• Research
  • Politika
  • About
Carnegie Russia Eurasia center logoCarnegie lettermark logo
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Judy Dempsey"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Europe"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "EU Integration and Enlargement"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Europe",
  "programAffiliation": "EP",
  "programs": [
    "Europe"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Europe",
    "Western Europe",
    "Iran"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "EU",
    "Democracy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media
Carnegie Europe

Why Did Euroskeptics Triumph at EU Poll?

One of the main reasons for the rise of anti-EU and nationalist parties in the European Parliament elections is that mainstream parties did not campaign very hard.

Link Copied
By Judy Dempsey
Published on May 26, 2014

Source: Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty

Europe is reeling following the big gains of anti-EU and nationalist parties in European Parliament elections on May 25.

RFE/RL's Claire Bigg discusses the causes and implications of the Euroskeptics' triumph with Judy Dempsey, a nonresident senior associate at Carnegie Europe and editor in chief of the "Strategic Europe" blog.

Unemployment, immigration, and mounting disillusion with mainstream parties are just some of the reasons cited for the huge gains made by Euroskeptic and far-right parties in the May 25 elections. In your opinion, why did so many voters across Europe back these parties?

The mainstream parties really didn't campaign very hard. They didn't take a stand on certain things -- standing up for what the European Union means, what Europe means as a place for immigrants as well. It left the field wide open for the fringe parties. And they capitalized on this.

Can we speak of a protest vote, or do voters who cast their ballots for anti-EU and far-right parties genuinely identify themselves with the values upheld by these parties?

Well, these values are very strange. It's a mixture of values. But I think what binds them together is antiglobalization, anti-immigration, and anti-what they see as this huge federalist monster called the European Union. They certainly played on this kind of anti-European, antiglobalization. And a lot of voters went for it.

Could this vote actually threaten the European Union's fundamental principles? Is Europe at stake?

The treaties are not affected by this. And the four big planks of the European Union -- labor, capital, people, democracy -- these are very important and won't change. What changes is the tone, how Europe is perceived by the outside world, and how the presence of the fringe parties in the European Parliament will affect Europe's defense and security policy.

Enlargement, the attitude toward Russia, relations with Ukraine, relations with Turkey, and the Middle East -- these are big foreign-policy issues and the inward-looking attitude of these fringe parties does not bode well at the moment for Europe.

Will these parties have enough leverage in the European Parliament to influence the EU's foreign policy?

If you look at the numbers, no. But they can be an incredible nuisance. They have a lot of votes back in France, Britain, and other countries, so they will make a lot of noise. But it's up to the mainstream parties to pull together and stand up for what they see as worth defending. And it's not just values. It's the whole identity of Europe, of the European Union.

The European People's Party, the socialist group, will probably do grand coalitions of the willing, so to speak. It will be unpleasant with the fringe parties. But everybody knows that once fringe parties get together, at the European Parliament or at other parliaments across Europe, they behave very badly and they perform very badly. So we'll see if they can put up a united front. UKIP [U.K. Independence Party] has already said it wouldn't [work] with [France's] Front National.

French Prime Minister Manuel Valls has described the election's result as a "shock" and an "earthquake." Did the Euroskeptics' triumph really take everyone by surprise?

It's an extraordinary result, frankly. Front National No. 1 in European Parliament elections? The turnout is very high, too. So yes. Opinion polls said they would do well, but gosh. The prime minister is right, it was a shock."

Do you think their poor showings in this election will force mainstream parties to rethink their policies, including on immigration?

David Cameron, the British prime minister, has been criticizing Europeans who come to work in Britain. It's just not right, the way he criticizes the Poles and those "living off the welfare state," whereas in fact a lot of these immigrants have contributed hugely to the British economy, paying their taxes and making Britain a more tolerant and open place. But Cameron, because of UKIP, decided to play the nationalist, populist card. This has backfired very, very badly. If the mainstream parties want to pander to these right-wing parties, they might as well give up everything they believe in. There has to be a serious amount of rethinking now.

[Fringe parties] stand for very little, for a very insular view of the world. These countries cannot go it alone. If they believe they can, they are deluding themselves. The mainstream parties must not perpetuate this delusion.

This interview was originally published on Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

About the Author

Judy Dempsey

Nonresident Senior Fellow, Carnegie Europe

Dempsey is a nonresident senior fellow at Carnegie Europe

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    Europe Needs to Hear What America is Saying

      Judy Dempsey

  • Commentary
    Babiš’s Victory in Czechia Is Not a Turning Point for European Populists

      Judy Dempsey

Judy Dempsey
Nonresident Senior Fellow, Carnegie Europe
Judy Dempsey
EUDemocracyEuropeWestern EuropeIran

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Why Are China and Russia Not Rushing to Help Iran?

    Most of Moscow’s military resources are tied up in Ukraine, while Beijing’s foreign policy prioritizes economic ties and avoids direct conflict.   

      • Alexander Gabuev

      Alexander Gabuev, Temur Umarov

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    What Does War in the Middle East Mean for Russia–Iran Ties?

    If the regime in Tehran survives, it could be obliged to hand Moscow significant political influence in exchange for supplies of weapons and humanitarian aid.

      Nikita Smagin

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    How Trump’s Wars Are Boosting Russian Oil Exports

    The interventions in Iran and Venezuela are in keeping with Trump’s strategy of containing China, but also strengthen Russia’s position.

      • Mikhail Korostikov

      Mikhail Korostikov

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    How Far Can Russian Arms Help Iran?

    Arms supplies from Russia to Iran will not only continue, but could grow significantly if Russia gets the opportunity.

      Nikita Smagin

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Lithuania’s Potash Dilemma Raises Questions About Sanctions’ Effectiveness

    What should happen when sanctions designed to weaken the Belarusian regime end up enriching and strengthening the Kremlin?  

      Denis Kishinevsky

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
Carnegie Russia Eurasia logo, white
  • Research
  • Politika
  • About
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Privacy
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.