Connect with us

Europe

Europe’s ‘illiberal democracies” issue

Published

on

Andrzej Duda, president of Poland’s Law and Justice Party (PiS), made a very harsh statement on the long-debated issue of releasing funds for covid recovery. Duda said he would no longer respond to proposals from the European Commission, taking all the necessary steps for the relevant fund. The Polish leader went even further, claiming that a group of “left-wing liberal” politicians in Brussels wanted a government change in the country.

The recovery fund that Brussels had allocated to Poland was around 36 billion euros, but this money had not been in Warsaw’s hands for a long time on the grounds that it had not follow “supremacy of law”. Poland’s plan was finally approved; European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen again made the provision of money conditional on “reform”.

In November last year, the European Commission froze 100m euros in EU funding to Poland over Warsaw’s refusal to comply with a decision by the EU to end the activities of the Polish Disciplinary Service. On 15 July, the PİS government made amendments to the law on the Supreme Court and terminated the running of the disciplinary board. Established in 2017, the Disciplinary Chamber was presented by the government as a judicial reform. The chamber was viewed by the opposition and the EU as a way of intimidating independent judges that go against the government. The agency had no legal identity, which was approved by both the Polish Constitutional Court and the ECHR. The EU had even started fining Poland 1m euros per day for the chamber. Upon this, Duda decided to close the chamber and establish the “Professional Chamber of Responsibility”. According to the opponents, it was just a variation of the same thing.

Poland as leader of the ‘rebellion‘ against Brussels

Founded in the early 2000s, Poland’s ruling party, PİS, has become one of the most important representatives of the political position in Europe, now called “right-wing populist”, over the years. At first, it was thought that there would be a standard “Christian Democrat” party, and it was also on good terms with the Catholic Church. After the election victory in 2015, criticism rose both inside and outside: PİS was attacking Poland’s “democratic institutions”, acting against the rule of law, interfering with the Constitutional Court, restricting human rights and freedoms and increasing the country’s debt. In summary, the PİS administration was in contradiction with the “Round Table Talks” that emerged in the 1980s and that governments generally  attuned with after the dissolution of socialism.

What was that consensus? We can summarize it under four headings: first, democratization and decentralization; second, the “inefficiency” of the socialist economy and, as a remedy, the process of transition to a fast free-market capitalist economy in which private ownership would be central; third, -related to the second one- the acceptance of the “bitter prescription” and austerity policies under IMF and World Bank supervision; and fourth, good relations with the US in foreign policy, integration into EU mechanisms, and NATO membership were the constant principles.

Pre-PİS governments had complied unquestioningly with a harsh privatisation programme and IMF-World Bank-based neoliberal offensive policies. The reform process, initiated in 1997 following the Shock Therapy in the early 1990s, placed the neoliberal agenda and led to a serious decline in the living standards of millions of Poles.

It was under these circumstances that the march of PİS, which started with the coalition in 2005 and ended with power alone in 2015, began. PİS, who was tougher on anti-communism and Russian hostility than its predecessors, appeared before voters in the 2015 elections with the promise of deviation from neoliberal testament under the name of “economic patriotism”. In this context, in addition to reducing the power of banks and multinational companies, a “social transfer” campaign, which had not been seen since 1989, was also put forward: lowering the retirement age, financial support for families with more than one child, tax regulation and hourly minimum wage. This was accompanied by cultural policies such as objection to the law that frees gay marriages, criticism of the EU’s migration and multiculturalism policy, strengthening the nation-state system and protection of Christian values. Not to mention changing the street names that are related to communism from the period of the People’s Republic of Poland, they were such hostile as to change street names from Poland’s socialist traditions.

Indeed, Warsaw’s flag of rebellion against Brussels is marked by an ideological slur that identify with fascism, communism and the LGBT, and underlines the opposition to all of this. At this point, it should be stated that in the overthrow of the first PİS power (2005-2007), the urban-educated professional layers had a significant role, who believed that harsh neoliberalism was still beneficial to them and that they would prosper. The group consisted of people who took out a loan and bought a house, took out private health insurance to get rid of Poland’s poor health system, went to private schools or sent their children there. The eurozone crisis has crashed the hopes of these segments as well. Poland, whose economy has been growing steadily since the fall of communism, reached its peak in the 2000s, was entering the 2010s with an economic slowdown. Those who sent PİS with a tin can tied to its tail were printing two seals on its “national capitalism” in 2015.

This is the source of the tension between the EU and Poland. This is the Poland’s motivation  behind the demand of $1.26 trillion in compensation from Germany due to World War II. The Polish leadership is driven by the equation “Germany equals the EU”. This situation, combined with anti-Russianism, gives Warsaw an interesting field of action: the anti-Russian Anglo-American alliance, together with the Baltic countries, assigns a special role to Poland. Moreover, Britain, which has left the EU, wants to consolidate a non-EU Eastern European alliance system that includes Poland.[1] This being the case, Poland can raise its voice against both Russia and Germany.

Raising the voice might be a bit of an understatement: PİS leader Jarosław Kaczyński said last August that there was a German-Russian plan designed to rule Europe, and that Poland did not follow it. Kaczyński argued that the Polish opposition also acted in accordance with this plan and wanted to make the country “obedient to neighbouring powers”. Whereas last year, it was him last year who caused eyebrows to raise, saying that the EU had become the “Fourth German Reich”. Justice Minister Zbigniew Ziobro recently went further and argued that Germany wanted a “colonial government” in Poland.

 Hungary seeks reconciliation

Another “illiberal” country that an issue for Brussels is Hungary. Following his 54.13% election victory last April, Fidesz leader Viktor Orban referred to the EU headquarters, saying his victories were visible from the Moon, even from Brussels. Orban also explained who they had won the victory against: the Leftists, the bureaucrats in Brussels, George Soros, the international mainstream media, and even the President of Ukraine.

In 2014, Orban said his goal was “to build an illiberal democracy based on national institutions”. According to Orban, the 2008 global economic crisis showed that liberal democratic states were not globally competitive. The Hungarian leader said he wants to transform “welfare societies” into “employment/working societies” and previously stated that central control should increase in order to cope with energy companies and banks. Orban was struggling to get rid of “debt slavery” and not to make Hungary a “colony of the EU”. What he meant was abandoning the liberal way of looking at the world in order to put society in order.

However, it seems that Orban, who riveted his power, wants to make a fresh start with Germany. Fidesz leader Olaf Scholz, who left for Berlin in October, met with Germany’s new chancellor last year. Afterwards, although Orban described the meeting as “productive”, it was noteworthy that a joint press conference was not held.

Although it is understandable that the traffic light coalition in Germany does not want to side with Orban, it seems that both countries are now sending the message of “unity”. Hungary, like Poland, faces the threat of halting the European Commission’s pandemic recovery funds. The release of funds, which will be decided on November 19th, is of vital importance for Budapest, and it is above all to get Berlin’s approval on this matter.

Orban hoped he could find support for his own anti-sanction position in the German business world, as German industry suffered greatly due to anti-Russian sanctions. Germany is still the largest foreign investor in Hungary and the country’s main trading partner. But Orban doesn’t seem to have found what he hoped for: German industrialists didn’t like Orban, who attended a business forum in Berlin. The German industry as a whole supports anti-Russian sanctions, said Philip Hausmann, president of the German Eastern Trade Association. Hausmann also warned that the German-Hungarian partnership was in danger. According to him, the increasing “illiberal” practices of the Hungarian government were disrupting this partnership. “Whoever cooperates with us wins,” Orban said.

The latest situation in Germany, France, Italy

In the past week, it may not have been felt around here how the tension between Germany and France got to the newspapers. But the hysteria in the French press reached such a point that the country’s oldest financial newspaper, Les Echos, made the headline, “The war between France and Germany has become possible again.”

What happened? The German-French joint cabinet meeting was cancelled, with Scholz and Macron avoiding the cameras. Current contradictions are evident: rising energy prices and Germany’s unilateral subsidy decision, objection to increasing joint debt. All this is causing Paris to raise eyebrows. Moreover, Olaf Scholz’s visit to China was not welcomed by Emmanuel Macron, who reportedly offered to “give the impression that Europe is united” and the German Chancellor declined. France argues that the two countries must develop a special relationship in order to make the EU a geopolitical centre and to create a weight against the US and China. On top of that, France seems to be far behind its oldest rival economically in the last few decades.

It seems that Germany is not very much involved. Germany, which has bowed to the United States militarily and economically, also seems to have paused on joint defence projects with France. From the French point of view, the Germans think: If a European-based defense industry is to be developed, it must be a German industry under American control. Otherwise, there should be no such defense industry at all. It is clear that the two countries have different interpretations of “strategic autonomy”of the EU.

In Italy, another powerful country, the new right-wing power that has aroused “fear” in Brussels, is not thought to be that frightening. Giorgia Meloni, who met Brussels bureaucrats for the first time after his election, described the dialogue as “very sincere and very positive”. Meloni reiterated his pro-EU position on joint fight against rising energy prices and support for Ukraine against Russia. Meloni presents himself to the EU as a pragmatic, moderate and mainstream politician.

[1]. According to an Italian newspaper, the United Kingdom has for some time been eager to establish a “Commonwealth of Europe” consisting of the Baltic countries, Poland and Ukraine. Even more interestingly, according to the newspaper, Turkey will be added to it soon after the community is formed. See the news.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Europe

Hungary’s new PM Magyar vows absolute ban on illegal migration, challenging Brussels over fines

Published

13 hours ago

on

03/06/2026

By

Hungary’s newly elected Prime Minister Péter Magyar has pledged to block all illegal migration, reject European Union quotas, and challenge Brussels’ punitive fines, signaling a highly restrictive border policy even as he vows to restore ties with European partners.

In his first interview with the German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung since taking office, Magyar outlined his administration’s strategic roadmap. He addressed the smear campaigns directed against him by the former government of Viktor Orbán, relations with the EU, migration policy, and the economic necessity of maintaining energy ties with Russia.

Reflecting on his transition to power, Magyar noted that the Orbán administration targeted him, his family, and his colleagues during a highly polarized campaign.

“I have known Viktor Orbán for a long time. What happened during the election campaign was no surprise to me, even if it might be difficult to imagine in other countries,” Magyar said. “The mudslinging campaign was not just directed at me personally, but also against my family, my colleagues, and my friends. However, those who faced each other were not Hungarians against Hungarians; it was Viktor Orbán and his vassals standing against the Hungarian nation. One of our most important campaign promises is that we will do everything we can to reunite the Hungarian nation.”

Despite running a pro-European campaign to secure victory, Magyar acknowledged fundamental disagreements with Brussels, particularly on migration. He argued that former Prime Minister Orbán’s hardline stance during the 2015 European migrant crisis was correct.

“My government will pursue an extremely strict and decisive policy regarding illegal migration,” Magyar said. “You can be as angry with Viktor Orbán as you want—and no one has criticized him more than I have—but when the migration crisis began in 2015, he was right. Many member states have now admitted they made wrong decisions at the time. In any case, we will protect our homeland, our country’s borders, and the external borders of Europe.”

“Hungary will not accept any illegal migrants”

Responding to whether Hungary would comply with newly implemented EU asylum rules, which mandate member states to conduct processing procedures at external borders, Magyar delivered a firm refusal regarding quotas and penalties.

“I can only say this: Hungary will not accept any illegal migrants. We will not pay any penalties for this either,” Magyar said. “However, we will help protect Europe’s external borders, whether in Greece, Malta, or Italy. The 2015 migration crisis must be a lesson for Europe. The most important duty of European politicians is to protect the safety of the people. I believe there are many ways to stop illegal migration without violating European Union rules. It is simply a matter of being able to negotiate.”

Magyar also dismissed the current relevance of a European Court of Justice ruling imposing a daily fine of 1 million euros on Hungary for failing to implement EU asylum procedures, arguing the decision is outdated.

“The court’s decision was made at a very different time and under a different legal framework,” Magyar said. “Today, we are in a completely different situation. This decision no longer reflects today’s reality. Today, there are many countries acting just like Hungary, yet this European Court of Justice decision does not apply to them. I find this incredibly unfair. In order to protect our borders and avoid having to pay the daily fine of 1 million euros, we will hold talks with our European partners and find a common solution.”

While acknowledging that the judicial ruling is final and cannot be appealed, Magyar described the financial burden on Hungarian citizens as unjust.

“The decision cannot be appealed. We are looking for new rules and opportunities to avoid paying the fine,” he said. “It is unfair and disproportionate that the people of Hungary must pay a fine of 1 million euros every day. Similarly, it is a great injustice that while other member states receive these funds, Hungary has been provided with no financial resources for the wire fence it constructed to protect the external border of the European Union.”

“Exclusion only makes the far-right stronger”

Magyar strongly opposed pushback from member states—particularly pressure from Germany—to transition EU foreign policy decision-making from unanimity to qualified majority voting, defending the preservation of national sovereignty.

While rejecting the confrontational rhetoric favored by Orbán toward Brussels, Magyar emphasized the importance of compromise among sovereign states.

“I served as a diplomat within the European Union for a long time, and I know very well how difficult it is to reach a consensus among 27 countries. Yet, most of the time, this is achieved,” Magyar said. “Orbán always said, ‘We must defeat Brussels.’ I do not think that is the point. The point is to understand each other, to persuade, and not to try to defeat one another. People do not want a United States of Europe; they want a European Union based on strong member states. For this reason, I do not support transitioning to a majority voting system in many areas instead of the unanimity rule at this stage. We will negotiate and find a middle ground.”

Addressing the political rise of far-right parties across Europe, particularly in France and Germany, Magyar criticized traditional political elites for being disconnected from public anxieties and relying on political moralizing.

He warned that isolating these populist movements is counterproductive.

“I do not like labels like far-right or far-left. I do not like ideological wars,” Magyar said. “People deserve more than politically correct speeches where ideological labels are slapped on one another. I have no intention of interfering in the internal affairs of other member states, and I will not do so; on this point, I differ from Orbán. However, I observe that some countries make mistakes in combating extremist parties. In many countries, politicians do not act honestly. They do not understand people’s fears and expectations, and they do not dare to talk openly about problems and face them. They use the language of political correctness and, at the end of the day, fail to grasp reality itself. These are precisely the mistakes that certain groups exploit. Excluding these people and these parties, building a wall of isolation around them, is not a solution on its own. Exclusion only makes these forces stronger. In many countries, these mistakes have been recognized, but not yet everywhere.”

Asked if this critique applied to Germany, Magyar maintained his criticism of governing establishments.

“In many countries, the political, media, and economic elites protect their own positions and do not always address the real fears and problems of the people. But the public does not forget this. That is why what we need is honesty, honesty, and once again, honesty,” he said.

On the debate over whether conservative factions in the European Parliament should cooperate with the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, Magyar shared his perspective on the future strategy of the European People’s Party (EPP), which includes his own party, Tisza.

“In the European Parliament, political forces must always seek a majority, and grand coalitions between the center-left and center-right can function. Germany and Austria are good examples of this,” Magyar said. “However, this does not always work, and that is why the CDU/CSU and the European People’s Party, which includes my party Tisza, may have to make a decision one day. In my view, the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) are the natural allies of the European People’s Party. Whether they want to cooperate with the AfD is not my decision to make. However, I believe that talking to one another and listening to the other’s arguments never causes harm. What we accept from each other’s proposals is an entirely separate matter.”

“Europe will partially return to Russian energy after the war”

Defending Hungary’s decision to continue importing crude oil and natural gas from Russia despite the war in Ukraine, Magyar emphasized the country’s landlocked geography and economic constraints.

“The Hungarian people elected me as the Prime Minister of Hungary. My government’s duties include ensuring energy security, security of supply, and the lowest possible energy prices,” Magyar said. “In recent years, Hungary has become one of the poorest and most corrupt countries in the European Union. Three million people live below the poverty line. Our neighbors in the European Union must understand that Hungary is a landlocked country. We are still dependent on Russian oil, and we cannot change this overnight. We have not seen economic growth for years, and we need cheap energy to grow. Of course, we are doing everything we can to diversify our energy resources, but we cannot afford to see our companies’ competitiveness decrease further and Hungarian families’ energy poverty increase. I think Europe will partially turn back to Russian energy resources and lift sanctions when the war ends, because the competitiveness of all of Europe is at stake here. In a future state of peace, no one has an interest in maintaining a new economic and political Cold War. For this, of course, the war must first end.”

While Orbán maintained close ties with American conservative movements and received explicit support from Donald Trump, Magyar indicated that the change in leadership in Budapest would not damage relations with Washington.

“The US is Hungary’s natural ally in NATO and a highly important economic partner. What happened during the election campaign will not change this. We will maintain good relations with every American administration,” Magyar said.

Magyar criticized Orbán’s personal relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin, arguing instead for a pragmatic, non-ideological approach to Moscow in the post-war era.

“I know the role of Russia in Hungarian history very well. I have not forgotten the years 1849 and 1956. In both periods, Russian troops bloodily suppressed the Hungarian freedom movement,” Magyar said. “But on the other hand, the reality is that geography does not change. We must accept this as it is. Therefore, we must develop pragmatic relations with Russia once the war against Ukraine ends. Nonetheless, it is extremely clear that Russia currently poses a security risk to all of Europe. It is unacceptable that people in Europe must live in fear of Russian sabotage or a Russian attack. That is why this war must end, and we must provide international security guarantees to Ukraine. However, Europe can only develop when normalcy returns, and Russia cannot have an interest in a new Cold War becoming permanent on the continent.”

“We can turn a new page with Ukraine”

Magyar pledged to end the hostile state-sponsored propaganda directed at Ukraine by the previous administration, emphasizing his respect for Ukraine’s territorial integrity and his personal involvement in humanitarian efforts.

“We want to build good relations with all our neighbors, not least because a Hungarian minority lives in each of them. This also applies to Ukraine,” Magyar said. “We have always stated that Ukraine is the victim in the Russia-Ukraine war and that Ukraine has the right to its territorial integrity. When the Russians bombed the largest children’s hospital in Kyiv in the summer of 2024, I immediately went to Kyiv with our volunteers and personally delivered the humanitarian aid of the Hungarian people. Right after the attack, we set off in a 30-year-old Ford Transit and reached Kyiv within 20 hours under air raids and missile bombardments. I did not see any other European politician at that bombed hospital. We are currently holding talks with Ukraine at a technical level, and we are working to reach an agreement within a few days to restore and guarantee the language, education, and cultural rights of the 100,000 Hungarians living in Ukraine. Today, we need to clarify certain matters with Ukraine regarding our minority in that country, and I hope we will achieve this in the coming days. Ethnic Hungarians there currently do not have the opportunity to use their mother tongue in their relations with official authorities. However, if we resolve these issues on the basis of mutual interest, we can turn a new page.”

Magyar cautioned that future security guarantees for Ukraine must be concrete and enforceable, unlike previous international agreements.

“In 1994, the famous Budapest Memorandum was signed, in which the US and other major powers guaranteed Ukraine’s independence and integrity. However, these promises were not kept, because empty slogans are of little use,” Magyar said. “Right now, everything is at stake in Ukraine. A large number of people are dying, and it is possible that this country will lose part of its territory. Therefore, Ukraine needs real, enforceable international guarantees.”

However, the Prime Minister reiterated that Hungary would remain militarily uninvolved in the conflict, stating that arms shipments do not constitute a genuine security guarantee.

“I do not believe that weapons are a security guarantee. Security guarantees can only be provided by the international community,” the Hungarian leader concluded. “Hungary cannot play a decisive role here; this is the work of the major powers. We can provide diplomatic and humanitarian aid, and Hungary can also provide a suitable ground for negotiations.”

Continue Reading

Europe

EU agrees new deportation rules allowing migrant return centers outside the bloc

Published

2 days ago

on

02/06/2026

By

European Union lawmakers and member states have reached agreement on new legislation overhauling rules governing the deportation of asylum seekers.

According to Politico, the agreed text allows asylum applicants whose claims have been rejected to be sent to dedicated return centers established outside the EU.

As a key condition of the deal, measures to establish the return centers are set to be implemented immediately.

The move is said to be of particular importance to the Netherlands and Germany. Other provisions of the legislation are expected to take effect one year later.

The agreement must still receive final approval from both the EU Council and the European Parliament before it can formally enter into force.

European Commissioner for Migration Magnus Brunner said the agreement would help the EU regain control over both those arriving in the bloc and those required to leave it.

According to data from Eurostat, the proportion of migrants denied asylum in the European Union who ultimately leave the bloc remains at around 27%.

“We must give people the feeling again that we have everything under control,” Brunner said.

The new framework grants member states the authority to transfer individuals ordered to leave EU territory to return centers located outside the bloc.

Several member states are already examining the option, while human rights organizations have warned of risks of rights violations and abuse during the process.

The legislation also introduces stricter measures, including home searches, extended detention periods, entry bans, and penalties for individuals deemed security threats or those who refuse to cooperate.

French Member of the European Parliament François-Xavier Bellamy told the publication: “For years, Europe sent the worst possible message: even if you had no right to stay, there was a high likelihood that nothing would happen. That era is ending. If you do not have the right to remain in Europe, you must leave.”

The initiative, however, has faced opposition from lawmakers affiliated with liberal and left-wing groups.

Melissa Camara, a representative of the Greens group, described the agreement as “a legal arsenal serving a xenophobic ideology” and criticized both offshore centers and the detention of minors.

Marta Welander, head of the International Refugee Committee, said the new measures signaled “a troubling new era.”

Welander argued that the rules would normalize migrant raids and increase the risk of people being deported to countries where they could face persecution or torture.

According to available data, the number of migrants living within the European Union reached 64.2 million in 2025. During the same period, the foreign-born population arriving from outside the bloc increased by 2.1 million people annually.

In 2010, the European Union was home to approximately 40 million migrants.

As a result, the migrant population has increased by more than 60% over the past 15 years, while migrants’ share of the EU population has risen to 14.2%.

In December last year, US President Donald Trump said Europe faced the risk of destruction because of the migration policies pursued by European countries.

Trump had previously argued that the continent was facing a wave of migration and that, as a result, Europe was “no longer the Europe it once was.”

Continue Reading

Europe

Anthropic invites EU cybersecurity agency to access Mythos AI hacking model

Published

2 days ago

on

02/06/2026

By

Anthropic has invited the European Union to access Mythos, its powerful AI-powered hacking tool, by sending an invitation to the bloc’s cybersecurity agency.

A European Commission official said the AI company issued the formal invitation following a meeting with the Commission in San Francisco last Thursday, adding that the EU must now establish a mechanism that would allow access to the model under appropriate security safeguards.

Bloomberg reported on Monday that ENISA, the EU’s cybersecurity agency based in Athens, would be granted access to Mythos.

European Commission spokesperson Thomas Regnier said the Commission had held “several productive meetings with Anthropic” and “welcomes the latest developments regarding potential future access.”

Anthropic unveiled Mythos in early April and warned that the model outperformed most humans in identifying and exploiting cybersecurity vulnerabilities.

The disclosure raised concerns that the model could be used to carry out large-scale attacks against critical and sensitive systems if it fell into the hands of cyber adversaries.

European officials were unable to access the cutting-edge cybersecurity AI technology for weeks, prompting urgent calls from European lawmakers and government officials to secure access.

Cybersecurity officials also urged Europe to develop its own version of the technology.

“This latest development is extremely important in helping us gain a clear understanding of the potential risks. We should not forget that Mythos is not an isolated case and that a new wave of powerful models is entering the market,” Regnier said.

An ENISA official said the agency does not currently have active access to the model but is working to make it operational.

The Commission is developing a formal action plan to respond to powerful AI hacking tools.

According to an industry official, the Commission has indicated that it wants to publish the plan before the summer break.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey