Timothy Garton Ash: “If Trump wins, I see a great danger of Europe dividing rather than uniting”

Europe is facing a turbulent time between the internal rise of far-right forces, Russian imperialism and the risk of Donald Trump returning to power. Timothy Garton Ash (London, 68 years old), professor of European studies at the University of Oxford and author of several books on the continent ―among them, the recent Europe. A personal story (Taurus)―, addresses these and other issues in an interview given this Wednesday in Madrid at the headquarters of the Ramón Areces Foundation, where he was preparing to give a lecture. During the conversation, he raises several warnings, including “the danger of Europe dividing instead of uniting if Trump wins”, with several EU leaders tempted to curry favor with the tycoon instead of focusing on strengthening community integration. As for his country of origin, Garton Ash believes that “with Starmer, the United Kingdom will once again be a serious country”.

Ask. A wave of far-right populism is sweeping through Western democracies. What has gone wrong to bring this about?

Answer. Many, many people in our societies are dissatisfied with the world that we liberals have built. That is the starting point. And surprisingly, many are young people, not just older people who are nostalgic for something, a past that perhaps never existed. I think there are two big issues. On the one hand, things related to community and identity. The classic phrase is: “I don’t recognise my own country anymore.” And that is a mix of globalisation, multiculturalism, immigration, globalised capitalism. On the other hand, there are the concerns that I link to the concepts of solidarity and equality. People feel that the basic contract that the European state had with its citizens, which involved a minimum of solidarity and equality, like being able to buy a house, have a job, get a decent education, have a police force that protects you well, that kind of thing, is not being fulfilled. And if you look at populist appeals, they always play on those two keys.

P. Steve Bannon recently told David Brooks, in The New York Timeswhich in his opinion “the dominant Western elites are increasingly alienated from the life experience of the people.”

R. There is some of that, but you have to note that the people who lead the populists are themselves part of the elites, as we know. Donald Trump is a millionaire. But of course there is some truth in that. Think, for example, of the left-liberal ideal that half of our children should go to university. We have achieved that. Unintended consequence: we have split our societies in half. Half of society is highly educated, speaks languages, loves to travel around Europe, lives in big cities, embraces multiculturalism and globalisation. The other half doesn’t. On the other hand, our political classes come almost entirely from the first half. 50 years ago, you had working-class people as leaders in politics. Now you have this sense of a separate elite in charge. Then comes the populist. And although they themselves went to university, Wharton Business School in Trump’s case, they manage to connect. There was an interesting study on Donald Trump that showed that 10 years ago his language had the sophistication typical of a Wharton Business School graduate. Then he simplified it. And that’s very effective politically.

P. You mentioned the issue of solidarity and equality. If we think of France, we see a country that collects a lot of taxes, that has strong public services. It is not a country that abandons its citizens.

R. I would slightly disagree. If you live in peripheral France, then the state doesn’t get there well. You don’t have good bus services, you don’t have great health services and so on. That’s what people feel. And the National Rally (RN) politicians really focus on these basic socio-economic concerns, about housing, the cost of living, healthcare. My conclusion, and I think this with a lot of conviction, is that if we want to defend liberalism in the broadest sense, we need to be much more radical in our liberalism. Liberals were supposed to be good at doing their job. Liberals were the people who said ‘it’s the economy, stupid’. So why don’t we build enough housing? Let’s get on with it. Let’s recognise that the market alone is never going to build enough affordable housing. Multinational companies pay less tax than many ordinary citizens. So I think there’s a real conclusion there, that we need more radical liberalism, which doesn’t mean more free market. I am talking about enabling every member of our society to have an equal opportunity to be the full master of his or her own life, which is the heart of true liberalism.

P. Why has the left not been successful in intercepting this malaise linked to the question of solidarity and equality?

R. One of the things that has happened to the centre-left parties is that they have moved remarkably closer to the business community and particularly to financial services. And the big mistake that we liberals made for 30, 40 years was to talk about the international community. We talked about Europe, but we stopped talking about the nation on the right. So we have to reclaim the nation, but in a civic and liberal way. We have to take the best of the left and the right. From the conservative tradition, we need to understand that people are attached to the community, to tradition, to what is. And from the left, we need to take some of the basic ideas about equality of opportunity, what Ralf Dahrendorf called the common ground, basic housing, health care, education, so that you have an equal chance and an equal start in life.

P. Everything points to a solid Labour victory in the UK. What are your expectations?

R. Starmer has a great slogan, to make the UK serious again. And I like that very much. It will become a serious country. He is a serious politician with a serious cabinet. He has run things. And so I think the country will become serious again. That is point number one. Point number two, they have some good ideas, although, in the direction we have been talking about, the problem is that we have a national debt that is close to 100% and growth is weak. So there is not much money to play with. Number three, there will be an attempt to reset relations with Europe. First, on security policy. So I expect a serious country that seeks a new beginning with Europe.

P. And if you think about the ToriesDo you think they will take a course of pragmatism and moderation or, with Nigel Farage still on the rise, will they opt for populist and radical gestures to slow his rise?

R. I would bet on the latter. I am not a member of any party, but I think the positive side of this is that the Labour Party – a serious governing party, committed to reforming the country and restoring the relationship with continental Europe – can potentially have a 10-year mandate. And that means that in the second term it will be able to take more decisive steps with the EU, such as the customs union.

P. If we look a
t the EU, the pro-European majority in Parliament has more or less held up. The problem is in the Council, with the radical right in power in many countries. And if the far right were to succeed in governing in France…

R. But even without Bardella [Jordan, dirigente del RN]there will be a Dutch government with an ultra-dominant party, there is Giorgia Meloni, there is obviously the pressure from the AfD in Germany. And, although it now seems likely that in France there will be an unstable parliament without an absolute majority, without a Prime Minister Jordan Bardella, nevertheless, the RN will be the largest party. The last thing we need in this situation is complacency because when push comes to shove, it is still the member states that make the difference and the situation does not look good in quite a few of the major European member states. On top of this, if in November we have a Donald Trump 2.0, I am sure that there will be the Trump party within the European Union. Viktor Orbán number one, Robert Fico number two, but also other leaders, also Marine Le Pen and I would bet Giorgia Meloni, who has been very cooperative so far, but is looking at the power relations within the West. And instead of uniting in response to a Trump presidency, I see a great danger of Europe breaking up.

P. You just mentioned Trump. Do you think that if he wins, he will abruptly cut off support for Ukraine? And, if so, is Europe prepared to support kyiv alone?

R. I think the future of Europe depends on this. And I think we are not doing enough. I was there just over a month ago. I have never felt the country so exhausted, so traumatised, so pessimistic, so divided. And military experts are really worried. So I think we Europeans should already be preparing for the eventuality of a Trump presidency, which means more defence industrial production, more ammunition, more arms supplies, more training, so that we are in a position to sustain Ukraine, even if Trump withdraws support. Are we doing it? Not enough. Has it become more likely since the European election and the French election? No, it has become less likely because who has been the most eloquent and bold advocate of this among the top European leaders? Emmanuel Macron. But Macron will have his hands tied, whatever the outcome on 7 July. So I am extremely worried about this. As for what Trump does, I think there’s a 90% chance he’ll do what he said and try to make a deal, essentially sacrificing Ukraine.

Follow all the international information at Facebook and Xor in our weekly newsletter.

_