In my opinion, the recent political atmosphere and the results of the latest European Parliamentary elections in particular, have shed light on a reality in which the vision of a federal Europe appears to be out of sync with the goals and aspirations of the European people. For many years, the idea of a united Europe, one that transcends our national borders and embraces shared governance, has been an inspiring and noble ambition. The European federalist movement has championed this vision, advocating for deeper integration and for a federal system that would lay the foundation of a more cohesive and powerful Union. However, the electoral outcomes of the 2024 election suggest a disconnect between this vision and the preferences of European voters. The rise of nationalist and populist parties across the continent is widely seen as a clear signal that many Europeans are rather sceptical towards the EU and of the current path towards further integration. In Hungary, as in many other Member States, voters have increasingly gravitated towards parties that emphasise national sovereignty and control over domestic affairs. We shouldn’t see this as a fleeting phenomenon but as a profound expression of the electorate’s will.
If we, Europeans, are to succeed together and not to fail together then our focus should be to strengthen a European Project that aspires to take into consideration the views of the many not just the few. During my tenure at JEF, I have aimed to represent a more conservative viewpoint to give voice to those who believe in the potential of a more united Europe, but one that respects the diverse identities and sovereignties of its member states. This approach is not about erasing the boundaries of our nations or promoting uniformity but about fostering cooperation while honouring the unique characteristics of our broader European family. However, much to my regret the dominant narrative within the federalist movement is gradually getting more radical and more comfortable with imposing ideas rather than forging solutions.
There will be many people who take the results of June 9th as a mandate to accelerate the push towards federalism in this current political climate. I, for one, cannot support deeper integration on a political level while tensions on the level of our societies are unattended. I fear that federalists misinterpret the will of the voters and risk further polarising our communities. Pursuing a more aggressive federalist agenda in response to growing euroscepticism is a hazardous journey. It could feed divisions within the EU and fuel the very nationalist sentiments JEF seeks to counter. Insisting on a one-size-fits-all model of federalism disregards the legitimate concerns of those who feel that their national identity and sovereignty are under threat. Why risking a greater disillusionment with the EU? Why driving more citizens towards populist and nationalist parties that promise to “reclaim control” from Brussels? The Brexit referendum and its aftermath should serve as a stark reminder of the potential consequences of ignoring the electorate’s concerns. The more an uncompromising federalist agenda is pushed, the more we risk alienating the very people whose support too is crucial for the success of the European project.
As I see it, a general mistake is that we approach the more integrated Europe through the lens of already existing federal systems. People tend to look to models like the United States or Germany, hoping to replicate their successes, although these systems are also struggling with their own shortcomings. I’m convinced that our continent’s unique historical, cultural, and political landscape requires a different approach. We should strive to invent a system that is ours, a uniquely European solution that keeps our continent united while preserving the autonomy of our Member States. Developing a framework that allows for varying degrees of integration based on the specific needs and desires of each country seems to be the only way for a proposal to enjoy wide support among citizens. Such a system would respect national sovereignty while fostering cooperation on shared challenges like climate change, security, and economic stability. It would be a model that is flexible and adaptable, capable of evolving in response to the diverse and dynamic nature of European societies.
I had good fortune to be part of the JEF Hungary project led by Balázs Brandt and to contribute to building up JEF in Hungary. We had a National Board which unanimously recognised that the betterment of European institutions and the closer collaboration to protect our shared future is and must continue to be a non-partisan question. We strongly believed that for such an endeavour, we must bring a wide spectrum of thoughts and beliefs to the table, since the result of this work should benefit all of us, regardless of political affiliation. In a heavily polarised society like Hungary, and indeed in the European Union as a whole, this approach is essential for building bridges. Our work in Hungary demonstrated that meaningful dialogue and cooperation across the political spectrum are possible and necessary. By focusing on common goals and shared interests, we can create a more inclusive and resilient European project that stands strong against the forces of division and the challenges of our modern time.
One of my growing concerns is that, instead of staying above party politics, JEF Europe and its current leadership seem comfortable positioning the organisation as the youth section of the European liberal left. I personally reject this idea. I still believe that JEF should take advantage of the fact that, as a youth organisation, it is not forced to engage in party politics. The community of the Young European Federalists has a unique opportunity to ease the division of future generations by promoting a spirit of collaboration and mutual respect while helping to form a European identity that leads us forward, not left or right. This is an opportunity that I do not see JEF Europe’s leadership leveraging.
As I bid farewell, my parting message to my fellow Europeans in JEF, and to all European federalists, is one of caution and pragmatism. Strategies must be reassessed and aligned more closely with the realities on the ground. It is crucial to engage with the concerns of eurosceptic voters and to find a moderate course that balances aspirations for unity with the need for respect and flexibility. We should advocate for a Europe of “concentric circles," where different countries can integrate at varying speeds and depths based on their preferences and capacities. This model could acknowledge that not all Member States are ready or willing to give up significant amounts of sovereignty, and creates a more organic and voluntary pathway towards integration. Furthermore, we must prioritise reforms that enhance the democratic legitimacy and transparency of EU institutions. Strengthening the role of the European Parliament and balancing it with the Council might be the most urgent, but increasing citizen participation in EU decision-making and ensuring that the benefits of integration are fairly distributed can also help to bridge the gap between the EU and its citizens.
The dream of a more united Europe remains a powerful and admirable vision, but in 2024 it has become clear that it must be pursued with a deep understanding of the diverse and evolving sentiments across our continent. Therefore I urge the European federalists, if their intentions are really to set the stage for a more powerful Union, to embrace a more realistic approach, one that seeks to unite rather than divide, to listen rather than dictate, and to build a Europe that truly reflects its people. Only through moderation, pragmatism, and respect for national sovereignty can we hope to revive and sustain the dream of a Europe that is united in diversity.
Follow the comments:
|
