The rise of Europe’s counter globalist Right: A look at Patriots for Europe, ECR, and Europe of Sovereign Nations”

The European political landscape is undergoing a profound transformation, with a rising tide of national-conservative, right-wing populist, and anti-globalist groups challenging the current left-liberal values championed by the EU’s Brussels-based establishment. Groups like Patriots for Europe, European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR), and Europe of Sovereign Nations (ESN) are advocating for a markedly different vision for Europe—one that, among other things, emphasises national sovereignty, a return to conservative values, and economic self-reliance. While these groups share common ground, they also diverge in some of their practical approaches to governance, reflecting a complex interplay between ideology and pragmatism.

Foundational Ideologies and Shared Themes

It’s importat to noe that despite their differences, Patriots for Europe, the European Conservatives and Reformists, and Europe of Sovereign Nations share some core principles:

• Sovereignty and National Identity: Central to each of these political groupings is the belief that EU member states should regain greater control over their domestic policies. All three view the EU as increasingly encroaching upon national autonomy and diminishing national sovereignty, and they push for reduced EU influence in the internal affairs of nation-states.
• Anti-Globalism and Economic Self-Reliance: These groups are united in their scepticism toward cultural and economic globalisation, which they believe has compromised Europe’s economic independence and undermined the unique cultural identities of nation-states. Their policy proposals aim to curb the influence of multinational corporations, promote local businesses, and bolster national industries.
• Cultural Preservation: Cultural sovereignty is another shared pillar, with these groups advocating for the preservation of national languages, customs, and values. They see the EU’s emphasis on pan-European identity as a threat to unique national cultures, which they feel should be protected and celebrated.

Key Global Issues and Foreign Policy Stances

The response of these groups to international conflicts and global powers further illuminates their ideological and practical distinctions.

Ukraine War

• Patriots for Europe: This group often takes a sceptical view of extensive EU involvement in the Ukraine War, pushing for European countries to adopt a non-interventionist stance and to focus instead on strengthening borders and security within Europe. They argue that Europe should not be drawn into what they consider a U.S.-led NATO agenda.
• ECR: ECR supports aid to Ukraine, even endorsing direct military involvement. They believe that Europe should remain diplomatically engaged but avoid policies that might provoke further escalation with Russia, emphasising that national interests should take precedence over the EU’s broader security agenda. The ECR is arguably one of the most hawkish groupings in the European parliament when it comes to the Russo-Ukrainian war.
• Europe of Sovereign Nations: This group adopts a cautious stance on Russia and limited aid to Ukraine as part of a broader European effort, yet emphasises the need for Europe to eventually work toward a diplomatic resolution. They believe maintaining economic and political stability within Europe should remain the priority. Some of them like Bulgarian Revival, or AfD have openly declared pro-peace stances.

Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

• Patriots for Europe: The group tends to side with Israel, viewing it as an ally in the fight against Islamist extremism, though they advocate for Europe to avoid direct involvement. They criticise what they see as one-sided narratives (in the favor of counter-Israel groups) and support strong anti-terrorism stances.
• ECR: ECR promotes a neutral, non-interventionist stance in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, favouring European efforts focused on humanitarian aid without taking strong sides. They advocate for de-escalation through dialogue rather than overtly favouring one side.
• Europe of Sovereign Nations: While also largely neutral, they support the right of Israel to defend itself while urging for a sustainable peace solution that involves cooperation with international partners.

Russia

• Patriots for Europe: Patriots for Europe have a pragmatic approach toward Russia, often suggesting that Europe should avoid isolating Russia entirely. They are critical of heavy sanctions, which they argue hurt European economies, and advocate for selective engagement on issues like energy and trade.
• ECR: ECR promotes cautious engagement with Russia, opposing outright isolation but maintaining that Europe should protect its own interests first. ECS also supports limiting energy dependence on Russia by diversifying European energy sources.
• Europe of Sovereign Nations: This group supports a middle-ground approach, advocating for targeted sanctions while keeping diplomatic channels open. They view Russia as a necessary, albeit complex, partner and stress that Europe should avoid fully severing ties that could lead to economic fallout.

China

• Patriots for Europe: Advocating for economic independence, PfE, apart from Hungary’s Fidesz party, view China with suspicion, fearing dependency on Chinese goods and technology. They call for strong protective measures for European industries against what they view as aggressive Chinese trade practices.
• ECR: ECR shares a critical stance on China, calling for closer scrutiny of Chinese investment in European infrastructure and technology. They advocate for Europe to limit Chinese influence and maintain tight security and data privacy laws.
• Europe of Sovereign Nations: Similar to ECR, they favour restricted engagement, pushing for Europe to be cautious in trade relations with China and reduce dependency on Chinese technology for critical infrastructure.

     Donald Trump’s Potential New Presidency

• Patriots for Europe: A new Trump presidency is welcomed, as they share a common scepticism of globalist policies and view Trump as a figure who would respect European sovereignty.
• ECR: ECR sees Trump as a mixed influence but acknowledges his preference for national sovereignty over global alliances. They remain cautiously optimistic about his approach to non-interventionist foreign policy.
• Europe of Sovereign Nations: This group welcomes Trump’s emphasis on national sovereignty and bilateral relations, seeing it as an opportunity to redefine transatlantic ties on more equal footing.

Elon Musk, Digital Technology (AI and Censorship), and Bitcoin

• Patriots for Europe: This group sees Elon Musk as a symbolic figure of innovation and free-market resilience. They support digital technology advancement but oppose EU censorship policies, pushing for freedom of speech on digital platforms. They’re generally favourable toward Bitcoin, viewing it as a tool for financial independence.
• ECR: ECR is more cautious about Musk, particularly concerned about the unchecked power of large tech firms. They advocate for balanced AI development with strong privacy protections and support limited digital censorship to prevent extremism. ECR remains undecided on Bitcoin, urging caution due to its regulatory challenges.
• Europe of Sovereign Nations: They support digital technology but advocate for a “sovereign internet,” with stricter controls on data leaving Europe. They oppose AI-driven censorship but support regulation to prevent abuse. They are open to Bitcoin but favour creating a European digital currency over complete adoption.

Stances on Environmental and Social Policies: Climate Change, Green Deal, and “Woke” Politics

As right-wing populist and national conservative groups gain influence within the European Parliament, their stances on climate and social issues highlight both shared beliefs and areas of division. Patriots for Europe, European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR), and Europe of Sovereign Nations bring differing perspectives on climate initiatives like the EU Green Deal and Paris Agreement, as well as social policies surrounding gender, LGBT rights, and so-called “woke” politics. These issues underscore ideological divides, particularly in balancing national interests with EU-wide initiatives.

Environmental Policies: Climate, Green Deal, Paris Agreement, and Fossil Fuels

Climate Change and the EU Green Deal

• Patriots for Europe: This group is largely sceptical about climate policies that they perceive as restrictive or costly to national economies. They view the EU Green Deal as an overreach of the European Union’s authority, arguing that its environmental mandates place an undue burden on industries and energy prices, especially in poorer EU regions. Patriots for Europe criticise what they consider “climate alarmism” and often advocate for prioritising energy independence (often via nuclear energy) and industrial resilience over ambitious climate goals.
• ECR: ECR takes a more moderate approach on climate issues, acknowledging the need for environmental protection but arguing that the EU Green Deal should be reformed to protect national economic sovereignty. ECR supports voluntary measures for emissions reduction rather than strict targets, viewing the Green Deal’s timeline as overly aggressive and potentially harmful to jobs and industry. They favour a climate policy that is more respectful of traditional industries, particularly in Eastern Europe.
• Europe of Sovereign Nations: Among the three, Europe of Sovereign Nations is the most receptive to climate policies. They support portions of the Green Deal, particularly initiatives that align with energy independence and sustainable development, such as investment in renewable energy. However, they still argue for flexibility in implementation, believing member states should have more control over how they meet climate targets rather than a one-size-fits-all EU mandate.

The Paris Agreement

• Patriots for Europe: Patriots for Europe openly criticise the Paris Agreement, viewing it as a symbol of globalism that imposes top-down climate standards. They argue that the targets are unrealistic and believe that national governments should set their own policies based on specific needs and resources, rather than international accords. They advocate for renegotiating or, if necessary, withdrawing from the Paris Agreement.
• ECR: ECR maintains a critical but cautious stance toward the Paris Agreement, acknowledging its goals while questioning its applicability across diverse economies. ECR supports scaled-back climate targets that take national contexts into account and prefers non-binding commitments, fearing that stringent requirements could jeopardise European economic stability.
• Europe of Sovereign Nations: Europe of Sovereign Nations generally supports the Paris Agreement but insists on flexibility in implementation. They argue that each country should have the autonomy to decide how to achieve its targets in line with its economic conditions. This group views climate action as important but believes national sovereignty must be preserved, with a focus on achievable rather than idealistic goals.

Social Policies: Gender, LGBT Rights, and “Woke” Politics

Gender and LGBT Rights

• Patriots for Europe: This group often takes a conservative stance on social issues, opposing what they label as “woke” policies on gender and LGBT rights. They believe these issues should be decided nationally rather than at the EU level and argue that the EU has pushed social policies that undermine traditional family structures. Patriots for Europe is sceptical of gender-based quotas and is vocal against what they see as the imposition of LGBT rights agendas in schools and public policy, framing these as issues of cultural sovereignty.
• ECR: ECR supports traditional values and emphasises the importance of family in European society. They are particularly critical of gender-based policies they feel are divisive, such as quotas or specific LGBT rights legislation that they argue is preferential treatment. ECR favours a more restrained approach to social policy, advocating for laws that uphold what they view as Europe’s cultural heritage without what they consider “radical” changes. They oppose EU mandates on gender or LGBT rights, supporting instead “family-first” policies.
• Europe of Sovereign Nations: While largely conservative, Europe of Sovereign Nations takes a more moderate approach, recognising the importance of equal rights but cautioning against identity-focused policies. They argue that social policies should aim for inclusivity without favouring one group over another, and they are critical of EU initiatives they feel go beyond promoting equality and risk fuelling division. This group promotes a “live and let live” philosophy, supporting civil rights without endorsing progressive gender policies that may be seen as “woke.”

“Woke” Politics

• Patriots for Europe: Fiercely opposed to what they see as “woke” politics, Patriots for Europe argue that these policies undermine traditional European values and foster social division. They reject EU-funded initiatives on topics like gender studies and racial diversity, considering them politically charged. Instead, they advocate for national education policies that emphasise cultural heritage and European identity.
• ECR: ECR opposes “woke” policies that, in their view, prioritise social activism over cultural cohesion. They criticise EU policies promoting diversity and inclusion, arguing they are often forced onto member states without regard to local values. ECR pushes for a Europe focused on unity through shared heritage, promoting integration rather than identity-based politics.
• Europe of Sovereign Nations: This group takes a more cautious approach, wary of “woke” politics but less overtly opposed. They argue that diversity initiatives should support social unity and be tailored to each country’s context. While they don’t outright oppose inclusivity, they advocate for policies that they believe strengthen European identity without catering to what they consider divisive social trends.

Concluding Thoughts

The ascent of right-wing populist, national-conservative, and anti-globalist parties, like those that make up the Patriots for Europe, ECR, and Europe of Sovereign Nations groupings, signals a potential turning point for Europe. These groups not only want to reshape Europe internally, but they also seek to redefine how Europe engages with the world. From advocating for sovereignty in the face of global challenges to questioning the EU’s long-standing alliances, they present a model that prioritises national control and economic independence. How these ideas will translate into European policy—especially in a world marked by complex international relations—remains to be seen. With issues ranging from digital innovation to geopolitics at stake, the decisions of the next European Parliament could either cement or challenge the union’s future stability.

The environmental and social positions of these rightist groups reflect their fundamental emphasis on sovereignty, national values, and economic security. While they share opposition to centralised EU climate mandates and “woke” social policies, they differ in their approach to balancing these views with pragmatic engagement on climate issues and a moderate, culturally sensitive approach to social policy. How these stances play out in the European Parliament will not only shape Europe’s environmental and social trajectory but also test the EU’s ability to unify member states on issues that increasingly define Europe’s place in the world.