World
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.
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.
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.
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).
“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.
ADVERTISEMENTInstead 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.
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.”
ADVERTISEMENTVon 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.”
“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.”
ADVERTISEMENTThese 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.”
A 3-D rendering of an Iranian Shahed-136 drone, a device with two triangle-shaped wings attached to a central fuselage. It has an engine the size of a small motorcycle’s and carries 110 pounds of explosives.
Engine the size of a small motorcycle’s
Carries 110 pounds of explosives
One of the biggest takeaways of the war with Iran is that it has proven itself to be a surprisingly capable adversary against the United States. In addition to its willingness to go on the offensive, Iran has forced the U.S. and its regional allies to confront the rise of cheap drones on the battlefield.
Iranian drones, made with commercial-grade technology, cost roughly $35,000 to produce. That is a fraction of the cost of the high-tech military interceptors sometimes used to shoot them down.
Cheap drones changed the war in Ukraine, and they have enabled Iranians to exploit a gap in American defense investments, which have historically prioritized accurate but expensive solutions.
Countering drones has been a major priority for the Pentagon for years, according to Michael C. Horowitz, who was a Pentagon official in the Biden administration. “But there has not been the impetus to scale a solution,” he said.
In just the first six days, the U.S. spent $11.3 billion on the war with Iran. The White House and Pentagon have not provided updated estimates, but the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative-leaning think tank, estimated in early April that the U.S. had spent approximately between $25 and $35 billion on the war, with interceptors driving much of the cost. Many missile defense experts also fear interceptor stockpiles are now running dangerously low.
Here is a breakdown of some of the ways the U.S. and its allies have countered Iran’s drones, and why it can be so costly.
Air-based strikes
In an ideal scenario, an early warning aircraft spots a drone when it is still several hundred miles out from a target, and a fighter jet, like an F-16, is dispatched from a military base. The F-16 can then use Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS) II rockets to shoot a drone from about six miles away.
A 3-D rendering of an F-16 fighter jet firing an APKWS II rocket from under one wing. Two to three rockets are fired per drone, as per air defense protocol. Two APKWS II rockets and an hour of F-16 flight cost approximately $65,000, a little less than twice that of the Iranian Shahed-136.
Two to three interceptors fired per drone
These types of defensive air patrols are cost-efficient, but haven’t always been available because of the vast scope of the conflict. Iran has also targeted early warning aircraft that the U.S. needs to detect a drone from that distance, according to NBC News.
The other option for detecting and shooting down drones is a variety of different ground-based detection systems, but these systems are all at a disadvantage, as their ability to spot low-flying drones is limited by the curvature of the earth.
Anti-drone defense systems
One ground-based defense system the U.S. and its allies have built specifically to counter drones at a shorter range is the Coyote. It can intercept drones up to around nine miles away.
A 3-D rendering of a Coyote Block 2 interceptor, which looks like a three-foot tube with small rockets at one end. Two Coyotes cost approximately $253,000 or about seven times that of the Iranian Shahed-136.
The Coyote is significantly cheaper than many of the other ground-based defense systems available to the U.S. and its allies and historically effective at defending important assets. But despite being both effective and cost-efficient, relatively few Coyotes have been procured by the U.S. military in recent years.
When Iran-backed militias launched attacks on U.S. ground troops in the region in 2023 and 2024, there were so few Coyotes available that troops had to shuffle the systems between eight different bases in the region almost daily, according to a report from the Center for a New American Security, a Washington think tank.
Ship-based anti-missile defenses
Many of the longer-range ground-based defense systems the U.S. and its allies can use to combat drones are more expensive, as they are designed to shoot down aircraft and ballistic missiles, not drones. A Navy destroyer’s built-in radar system, for instance, can detect drones from 30 miles away and shoot it down with Standard Missile 2 (SM-2) interceptors. As in the air-based strikes, military protocol stipulates that at least two missiles be fired.
A 3-D rendering of the deck of a Navy destroyer firing an SM-2 missile from a built-in launcher, which looks like a 15-foot missile launching from a grid of openings on the ship’s surface. Two SM-2 missiles cost approximately $4.2 million, about 120 times that of the Iranian Shahed-136.
This misalignment between America’s defense systems and current warfighting tactics started after the Cold War, when the anticipated threats were fewer, faster, higher-end projectiles, not mass drone raids.
Iran often launches multiple Shahed-136 drones at a time, given their low price tag. The drones are also programmed with a destination before launch and can travel roughly 1,500 miles, putting targets all across the Middle East within reach.
“This category of lower-cost precision strike just didn’t exist at the time that most American air defenses were developed,” said Mr. Horowitz.
Ground-based anti-missile defenses
The Army’s standard air-defense system is the Patriot. Typically stationed at a military base, it can shoot down a drone from up to around 27 miles away with PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement interceptors. Military protocol stipulates that at least two missiles be fired.
A 3-D rendering of a Patriot launcher loaded with 17-foot PAC-3 MSE missiles, which looks like a tilted shipping container with scaffolding. Two PAC-3 MSE missiles cost approximately $8 million, about 220 times that of the Iranian Shahed-136.
Patriot missile defense system
Air defense training teaches service members to prioritize using longer-range defense systems first to “get as many bites at the apple as you can,” but those are the most expensive, said Stacie Pettyjohn, a senior fellow and director of the defense program at the Center for a New American Security.
But a costly defense can still make economic sense to protect a valuable target, especially those that are difficult to repair or replace, such as the nearly $1.1 billion radar at a military base in Qatar and the $500 million air defense sensor at a base in Jordan that were damaged early in the conflict.
Ground-based guns
Finally, there is what one might call a last resort: a ground-based gun. When a drone is about a mile away or less than a minute from hitting its target, something like the Centurion C-RAM can begin rapidly firing to take down the drone.
A 3-D rendering of a Centurion C-RAM, which looks like a gun mounted to a rotating, cylindrical stand. The gun fires 75 rounds of ammunition per second. Five seconds of firing the gun costs $30,000, slightly less than a single Iranian Shahed-136.
Centurion Counter-Rocket, Artillery and Mortar
Fires 375 rounds of ammunition in 5 seconds
Even though it is fairly cost-effective, the Centurion C-RAM is not the best option because it has such a short range.
Interceptor drones
There’s also what one might call the future of fighting drones: A.I.-powered interceptor drones. Interceptor drones like the Merops Surveyor can theoretically hunt and take down enemy projectiles from a short range.
A 3-D rendering of a Surveyor drone, which looks like a three-foot tube with wings and a tail. The Merops drone costs approximately $30,000, a little less than a single Iranian Shahed-136.
Merops system: Surveyor drone
Eric Schmidt, the former Google chief executive, founded a company to develop the Merops counter-drone system in conjunction with Ukrainian fighters, who have already been combatting Iranian drones in the war with Russia for years.
The U.S. sent thousands of Merops units to the Middle East after the conflict began, but it is unclear whether they have been deployed. The military set up training on the system in the middle of the war, as reported by Business Insider.
Other attempts to lower the cost-per-shot ratio of taking out a drone have failed.
The Pentagon invested over a billion dollars in fiscal year 2024 researching directed energy weapons, or lasers, that would cost only $3 per shot and have a range of 12 miles. Those systems have yet to be used in the field.
Despite the cost imbalance, the real fear for many in the defense community is the depleted stockpile of munitions.
“What scares me is that we will run out of these things,” said Tom Karako, the director of the Missile Defense Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. “Not that we can’t afford them, but that we’ll run out before we can replace them.”
World
Moscow-born gunman dead after Kyiv shooting rampage leaves at least 6 dead, 14 wounded: Zelenskyy
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A Russian gunman was killed by special forces Saturday in Ukraine after opening fire at a supermarket in Kyiv, killing six people and wounding 14 others — including a 12‑year‑old boy.
The 58-year-old shooter long resided in the Donetsk region and was born in Moscow, according to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Interior Minister Ihor Klymenko.
He took at least four hostages, killed one of them, and fatally shot four others on the street, Zelenskyy said. Another woman died at a hospital from her injuries.
Graphic video captured by witnesses showed the gunman shooting at a victim within close range on the street. Other bodies were seen lying on the pavement and in courtyards.
The gunman was seen walking with a weapon on the street. (Obtained by Will Stewart)
MANHUNT UNDERWAY AFTER GUNMEN STORM CHICK-FIL-A LEAVING 1 DEAD
Ukranian special forces stormed the convenience store after 40 minutes of failed negotiations, according to Klymenko.
At least fourteen people were wounded in the attack, though officials cautioned the number may rise as people continue to seek medical assistance.
Among the injured is a 12‑year‑old boy and a supermarket security guard, according to Kyiv Mayor Vitali Klitschko.
The gunman was pictured dead in the convenience store. (Obtained by Will Stewart)
NINE DEAD, 13 WOUNDED IN SECOND TURKISH MASS SHOOTING IN TWO DAYS
Zelenskyy said the shooter also set fire to an apartment prior to the attack, though it is unclear if any injuries resulted from the arson.
“My condolences to the families and loved ones of the victims,” Zelenskyy wrote in an X post. “…We wish all the wounded a swift recovery.”
The gunman had previously been prosecuted for criminal offenses, but held a valid weapons permit, according to authorities. Investigators from the National Police and the Security Service of Ukraine are investigating.
The gunman was seen holding and shooting a weapon in the street. (Obtained by Will Stewart)
GUNMAN OPENS FIRE AT HIGH SCHOOL IN TURKEY, WOUNDING AT LEAST 16
Ukraine’s security service labeled the attack an act of terrorism.
“All available information about him and the motives behind his actions is being thoroughly investigated,” Zelenskyy said. “Every detail must be verified.”
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
One of the shooter’s neighbors, Hanna Kulyk, 75, described him as an “educated, refined man,” who lived alone and did not socialize often.
“You’d never guess he was some kind of criminal,” Kulyk told The Associated Press.
Top negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf says US naval blockade of Iran’s ports is ‘a clumsy and ignorant decision’.
Published On 18 Apr 2026
Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy (IRGC) says the Strait of Hormuz is closed and that any ship that attempts to pass through the waterway will be targeted, a dramatic reversal less than 24 hours after the critical shipping lane was reopened.
In a statement carried by Iran’s Student News Agency, the IRGC navy said on Saturday the strait will be closed until the United States lifts its naval blockade on Iranian vessels and ports. It said the blockade was a violation of the ongoing ceasefire agreement in the US-Israel war on Iran.
list of 4 itemsend of listRecommended Stories
“We warn that no vessel of any kind should move from its anchorage in the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman, and approaching the Strait of Hormuz will be considered cooperation with the enemy, and the offending vessel will be targeted,” it said.
Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Iran’s parliament speaker and a senior negotiator in talks between Washington and Tehran on ending the war, said in a television interview that “the Strait of Hormuz is under the control of the Islamic Republic”.
“The Americans have been declaring a blockade for several days now. This is a clumsy and ignorant decision,” he added.
The reassertion of control came just hours after Iran had briefly reopened the strait, in line with a 10-day ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon. Oil prices dropped on global markets after Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Friday that the waterway was “completely open for all commercial vessels.”
More than a dozen commercial ships passed through the waterway before the IRGC reversed course.
Iranian gunboats reportedly fired on two commercial ships on Saturday, according to United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO). India’s Ministry of External Affairs also said that two Indian-flagged ships were involved in a “shooting incident” in the strait.
Some merchant vessels in the region received radio messages from the IRGC Navy, warning that no ships were being allowed through the strait.
US President Donald Trump said Tehran could not blackmail Washington by closing the waterway and warned that he would put an end to the ceasefire if a deal before its expiry on Wednesday is not reached. Trump added that the naval blockade would “remain in full force”.
Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, meanwhile, said the navy was ready to inflict “new bitter defeats” on its enemies.
‘Two competing blockades’
Al Jazeera correspondent Zein Basravi said that Iran and the US are back where they were the previous day.
“Less than 24 hours ago, world leaders were praising what they thought was a breakthrough in this conflict, hoping Iran was signalling a confidence-building measure by opening the Strait of Hormuz, potentially leading to a ceasefire deal and a permanent end to the war,” he said.
“As disappointed as people may be, this isn’t entirely surprising. What we’re seeing now is a return to square one,” he added, saying there are now “two competing blockades in place”.
Al Jazeera’s Ali Hashem, reporting from Tehran, said Iran was using the strait to send a message.
“It’s clear that Iran is dealing with a situation in which they are not sure what’s on the table. So the Strait of Hormuz is once again the only space for engagement, even if it’s a negative engagement. And it’s the space where they are sending and conveying messages to the Americans, showing their leverage,” he said.
-
Louisiana1 minute ago‘Growth pays for growth’: Entergy’s Fair Share Plus model to save Louisiana customers $2.8 billion
-
Maine7 minutes ago18 jaw-dropping views from Katahdin to help you plan for warmer weather
-
Maryland13 minutes agoMaryland Lottery Powerball, Pick 3 results for April 18, 2026
-
Michigan19 minutes agoQ&A: Jocelyn Benson on her tenure as Michigan’s secretary of state
-
Massachusetts25 minutes agoPolice shoot and kill man armed with knife in Lexington, DA says
-
Minnesota31 minutes agoBoldy, Eriksson Ek help Wild cruise past Stars in Game 1 of Western 1st Round | NHL.com
-
Mississippi37 minutes agoGeorge County High School senior killed in Highway 26 crash, MHP says
-
Missouri43 minutes ago
Missouri Lottery Powerball, Pick 3 winning numbers for April 18, 2026