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

Mexico pyramid shooter who took hostages and killed 1 is identified

Published

on

Mexico pyramid shooter who took hostages and killed 1 is identified

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A gunman who fatally shot a Canadian tourist and wounded more than a dozen others atop a historic pyramid in Mexico on Monday has been identified, according to officials.

Authorities identified the gunman as 27-year-old Julio Cesar Jasso, a Mexican national, according to a state official who spoke anonymously because they were not authorized to discuss the case publicly.

Jasso later died by suicide after turning the gun on himself, and security officials found a gun, a knife and ammunition. Authorities said he acted alone, with the State of Mexico government confirming he was the sole assailant on Monday night.

Officials said seven of the victims were struck by gunfire, while others were hurt in the chaos as people scrambled to get down from the pyramids, with some falling during the panic.

Advertisement

EX-TV REPORTER ALLEGEDLY TURNED ROADSIDE GUNMAN, GRILLED VICTIMS ON ETHNICITY BEFORE OPENING FIRE

The Pyramid of the Moon and the Pyramid of the Sun are seen along with smaller structures lining the Avenue of the Dead in Teotihuacan, Mexico, on March 19, 2020. A gunman killed a Canadian tourist and injured several others before taking his own life at the popular site, authorities said Monday. (Rebecca Blackwell/AP)

Those hospitalized included tourists from several countries, among them the United States, Colombia, Russia, Brazil and Canada, authorities said. The victims ranged in age from 6 to 61.

Footage circulating in local media appears to show the suspect positioned atop the structure as visitors rushed for safety below, with gunfire echoing across the site.

Police and forensic workers stand on a pyramid after authorities said a gunman opened fire in Teotihuacan, Mexico, Monday, April 20, 2026. (AP Photo/Eduardo Verdugo)

Advertisement

The Teotihuacan complex, located just outside Mexico City, is one of the country’s most visited archaeological landmarks, drawing millions of international visitors each year to its towering pre-Hispanic structures.

MOSCOW-BORN GUNMAN DEAD AFTER KYIV SHOOTING RAMPAGE LEAVES AT LEAST 6 DEAD, 14 WOUNDED: ZELENSKYY

The shooting took place shortly after 11:30 a.m. when dozens of tourists were at the top of the Pyramid of the Moon.

Security measures at the site have changed in recent years, with routine entry screenings no longer consistently in place, according to a local guide.

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum wrote on social media that the shooting would be investigated and that she was in touch with the Canadian Embassy.

Advertisement

SUSPECTED BLUE CITY GUNMEN KILL INNOCENT GIRL IN REVENGE SHOOTING AT HOME: SHERIFF

“What happened today in Teotihuacán deeply pains us. I express my most sincere solidarity with the affected individuals and their families,” she wrote.

Anita Anand, Canada’s foreign affairs minister, said on X that as a “result of a horrific act of gun violence, a Canadian was killed and another wounded in Teotihuacán” and that her “thoughts are with their family and loved ones.”

People visit the Pyramid of the Sun in the pre-Hispanic city of Teotihuacan near Mexico City, Mexico, on March 21, 2024, following the spring equinox. (Henry Romero/Reuters)

Later in the evening, U.S. Ambassador to Mexico Ronald Johnson also expressed “deep concern” and sadness over the deaths and numerous injuries, and said in a post on X that the U.S. is “ready to provide support as needed while Mexican authorities continue their investigation.”

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The National Institute of Anthropology and History said in a statement that the Teotihuacán archaeological site will remain closed until further notice.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

World

Appetite among NATO members to join Iran war ‘very limited’, says Eide

Published

on

Appetite among NATO members to join Iran war ‘very limited’, says Eide

Norway has pushed back against criticism from US President Donald Trump over what he described as “zero” European support in the conflict with Iran.

ADVERTISEMENT


ADVERTISEMENT

“NATO is a defensive alliance. It is not an attack alliance,” Norway’s Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide told Euronews’ Europe Today flagship morning show.

Eide said NATO members are focused on safeguarding key global trade routes, including keeping the Strait of Hormuz open. “NATO countries are doing something, but it’s not as a party to a conflict,” he added.

Trump has repeatedly criticised NATO allies for not backing Washington in the Iran conflict. He raised the issue again during a White House meeting earlier this month with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte.

Advertisement

Eide argued that there had been no prior preparation or consensus within the alliance. As a result, there is “very limited appetite” among member states to join the war.

He said that while both the US and Iran may have reasons to end the conflict, “the sides are far apart”, with negotiations hindered by opposing demands.

On Monday, Trump said the United States would maintain its blockade of Iranian ports until Tehran agrees to a peace deal.

Still, Eide pointed to signs of “some progress”, noting the broader global impact of the conflict. “This is not only an issue for the two sides, but it affects the whole world economy,” he said.

Addressing a European diplomatic push to establish a Palestinian state, Eide reiterated support for a two-state solution based on long-standing United Nations principles. However, he acknowledged that such an outcome is “not around the corner”.

Advertisement

He added that a two-state solution is also in Israel’s interest, describing it as “the only viable solution for real peace in a very troubled region”.

Norway, alongside Spain and Ireland, recognised the State of Palestine in 2024.

Continue Reading

World

Iran War Live Updates: Trump Officials and Iran Plan New Talks Despite Mixed Messages

Published

on

Iran War Live Updates: Trump Officials and Iran Plan New Talks Despite Mixed Messages

The United States military last week extended its blockade on vessels coming in and out of Iranian ports to the waters of the wider world, declaring that it would pursue any ship aiding Iran, regardless of location on the high seas or flag.

The U.S. “will actively pursue any Iranian-flagged vessel or any vessel attempting to provide material support to Iran,” Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Thursday, noting that the American troops beyond the Middle East will engage in operations to thwart Iranian shipping.

The extension of the blockade comes as the economically vital Strait of Hormuz remains all but closed to commercial traffic and the two-week cease-fire between the United States and Iran nears an end. The move aligns longstanding American economic policies targeting Iran with the current military campaign against it, maritime and military law experts say.

But it raises a host of legal and practical questions.

“War is a messy thing not just on the combat side but under national and international law,” said James R. Holmes, chair of maritime strategy at the Naval War College.

Advertisement

“From a legal standpoint, a blockade is an act of war, so the blockade probably is legal to the extent Operation Epic Fury is,” he said using the name of the U.S. military campaign against Iran.

Since Congress has not declared war against Iran, no formal state of war exists between the United States and the Islamic Republic. But Mr. Holmes noted that “undeclared wars are more the rule than the exception in U.S. history,” with joint resolutions of Congress, United Nations Security Council resolutions and NATO decisions invoked to justify fighting.

“This campaign may be more unilateral than most, but it is not without precedent,” he said.

Under international law, the legality of the blockade is “more ambiguous,” said Jennifer Kavanagh, a senior fellow and director of military analysis at Defense Priorities, a foreign policy think tank in Washington.

A state-organized rally in support of the supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei in Tehran on Friday.Credit…Arash Khamooshi for The New York Times

For a blockade to be legal, Ms. Kavanagh said, it must be “effective,” meaning that it is both enforceable and enforced. Some would argue that a “‘global blockade’ is not permissible in conception” because it is overly broad, she said.

Advertisement

Still, expansive blockades have taken place throughout history, including during World War II, when states enforced naval blockades worldwide other than in neutral territorial seas. Over the centuries before that, the British blockaded France throughout the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, and during the War of American Independence, the colonies and their allies raided British shipping as far away as the Indian Ocean.

Enforcing expansive blockades is difficult, however.

“The seven seas are a big place, and the largest navy or coast guard is tiny by comparison,” Mr. Holmes said. Whether the U.S. blockade ultimately is deemed “effective,” legally speaking, will depend on whether the U.S. has enough assets like ships, aircraft, boarding crews and intelligence gathering to enforce it.

The blockade does not have to be “airtight” to meet the legal test, Mr. Holmes said, and assessing its effectiveness will be tough for outside observers in any case.

Enforcement may also have to be somewhat selective, he suggested.

Advertisement

“Now, it is possible our leadership might quietly let a ship proceed when it suits the national interest,” Mr. Holmes said. “For instance, with a summit coming up between President Trump and General Secretary Xi” — Mr. Trump is to meet with China’s leader, Xi Jinping, in May — “Washington might not want to ruffle feathers by obstructing China’s oil imports.”

The expanded blockade is part of a longstanding economic campaign against Iran, but it represents something of a tactical change for the Trump administration.

Earlier in the war, the United States temporarily lifted sanctions on Iranian oil at sea to ease the pressure on global energy prices. And before imposing a blockade on Iranian ports last week, the U.S. allowed Iranian tankers to transit the Strait of Hormuz for the same reason.

Now Washington seems to be returning its focus to keeping pressure on Iran.

“The blockade is a wartime extension of existing U.S. economic sanctions against the Iranian regime,” said James Kraska, professor of international maritime law and a visiting professor at Harvard Law School. In peacetime, he said, the sanctions were a “powerful tool to weaken the Iranian economy.” Now, he said, the blockade serves as a “kinetic expansion.”

Advertisement

General Caine’s announcement about the expanded naval blockade came one day after Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced “Operation Economic Fury,” an effort he called the “financial equivalent” of a bombing campaign. It includes secondary sanctions on institutions internationally, like banks, that have dealings with Iran.

The expanded blockade “marks a notable escalation by the United States,” said Ms. Kavanagh.

Still, she said, it is unlikely to significantly change Iranian calculations.

“For Iran, this war is existential and it is not going to cave easily or quickly,” she said. “Economic pressure may work over the very long term, but Trump seems too impatient for a deal to wait it out.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending