The victory of the European right brings reasons for the Brazilian right to celebrate – but also to worry.
Humiliating defeats for Emmanuel Macron and Olaf Scholz, Lula’s first-time allies, marked the European Parliament elections this weekend. The socialist parties shrank and the Greens were reduced to near insignificance.
Meanwhile, parties labeled as “far-right” and independent, once marginalized, are now gaining strength and starting to significantly influence the design of a new political face, perhaps more conservative, in Europe.
The populist wave, which began with Brexit in 2016, appears to have finally reached continental Europe. There are only reasons to celebrate, right? Not exactly.
After the euphoria of the initial impact, a deeper analysis reveals certain nuances that recommend a healthy dose of skepticism, especially regarding the possible effects on Brazil.
First, as observed in the victories of Trump, Bolsonaro and Brexit itself, the system’s reaction against conservative democratic advances is always brutal and almost immediate, taking advantage of the eternal disorganization of the right – normally averse to the game of the deep state and, therefore, making yourself vulnerable to it.
Second, although the press generally paints the so-called European “extreme right” as a bogeyman — along the lines of the Brazilian or American right —, with few exceptions, this right differs substantially from those existing on this side of the Atlantic.
For example, in addition to immigration, Marine Le Pen’s party campaign focused on issues considered centrist or even left-wing, such as wage cuts, a universal healthcare system and an increase in pensions.
Issues of the so-called “customary agenda”, such as abortion, carrying weapons, and, increasingly, gender ideology and even euthanasia, are considered “pacified” and ignored by the European right. The romantic vision of Europe’s resurgence as the center of Christianity is non-existent on the continent.
In Europe, the conservative agenda is more focused on nationalist sentiment against EU centralization (called Euroscepticism), tighter immigration control — sometimes advocating restrictions on the advancement of Islam — and a more rational approach to environmental policies, in opposition to climate change hysteria. Still, these issues gained relevance due to their secondary effects on housing, social well-being, crime and cost of living.
The European Parliament, despite theoretically representing the legislative power of the EU, does not have the power to propose or approve laws on its own, functions of the (non-elected) executive power of the EU, the European Commission – today headed by the German Ursula von der Leyen. Parliament’s influence is limited, and its elections attract lesser politicians, making this weekend’s gains more symbolic.
However, there is no doubt that these elections serve as a barometer for European politics, and the message from the European electorate of “more France (or Germany, or Italy…), less Brussels” echoes the Brazilian right’s sentiment of “more Brazil, less Brasília”.
The most positive aspect for Brazil coming from this result may be the consolidation of a new global conservative wave, with the rehabilitation of right-wing agendas that suffered harsh defeats – and a certain setback – in the post-Covid world, especially with the elections of Lula and Biden.
This wave resurfaces at an excellent time, possibly influencing this year’s Brazilian municipal elections and, if Trump’s victory in November’s American elections is confirmed, potentially gaining extra momentum until 2026.
Another reason for optimism is the so-called “Brussels Effect”, where the EU, unable to lead on account of innovation or productivity, has specialized in exercising a kind of global regulatory leadership – exporting its laws to other jurisdictions. One example is the EU General Data Protection Law (GDPR), which inspired similar laws around the world, including the Brazilian LGPD itself.
At a time when the EU is stepping up its efforts to regulate Artificial Intelligence, it is threatening to impose severe sanctions on big techs that fail to comply with its strict regulations on social networks, and advances in imposing restrictions on freedom of expression through laws against so-called “hate speech” – in addition to threatening the privacy of citizens with the implementation of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs ) – a Parliament with a more conservative composition could act as a counterweight to some of the bloc’s authoritarian tendencies, potentially limiting its expansion around the world.
On the other hand, the growth of the European right could be negative for Brazilian agribusiness, as less competitive and highly subsidized European agribusiness gained significant political strength in these elections, possibly making the conclusion of the Trade Agreement between the EU and Mercosur still more complicated.
Furthermore, under the leadership of Macron — perhaps the world leader most averse to Brazilian agribusiness, rivaling even Lula —, the European environmental lobby has explored a variety of environmental pretexts, from burning in the Amazon to the use of agricultural pesticides, to obstruct the ratification of the trade agreement between the EU and Mercosur.
This scenario, already tense since the conclusion of negotiations in 2020, tends to become even more complicated with the political strengthening of European farmers.
The implosion of the German economic growth model, which for decades depended on imports of cheap energy from Russia and consumer and capital goods from China, makes Germany extremely interested in implementing the agreement.
This agreement is seen as vital to sustaining its weakened industrial sector, creating a major rift between Macron and Scholz. This contrast could even influence the choice of Ursula von der Leyen’s successor as leader of the European Commission later this year.
With the weakening of Macron and Scholz, both major Lula guarantors in Europe, the Brazilian’s global ambitions and credibility are also impacted, especially in the context of the expansion of the BRICS bank and operations on other international platforms.
Additionally, it is worth noting that Brazil can also benefit from greater European sensitivity to issues of political persecution and attacks on freedom of expression occurring in the country, aspects that were recently highlighted by the American Chamber.
Although the rise of a certain right in Europe may initially be seen as positive, it is important to note that the ideological differences, and structural and political limitations of the EU itself, indicate that the benefits of this political change may not be as direct or substantial as previously thought. could wait.
Jefferson Vieira is an economist with a decade of experience in the financial market and multilateral organizations, based in Europe.
#Conservative #wave #sweeps #Europe