Connect with us

World

Von der Leyen: Too right for the left and too left for the right?

Published

on

Von der Leyen: Too right for the left and too left for the right?

Ursula von der Leyen has presided over the most transformative years of the European Union in recent memory. But after weathering a string of extraordinary crises, her ideology might have gotten lost along the way.

ADVERTISEMENT

Von der Leyen has had few quiet days since moving to Brussels. Just three months after assuming office as the first female president of the European Commission, her executive was faced with a global pandemic that killed millions, brought the economy to a standstill and left wealthy governments scrambling to get hold of basic medical supplies.

The formidable test turned the president into a crisis manager, a position she initially struggled with but later appeared to rejoice. She was then tasked with guiding the bloc through Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, a painful energy crunch, a steady rise in irregular migration, a combative China, ubiquitous online threats and the mounting devastation wreaked by climate change.

Now, after almost five years of emergencies, von der Leyen wants a second chance at the very top: she is running as the lead candidate, or Spitzenkandidat, for her policy family, the centre-right European People’s Party (EPP), to preside over the Commission for another term. With the EPP projected to emerge victorious at the June elections, the odds are in von der Leyen’s favour.

As the campaign intensifies, so does the scrutiny over her legacy and ambitious policies. Did she fulfill her promises or did she break them? Can she be trusted? These are legitimate questions for a candidate seeking to rule the bloc’s most powerful institution. But the scrutiny inevitably extends to a more enigmatic question surrounding von der Leyen: Is she still a conservative?

In her speech during the EPP congress in March, she referenced World War II and touched upon a variety of topics, such as family values, security, border controls, economic growth, competitiveness and farmers, all of which tend to resonate well with right-wing voters. 

Advertisement

Notably, though, the intervention featured only one mention of Christian Democracy. The word “conservative” was nowhere to be found.

Even more notable was the scathing letter the French delegation of the EPP had sent ahead of the congress in Bucharest, opposing von der Leyen’s nomination. Les Républicains (LR) lambasted the German for her “technocratic drift,” “de-growth policies” and failure to control “mass migration.”

“A candidate of Mr Macron (The French president) and not the right, she has continuously left the European majority drift towards the left,” the letter read.

A few days earlier, socialists had gatheredin Rome for their own congress during which Iratxe García Pérez, the chair of the Socialists & Democrats (S&D), was asked if her group would support von der Leyen, the indisputable frontrunner, for a second term. 

García Pérez said her group was open to negotiating but insisted they would not back a contender “who doesn’t accept our policies.” She then went on an extensive denunciation of the EPP for abandoning the mainstream and embracing talking points of the far right. “This is a real danger,” she told journalists.

Advertisement

Consensus vs ideology

With the right and the left hardening their positions ahead of the elections, von der Leyen’s accomplishments appear caught in the middle.

The last five years have seen the Commission designing policies that cater to the right, including a sweeping reform to speed up asylum procedures, harsher penalties for human traffickers, deals with neighbouring countries to curb irregular migration, plans to boost the defence industry and a toolbox to address demographic changes.

On the other hand, von der Leyen’s executive has spearheaded initiatives warmly welcomed by the left, such as a €100-billion scheme to sustain employment during the pandemic, new rules to improve the conditions of platform workers, standards to ensure adequate minimum wages, a pioneering law to protect journalists from state interference, the first-ever LGBTIQ strategy and, most crucially, the European Green Deal, a vast set of policies aimed at making the bloc climate-neutral by 2050.

But pigeonholing her proposals into an ideological sphere fails to give a complete picture of von der Leyen’s true creed. Instead, they serve as a reminder of the particular nature of the European Commission, an institution that, according to the Treaties, is independent and meant to promote the bloc’s general interest.

By constantly negotiating with the Parliament and member states, the president has no choice but to give preference to consensus over ideology, says Fabian Zuleeg, the chief executive of the European Policy Centre (EPC).

Advertisement

“She has been, in many cases, very much a crisis manager. Certainly with COVID and with Ukraine. It wasn’t so much, in the first instance, about ideology. It was about reacting. But, of course, certain preferences have come through. But this has been very much in the interplay with member states,” Zuleeg said in an interview.

“From a European perspective, pragmatism is the name of the game. You have to have pragmatic compromises, so you can bring enough on board to get things through.”

Some of von der Leyen’s flagship actions, such as de-risking from China, reining in Big Tech, financial support for Ukraine, the revival of enlargement and the joint procurement of vaccines, further blur the line, as they can appease both sides of the spectrum.

ADVERTISEMENT

Instead of treating these sensitive issues through a partisan lens that risks polarisation and dissent, von der Leyen frames them as “European challenges” that require “European solutions,” a vague but catchy wording that she often employs to defend her policy interventions and remain above the fray.

“What has been much more characteristic of (her tenure) is that she has very much pushed this idea of European solutions to all of these issues,” Zuleeg notes. “And in some cases, it’s actually very difficult to say when you look into the details: Is this really left or right? I don’t think you can easily distinguish between the two.”

‘Queen Ursula’

Von der Leyen’s careful pragmatism only compounds the mystery surrounding her political beliefs, despite the high profile and media coverage she has amassed over the past five years.

Advertisement

Nathalie Tocci, director of the Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI), identifies three ideological tenets that can be attached to von der Leyen: a strong commitment to European integration, a strong commitment to the Transatlantic alliance and a strong commitment to Israel, the last of which responds to her German background.

“I cannot imagine a world in which she would give up those convictions,” Tocci told Euronews. “I think the rest is really up for grabs.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Von der Leyen, Tocci says, has been willing to reformulate her agenda and narrative “out of convenience”. When she faced the Parliament in 2019 for a nail-biting confirmation vote, she bet big on the Green Deal, invoking the climate movement that back then was making headlines. Four years later, she rushed to propose exemptions to the Green Deal in a bid to quell farmer protests.

Migration is another field in which the president has swayed between a humanist perspective, speaking sympathetically about the plight of asylum seekers, and a hardline approach, calling for stricter controls and signing deals with authoritarian regimes.

“Depending on what the political trend of the day is, she could be either relatively open and liberal towards migration or she could be somewhat conservative,” Tocci says. “These are things where I don’t think she has very firm convictions.”

An EU official, who requested anonymity to speak candidly, expressed a similar view, saying von der Leyen switches between “ideological positions opportunistically, aligning herself with whatever suits her convenience and interests at the time.”

Advertisement

“Coherent policy implementation has been noticeably absent, with actions often appearing more geared towards seizing photo opportunities than addressing substantive issues,” the official said, speaking of “political ambiguity.”

ADVERTISEMENT

These complaints are commonplace in Brussels. Although von der Leyen has been widely praised for her determined leadership, ambitious vision and energetic rhetoric – skills that come in handy to weather crises –, she has been repeatedly criticised for pushing through the legislative cycle with little to no consultation beyond her closely-knit circle of advisors, some of whom she brought directly from Berlin.

Her penchant for centralisation, her aloof character and her avoidance of controversial subjects have garnered her the nickname of “Queen Ursula” in Brussels, which her calculated not-too-right, not-too-left campaign is bound to reinforce.

“She was progressive on climate because she needed those green votes to get elected,” Tocci said. “This was, in a sense, the price to pay. Now, does this mean that she didn’t believe in this at all? No, not necessarily. But does it therefore mean that she firmly believes in it? Not necessarily either.”

“She’s not ideologically committed,” Tocci went on. “So if she now needs conservatives to vote for her – well, then she will be conservative.”

Advertisement

World

Horvath to Heidenreich on 4th-and-goal leads No. 22 Navy to a 17-16 win over Army

Published

on

Horvath to Heidenreich on 4th-and-goal leads No. 22 Navy to a 17-16 win over Army

BALTIMORE (AP) — Blake Horvath to Eli Heidenreich.

That’s the connection that led Navy to such a memorable season — and the two of them came through again on the biggest play of the biggest game.

Horvath threw an 8-yard touchdown pass to Heidenreich with 6:32 remaining — on fourth-and-goal — and No. 22 Navy rallied to beat Army 17-16 on Saturday. Heidenreich, the career and single-season leader in yards receiving for the Midshipmen, caught six of Horvath’s seven completions on the day.

“Who wouldn’t go to him?” Horvath said. “Talk about an all-time Navy legend. You’re going to be talking about Eli Heidenreich for years and years and years.”

Although it was clearly a passing situation, and Heidenreich was Navy’s top target, he was single covered over the middle.

Advertisement

“Tried to bring some pressure on them,” Army coach Jeff Monken said. “Good throw and good catch.”

With President Donald Trump in attendance, Navy (10-2) got its second straight victory over Army (6-6), and the Midshipmen won the Commander-In-Chief’s Trophy for a second straight season. The Black Knights have not beaten a Navy team that was ranked by the AP since 1955.

Horvath was fortunate to have the chance to throw that decisive touchdown pass. On second-and-goal from the 1, he lost the ball while attempting a tush push. Army linebacker Eric Ford had a chance to scoop it up, but Navy running back Alex Tecza lunged over to prevent that, and Heidenreich eventually fell on the ball back at the 8.

“That’s probably the last thing you want to see on the 1-yard line is you turn around and the ball is just bouncing behind you,” Heidenreich said. “I was blocking down. I thought he had pushed in, and kind of out of my peripheral I saw it going behind me.”

On the next play, Horvath was nearly sacked, but he was able to throw the ball toward Tecza as he went down. The ball fell incomplete instead of being caught around the 15, which was just as well for Navy because it made going for it on fourth down a more viable option.

Advertisement

“I kind of felt like we had to,” Navy coach Brian Newberry said. “The nature of what they do offensively, despite how well we played in the second half, you may not get the ball back.”

Even after Heidenreich’s touchdown and an Army punt, Navy still had to escape one more near-turnover. On third-and-3 from the Army 43, the ball popped loose on a run by Horvath, but he was able to catch it out of the air. It came loose again and the Black Knights recovered, but after a review, Horvath was ruled down before the second fumble — a yard short of the line to gain.

Tecza then ran for the first down that enabled Navy to kneel out the clock, and Horvath appeared to wave goodbye at the Army sideline. There was a bit of a ruckus near midfield after the final kneel-down before things eventually calmed down for the traditional singing of the alma maters.

“They want to talk all their crap during the game and act like they’re so tough,” Horvath said. “The excuse last year was that they played a conference championship game before us. This year, we’ll see what it is.”

The Black Knights were trying to turn the tables on Navy after a ranked Army team — which had just won the American Conference title — lost to the Midshipmen last year.

Advertisement

The teams traded touchdown drives to start the game, each lasting 13 plays, 75 yards and over seven minutes. Horvath had a 5-yard scoring run, and Army quarterback Cale Hellums answered with a 2-yarder. Army’s first drive didn’t end until 5 seconds into the second quarter.

Then it was a while before anyone reached the end zone again. With Army up 10-7 late in the second quarter, the ball slipped out of Horvath’s hand while he was looking to pass. Army recovered the fumble at its own 45 with 20 seconds to play and moved into range for a 45-yard field goal by Dawson Jones.

Navy’s defense stiffened in the second half, but the Midshipmen still flirted with disaster. Horvath threw an interception in the third quarter that was initially returned to the end zone — before a replay showed Army’s Justin Weaver had a knee down when he picked off the pass at the Navy 32. The Black Knights had to settle for three — Dawson connected on a career-long 48-yard kick.

Navy’s Wing-T offense has been explosive this season. The Midshipmen entered the day with an FBS-high 10 plays of at least 60 yards. Army mostly kept them contained, but Horvath slipped free for a 37-yard run that set up a third-quarter field goal that made it 16-10.

After Hellums’ underthrown pass was intercepted by Phillip Hamilton, giving Navy the ball at the 50 with 11:19 to play, Tecza’s 24-yard run made it first-and-goal from the 5.

Advertisement

Trump tossed the coin before the game at midfield, then returned at halftime to walk from the Navy sideline to the Army one.

One that got away

Army defensive lineman Jack Bousum, who is from Annapolis, had a big game against his hometown team. He finished with 1 1/2 sacks and a fumble recovery.

The takeaway

Army: The Black Knights were the better team in the first half Saturday but didn’t do much offensively after that.

“They beat blocks,” Monken said. “We didn’t sustain the blocks we needed to.”

Navy: Horvath made some big plays and some bad ones, and the Navy defense was stout in the second half. The Midshipmen finished tied for first in the AAC this year but missed out on the league title game because of tiebreakers. This victory matters more to them anyway.

Advertisement

Up next

Army: Faces UConn in the Fenway Bowl on Dec. 27.

Navy: Faces Cincinnati in the Liberty Bowl on Jan. 2.

___

This story has been corrected to show Army took over at the Navy 32 after Horvath’s interception.

___

Advertisement

Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here and here (AP News mobile app). AP college football: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-college-football-poll and https://apnews.com/hub/college-football

Continue Reading

World

2 US Army soldiers, interpreter killed in Syria ambush attack, Trump warns of ‘very serious retaliation’

Published

on

2 US Army soldiers, interpreter killed in Syria ambush attack, Trump warns of ‘very serious retaliation’

Join Fox News for access to this content

You have reached your maximum number of articles. Log in or create an account FREE of charge to continue reading.

By entering your email and pushing continue, you are agreeing to Fox News’ Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive.

Please enter a valid email address.

Having trouble? Click here.

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

President Donald Trump warned Saturday that there will be “very serious retaliation” after a lone Islamic State gunman in Syria killed two U.S. Army soldiers and a U.S. interpreter in an ambush attack.

Advertisement

Chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell announced earlier that the soldiers and interpreter were targeted in the central Syrian town of Palmyra in an attack that left three others wounded. U.S. Central Command said the deaths and injuries were a “result of an ambush by a lone ISIS gunman in Syria.”

“We mourn the loss of three Great American Patriots in Syria, two soldiers, and one Civilian Interpreter. Likewise, we pray for the three injured soldiers who, it has just been confirmed, are doing well. This was an ISIS attack against the U.S., and Syria, in a very dangerous part of Syria, that is not fully controlled by them,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. 

“The President of Syria, Ahmed al-Sharaa, is extremely angry and disturbed by this attack. There will be very serious retaliation,” he added.

SYRIANS MARK FIRST YEAR SINCE ASSAD’S FALL AS US SIGNALS NEW ERA IN RELATIONS

U.S. forces patrol in Syria’s northeastern city of Qamishli in the Hasakeh province, on Jan. 9, 2025.  (Delil Souleiman/AFP via Getty Images)

Advertisement

In comments to reporters outside of the White House on Saturday, Trump also said, “This was an ISIS attack on us and Syria. And again, we mourn the loss and we pray for them and their parents and their loved ones.”

Parnell wrote on X that the attack happened as the soldiers “were conducting a key leader engagement.”

“Their mission was in support of ongoing counter-ISIS/counter-terrorism operations in the region,” he added, noting that “The soldiers’ names, as well as identifying information about their units, are being withheld until 24 hours after the next of kin notification. “

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said that, “The savage who perpetrated this attack was killed by partner forces.”

“Let it be known, if you target Americans — anywhere in the world — you will spend the rest of your brief, anxious life knowing the United States will hunt you, find you, and ruthlessly kill you,” Hegseth also said in a post on X.

Advertisement

Parnell said the attack is currently under investigation. A Pentagon official told Fox News Digital that the attack unfolded in a place where the Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa does not have control.

President Donald Trump meets with Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa at the White House on Nov. 10, 2025. A Pentagon official told Fox News Digital that the attack on the soldiers on Saturday, Dec. 13, 2025, unfolded in a place where the Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa does not have control. (Syrian Presidency/Anadolu via Getty Images)

“I’m praying for the brave U.S. soldiers and civilian who lost their lives, those who were injured in this attack, and the families who bear this profound loss,” Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll wrote on X. “The men and women who serve our country represent the very best of our nation. We mourn the passing of these heroes and honor their service and sacrifice.”

A senior U.S. official earlier confirmed to Fox News there were multiple injuries after American service members were ambushed in Syria.

“The United States, CIA and military forces are reportedly deeply involved in securing and stabilizing the situation in Syria,” Dan Diker, president of the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs, recently told Fox News Digital.

Advertisement

The injured in Saturday’s attack were taken by helicopters to the al-Tanf garrison, which is near the border with Iraq and Jordan, The Associated Press reported, citing Syrian state media.

ISRAELI OFFICIAL ISSUES STARK WARNING AFTER CHILLING SYRIAN MILITARY CHANTS RESURFACE

U.S. Army soldiers prepare to go out on patrol from a remote combat outpost on May 25, 2021, in northeastern Syria.  (John Moore/Getty Images)

There are currently around 900 U.S. troops in Syria.

The U.S. had eight bases in Syria to keep an eye on ISIS since the U.S. military went in to prevent the terrorist group from setting up a caliphate in 2014, although three of those bases have since been closed down or turned over to the Syrian Democratic Forces.

Advertisement

On Monday, tens of thousands of Syrians flooded the streets of Damascus to mark the first anniversary of the Assad regime’s collapse.

U.S. Army soldiers stand near an armored military vehicle on the outskirts of Rumaylan in Syria’s northeastern Hasakeh province, bordering Turkey, on March 27, 2023.  (Delil Souleiman/AFP via Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP 

Those celebrations came a year after former Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad fled the capital as rebel forces swept through the country in a lightning offensive that ended five decades of Assad family rule and opened a new chapter in Syrian history.

Fox News’ Lucas Tomlinson, Ashley Oliver, Jennifer Griffin, Benjamin Weinthal and Ashley Carnahan contributed to this report.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

World

EU dismisses Russia’s lawsuit against Euroclear as ‘speculative’

Published

on

EU dismisses Russia’s lawsuit against Euroclear as ‘speculative’

Published on

The European Commission has dismissed as “speculative” and groundless a lawsuit launched by the Russian Central Bank against Euroclear, the Brussels-based central securities depository that holds €185 billion in immobilised assets.

In a short statement published on Friday morning, the Russian Central Bank announced the start of legal proceedings for the “recovery of damages” and blamed Euroclear for preventing the release of the assets, which are subject to EU law.

The lawsuit was submitted to the Arbitration Court in Moscow.

Advertisement

The development comes with the EU still hammering out a plan to channel Russia’s sovereign assets into a zero-interest reparations loan to Ukraine, a process with Euroclear at its centre. EU leaders are meant to make a final decision when they meet on 18 December.

“Our proposal is legally robust and fully in line with EU and international law. The assets are not seized, and the principle of sovereign immunity is respected,” Valdis Dombrovskis, the European Commissioner for the Economy, said on Friday afternoon.

“We kind of expect that Russia will continue to launch speculative legal proceedings to prevent the EU from upholding international law and to pursue the legal obligation for Russia to compensate Ukraine for the damages it has caused.”

According to Dombrovskis, all European institutions that have Russian assets, from Euroclear to private banks, will be “fully protected” against Moscow’s retaliation. The EU has controlled €210 billion in assets of the Russian Central Bank since February 2022.

The sanctions regime already allows Euroclear to “offset” any potential loss, he added.

Advertisement

For example, if a Russian court orders the seizure of the €17 billion that Euroclear has on Russian soil, Euroclear will be allowed offset the loss by tapping into the €30 billion that its Russian counterpart, the National Settlement Depository, has stored within the EU.

Additionally, the reparations loan, if approved, will introduce a new mechanism to deal with state-to-state disputes. If Russia seizes the sovereign assets of Belgium in retaliation, Belgium will be allowed to “offset” the lossagainst the €210 billion, while Russia will not recover the amount it has seized when the assets are freed.

The Belgian factor

The legal safeguards are meant to allay the concerns of Belgium, which remains the chief opponent of the reparations loan. Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever has repeatedly warned of the risk a successful legal challenge could pose.

“We put forward a proposal. We are confident in its legality and its court-proof character,” a Commission spokesperson said.

Euroclear, which declined to comment, has previously criticised the reparations loan as “very fragile”, legally risky and overtly experimental.

Advertisement

The lawsuit comes a day after EU countries agreed to trigger an emergency clause to immobilise the Russian Central Bank assets for the foreseeable future.

Under the new law, the €210 billion will be released only when Russia’s actions “have objectively ceased to pose substantial risks” for the European economy and Moscow has paid reparations to Kyiv “without economic and financial consequences” for the bloc – a high bar that is unlikely to be cleared any time soon, if ever.

The indefinite immobilisation is meant to further placate Belgium and Euroclear in order to facilitate the approval of the reparations loan next week.

In a separate statement, the Russian Central Bank said it “reserves the right, without further notice, to apply all available remedies and protections if the proposed initiatives of the European Union are upheld or implemented”.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending