth the number that Germany has agreed to accept in one year alone. Obviously the situation is now even more grim for refugees wanting to come to America, with Trump's "Make America Great Again" anti-immigration policies.

No doubt proximity plays a part in explaining the contrast between German and U.S. attitudes. Viewed from Wichita or Walla Walla, the plight of those who hand themselves over to human traffickers in hopes of crossing the Mediterranean plays out at a great distance.

Syria is what Neville Chamberlain would have described as a faraway country of which Americans know nothing (and care less). And Iraq and Afghanistan are faraway countries that most Americans have come to regret knowing.

However, To attribute the European  refugee crisis to any single cause would also be misleading. A laundry list has contributed: historical and sectarian divisions within the region; the legacy of European colonialism; the absence of anything even approximating enlightened local leadership able to satisfy the aspirations of people tired of corruption, economic stagnation, and authoritarian rule; the appeal — inexplicable to Westerners — of violent Islamic radicalism. All play a role.

Such attitudes may be understandable. They are also unconscionable.

Yet when it comes to why this fragile structure collapsed just now we can point to a single explanation — the cascading after-effects of a decision made by Bush during the spring of 2002 to embrace a doctrine of preventative war.

The previous autumn, U.S. forces toppled the government of Afghanistan, punishing the Taliban for giving sanctuary to those who plotted the 9/11 attacks. Bush effectively abandoned Afghanistan to its fate and set out to topple another regime, one that had no involvement whatsoever in 9/11.

For Bush, going after Saddam Hussein’s Iraq formed part of a larger strategy. He and his lieutenants fancied that destroying the old order in the greater Middle East would position the U.S. to create a more amenable new order. Back in 1991, after a previous Iraq encounter, Bush’s father had glimpsed a “new world order.” Now a decade later, the son set out to transform the father’s vision into reality.

The administration called this its Freedom Agenda, which would begin in Iraq but find further application throughout the greater Middle East. Coercion rather than persuasion held the key to its implementation, its plausibility resting on unstoppable military power. For Bush’s inner circle, including Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz (but not Powell), victory was foreordained.

They miscalculated. The unsettled (but largely ignored) condition of Afghanistan after the fall of the Taliban already hinted at the extent of that miscalculation. The chaos that descended upon Iraq as a direct result of the U.S. invasion affirmed it. The Freedom Agenda made it as far as Baghdad and there it died.

That Saddam was a brutal tyrant is a given. We need not mourn his departure. Yet while he ruled he at least kept a lid on things. Bush blew off that lid, naively expecting liberal democracy or at least deference to American authority to emerge. Instead, “liberating” Iraq produced conditions conducive to the violent radicalism today threatening to envelop the region.

So rather than cluck over the reluctance of Greeks, Serbs, Hungarians and others to open their borders to those fleeing from the mess the U.S. played such a large part in creating, Americans would do better to engage in acts of contrition.

The US, even under the leadership of Donald Trump, should at least understand that it is never too late to say they are sorry for creating this total mess in the Middle East and Afghanistan, which saddled the EU and Turkey up with millions of refugees, and indirectly, as a result, also created ISIS.

As to the EU,  it is never too late to recognize, they finally must get off the lap of Uncle Sam, develop their own independent foreign policy, and stop being part of disastrous US military  adventures.

EU-Digest

Austria's election: Europe reacts to Sebastian Kurz victory

Sebastian Kurz Austria's new political leader 

German Chancellor Angela Merkel congratulated Sebastian Kurz on his victory and the "energetic" modernization of his party, which is aligned with her Christian Democrats.

She declined to comment on which coalition arrangement she wanted to see, but said the Freedom Party's strength would be a "major challenge" for its Austrian rivals.

Merkel said the challenge posed by the right-wing populist Alternative for Germany was "manageable" compared with the FPÖ's strength. She hoped for close cooperation with Kurz at the European level.

Hungary's foreign minister Peter Szijjarto was full of praise for his Austrian counterpart and "friend" Kurz, who at 31 is expected to become Europe's youngest national leader following an election victory on Sunday.

"He's hijacked neither by hypocrisy nor by political correctness. He's always honest, he's always very direct and I think it's very necessary currently, that European leaders speak directly," Szijjarto told reporters in Brussels.

Szijjarto welcomed Kurz's stance on migration as close to that of Budapest and expected Austria to work more closely with anti-immigration eastern and central European states including Hungary, Poland, Slovakia and the Czech Republic. East-West divides over migration policy have strained unity in the bloc.

Note EU-Digest: 
It is sad to see that some of the Governments of the EU's Eastern and Central European States, occupied by the Nazi's in the second world war, " indirectly" seem to have copied some of the policies and laws of their former Nazi occupiers, particularly in relation to some of their present immigration policies.  

These laws were implemented in Nazi Germany and their occupied territories (1933–45) based on a specific racist and religious doctrine, asserting the superiority of the Aryan race, which claimed scientific legitimacy.  

The Nazi laws qualified Muslims, Africans and other minorities as "Untermenschen (sub-humans)" . It is important for the EU Parliament and EU Commission to make clear, that laws by EU member states, which ban immigrants from entering into the EU, based on their ethnicity or religion, in any way or form, should not be allowed to see the light of day.. 

Read more: Austria election: Europe reacts to Sebastian Kurz victory | News | DW | 16.10.2017

EU: Exports and low unemployment fuel rapid growth in central Europe - by James Shotter

Central Europe’s economies have continued their rapid expansion, outpacing their peers in western Europe as rock bottom interest rates and record low unemployment fuel consumer spending.

With the eurozone’s recovery also pushing up exports from the region, Romania’s economy grew at the fastest annual rate in the EU in the second quarter.

The Czech Republic, Poland, Slovakia and Hungary also reported strong growth, according to preliminary data on Wednesday.

Romania grew by 5.7 per cent year on year in the second quarter. The Czech Republic grew by 4.5 per cent, Poland by 4.4 per cent, Hungary by 3.6 per cent and Slovakia by 3.1 per cent. The EU grew by 2.3 per cent.

Read more: Exports and low unemployment fuel rapid growth in central Europe

EU: Post-Trump, post-Brexit, the EU may end up more unified than ever - by Joshua Keating

EU- United we stand - divided we fall

As France’s next president, Emmanuel Macron, took the stage outside the Louvre on Sunday night to the strains of Beethoven’s “Ode To Joy,” the European Union anthem, it was easy to view the centrist, pro-EU technocrat’s victory over the right-wing populist Marine Le Pen as an endorsement by the French public of the European project.

This would be a little misleading. Between Le Pen, François Fillon, and Jean-Luc Mélenchon—the second-, third-, and fourth-place candidates in the first round of the election—and various fringe parties, more than two-thirds of French voters went for euro-skeptic candidates. Those candidates’ supporters went for Macron in the second round less because of enthusiasm for him than the fact that most of them, though not as many as in previous elections, considered Le Pen unacceptable.

The contradiction at the heart of the EU—that a project dedicated to the spread and promotion of democracy continues despite the will of most European—that a project dedicated to the spread and promotion of democracy continues despite the will of most Europeans—has not gone away.

The project persists in large part because, as the French election demonstrated, its opponents can’t agree on what an alternative should look like. And while it’s still early days, the global political events of the past year may have unexpectedly strengthened the EU by giving it something to stand against.

A few months ago, the EU looked on the verge of collapse. The Greek financial crisis and a massive influx of migrants had opened up fissures between members. Then came Brexit, which European leaders warned could set off a race to the exits.

Then came the election of Donald Trump, a president who threatened to abandon the traditional U.S. support for European integration and publicly attacked German Chancellor Angela Merkel while praising Vladimir Putin. All the while, populist, nationalist parties, many with murky links to the Kremlin, were surging in the polls in a number of countries.

But in 2017, the wave has crested a bit. In the Netherlands’ March election, far-right candidate Geert Wilders had a disappointing finish. A pro-European center-right party won parliamentary elections in Bulgaria, and a pro-European president won in EU applicant state Serbia. Merkel appears in good shape ahead for her re-election bid in September, and even if her center-left opponent, Martin Schulz, could squeak out a victory, he’s also a strong backer of European integration.

Brexit will undoubtedly reduce the global economic clout of the union, but it could also make the EU politically stronger by removing one of the staunchest opponents of European integration. For instance, the EU is moving to coordinate defense budgets and military command structures, a process Britain often opposed, viewing it as a back-door means of creating a transnational European army. European governments have also been able to agree on a common negotiating stance over Britain’s exit remarkably quickly. Feeling a little more stable after Macron’s victory, European leaders may be more confident in enforcing tough terms on Britain to dissuade any other wayward members from getting similar ideas.

As for Trump, in practice he has turned out to be neither as anti-Europe or as pro-Russian as Brussels feared. He’s reportedly warming to the idea of striking a trade agreement with Europe rather than the bilateral deals that he, and particularly nationalist adviser Steve Bannon, said he preferred during the campaign.

Trump has had an impact on European politics by providing establishment politicians with a counterexample to run against. Trump and Le Pen have each praised each other, and she even paid a visit to Trump Tower—though not to Trump himself—in January. She even went as far as to describe them as part of a common global movement. But 82 percent of French voters have a negative view of Trump, according to a poll released last week, so it wasn’t exactly surprising to see anti–Le Pen ads warning French voters not to “Trump themselves” or to see Macron touting the support of Barack Obama.

A Trump-led movement is not one the Frenchor any of the Europeans particularly want to be part of.

The European public may still be suspicious of Europe, and European leaders—who are viewed as distant and undemocratic—still need to do a much better job of articulating a positive vision of what they’re for. But thanks to Brexit and Trump, it’s now at least easy for those leaders to articulate what they’re against. 

Read more: Post-Trump, post-Brexit, the EU may end up more unified than ever.

EU leaders forced to unite in new Trump reality - by Eszter Zalan

United We Stand Divided We Fall

EU leaders pledged the need for unity and for Europe to stand on its own two feet at their meeting in Valletta on Friday (3 February), during a discussion on how to handle US president Donald Trump, whom EU council chief Donald Tusk described earlier this week as a "threat" to the EU.

Leaders emphasized the importance of the transatlantic relationship, and said they would work together with Trump on common interests, but move toward more independent European action on issues where the EU and the US administration disagree.

"We work on the basis of our shared values, [...] there are areas where we agree, like fighting international terrorism, and where we don’t agree," German chancellor Angela Merkel said after lunch, which summed up the mood toward Trump among EU leaders after a turbulent week of heavy criticism from Europe and concern over the US president's first days in office.

Merkel said that this is an opportunity for Europe to redefine itself and become more self-reliant. 

"The general debate concentrated on where we stand, we have to act together," Merkel said, adding that it could lead to boosting investment in defense capabilities in the EU but also in Germany. "We have our destiny in our own hands."

Some EU leaders heavily criticised Donald Trump's decision to ban refugees and people arriving to the US from seven Muslim-majority countries.

Others, like Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orban ( whose country represents the new face of corruption in Europe), slammed those who criticized Trump. Before arriving at the Valletta summit, Orban said that the US has the right to decide its own border control policy, and that he is puzzled at the "neurotic European reactions" over the travel ban.

Read more: EU leaders forced to unite in new Trump reality