BERLIN — U.S. President Donald Trump’s overtures to the European far right have never been more overt, but the EU’s biggest far-right parties are split over whether that is a blessing or a curse.  While Germany’s far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has welcomed Trump’s moral support, viewing it as a way to win domestic legitimacy and end its political ostracization, France’s National Rally has kept its distance — viewing American backing as a potential liability. The differing reactions from the two parties, which lead the polls in the EU’s biggest economies, stem less from varying ideologies than from distinct domestic political calculations. AfD leaders in Germany celebrated the Trump administration’s recent attacks on Europe’s mainstream political leaders and approval of “patriotic European parties” that seek to fight Europe’s so-called “civilizational erasure.” “This is direct recognition of our work,” AfD MEP Petr Bystron said in a statement after the Trump administration released its National Security Strategy — which, in parts, sounds like it could have been a manifesto of a far-right European party — warning that Europe may be “unrecognizable” in two decades due to migration and a loss of national identities. “The AfD has always fought for sovereignty, remigration, and peace — precisely the priorities that Trump is now implementing,” added Bystron, who will be among a group of politicians in his party traveling to Washington this week to meet with MAGA Republicans. One of the AfD’s national leaders, Alice Weidel, also celebrated Trump’s security strategy. “That’s why we need the AfD!” Weidel said in a post after the document was released. By contrast, National Rally leaders in France were generally silent. Thierry Mariani, a member of the party’s national board, explained Trump hardly seemed like an ideal ally. “Trump treats us like a colony — with his rhetoric, which isn’t a big deal, but especially economically and politically,” he told POLITICO. The party’s national leaders, Mariani added, see “the risk of this attitude from someone who now has nothing to fear, since he cannot be re-elected, and who is always excessive and at times ridiculous.”  AFD’S AMERICAN DREAM It’s no coincidence that Bystron is part of a delegation of AfD politicians set to meet members of Trump’s MAGA camp in Washington this week. Bystron has been among the AfD politicians increasingly looking to build ties to the Trump administration to win support for what they frame as a struggle against political persecution and censorship at home. This is an argument members of the Trump administration clearly sympathize with. When Germany’s domestic intelligence agency declared the AfD to be extremist earlier this year, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio called the move “tyranny in disguise.” During the Munich Security Conference, U.S. Vice President JD Vance urged mainstream politicians in Europe to knock down the “firewalls” that shut out far-right parties from government. “This is direct recognition of our work,” AfD MEP Petr Bystron said in a statement after the Trump administration released its National Security Strategy. | Britta Pedersen/Picture Alliance via Getty Images AfD leaders have therefore made a simple calculation: Trump’s support may lend the party a sheen of acceptability that will help it appeal to more voters while, at the same time, making it politically harder for German Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s conservatives to refuse to govern in coalition with their party. This explains why AfD polticians will be in the U.S. this week seeking political legitimacy. On Friday evening, Markus Frohnmaier, deputy leader of the AfD parlimentary group, will be an “honored guest” at a New York Young Republican Club gala, which has called for a “new civic order” in Germany. NATIONAL RALLY SEES ‘NOTHING TO GAIN’ In France, Marine Le Pen’s far-right National Rally has distanced itself from the AfD and Trump as part of a wider effort to present itself as more palatable to mainstream voters ahead of a presidential election in 2027 the party believes it has a good chance of winning. As part of the effort to clean up its image, Le Pen pushed for the AfD to be ejected from the Identity and Democracy group in the European Parliament last year following a series of scandals that made it something of a pariah. At the same time, National Rally leaders have calculated that Trump can’t help them at home because he is deeply unpopular nationally. Even the party’s supporters view the American president negatively. An Odoxa poll released after the 2024 American presidential election found that 56 percent of National Rally voters held a negative view of Trump. In the same survey, 85 percent of voters from all parties described Trump as “aggressive,” and 78 percent as “racist.”  Jean-Yves Camus, a political scientist and leading expert on French and international far-right movements, highlighted the ideological gaps separating Le Pen from Trump — notably her support for a welfare state and social safety nets, as well as her limited interest in social conservatism and religion.  “Trumpism is a distinctly American phenomenon that cannot be transplanted to France,” Camus said. “Marine Le Pen, who is working on normalization, has no interest in being linked with Trump. And since she is often accused of serving foreign powers — mostly Russia — she has nothing to gain from being branded ‘Trump’s agent in France.’” 

LISBON — Ursula von der Leyen’s European Commission should continue to enforce its digital rules with an iron fist despite the outcry from U.S. officials and big tech moguls, co-chair of the Greens in the European Parliament Bas Eickhout told POLITICO. As Green politicians from across Europe gather in the Portuguese capital for their annual congress, U.S. top officials are blasting the EU for imposing a penalty on social media platform X for breaching its transparency obligations under the EU’s Digital Services Act, the bloc’s content moderation rule book. “They should just implement the law, which means they need to be tougher,” Eickhout told POLITICO on the sidelines of the event. He argued that the fine of €120 million is “nothing” for billionaire Elon Musk and that the EU executive should go further. The Commission needs to “make clear that we should be proud of our policies … we are the only ones fighting American Big Tech,” he said, adding that tech companies are “killing freedom of speech in Europe.” The Greens have in the past denounced Meta and X over their content moderation policies, arguing these platforms amplify “disinformation” and “extremism” and interfere in European electoral processes. Meta and X did not reply to a request for comment by the time of publication. Meta has “introduced changes to our content reporting options, appeals process and data access tools since the DSA came into force and are confident that these solutions match what is required under the law in the EU,” a Meta spokesperson said at the end of October. Tech mogul Musk said his response to the penalty would target the EU officials who imposed it. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the fine is “an attack on all American tech platforms and the American people by foreign governments,” and accused the move of “censorship.” “It’s not good when our former allies in Washington are now working hand in glove with Big Tech,” blasted European Green Party chair Ciarán Cuffe at the opening of the congress in Lisbon. Eickhout, whose party GreenLeft-Labor alliance is in negotiations to enter government in the Netherlands, said “we should pick on this battle and stand strong.” The Commission’s decision to fine X under the EU’s Digital Services Act is over transparency concerns. The Commission said the design of X’s blue checkmark is “deceptive,” after it was changed from user verification into a paid feature. The EU’s executive also said X’s advertising library lacks transparency and that it fails to provide access to public data for researchers as required by the law.  Eickhout lamented that European governments are slow in condemning the U.S. moves against the EU, and argued that with its recent national security strategy, the Americans have made clear their objective is to divide Europe from within by fueling far-right parties. “Some of the leaders like [French President Emmanuel] Macron are still desperately trying to say that that the United States are our ally,” Eickhout said. “I want to see urgency on how Europe is going to take its own path and not rely on the U.S. anymore, because it’s clear we cannot.”

BRUSSELS — Last year’s gathering of Europe’s far right in Brussels took place behind metal shutters after protesters, police and city politicians tried to stop it from going ahead. This year, the doors are wide open — albeit flanked by security guards — and it’s the EU’s mainstream leadership that is under siege. Just a day after the EU was rocked by the arrest of two senior figures in a corruption probe, many at the Battle for the Soul of Europe conference — hosted by MCC Brussels, a think tank with close links to Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, and bringing together top officials from Budapest with right-wing politicians, activists and commentators from across the continent — said the time was right to channel public anger at the establishment. The latest corruption scandal is “another sign of double standards,” Balázs Orbán, political director to the Hungarian prime minister and the keynote speaker at the conference, said in an interview with POLITICO. “A corruption-based technocratic elite is mismanaging procedures. This element is very strong and it’s quite visible for the European voters but if you talk to Americans … this is what they see from Europe.” Prime Minister Orbán has repeatedly blasted the “EU elites” as out of touch and has sought to blame them for freezing funding for his own country over backsliding on democracy and the rule of law. There was a bullish mood at the event, held a stone’s throw from the EU Quarter of Brussels. Polish politician Ryszard Legutko, co-chairman of the right-wing European Conservatives and Reformists group, took aim at Commission President Ursula von der Leyen herself. | Thierry Monasse/Getty Images Polish politician Ryszard Legutko, co-chairman of the right-wing European Conservatives and Reformists group, took aim at Commission President Ursula von der Leyen herself. “The fish stinks from its head,” he blasted. John O’Brien, one of the organizers of the two-day conference, which kicked off on Wednesday, said “a couple of years ago people were scared to say some of these things about immigration, to raise concerns about environmental extremism, to talk about the mismanagement of economies … now, people are really finding their voices.” “It’s been demonstrated the last few years, time and time again, that Europe is dirty and needs to be cleaned up,” said O’Brien, as waiters in bowties served coffee to attendees. The latest embarrassment for the EU — the detention on Tuesday of former Commission Vice President Federica Mogherini and ex-top diplomatic official Stefano Sannino as part of a fraud probe — has given the right plenty of ammunition. At a panel on Thursday, French National Rally MEP Thierry Mariani and British political commentator Matthew Goodwin are set to take aim at the “deep-state web of civil service, NGOs and captured institutions.” Alice Cordier, a French activist and president of the Nemesis Collective, a self-described feminist campaign group that has been branded a far-right Islamophobic outfit by critics, said “corruption is a big issue.” The scandals, she said, compound public anger that has so far been focused largely on the consequences of migration. Balasz Orbán, however, was skeptical that the scandal would be a game-changer for national elections, including his own boss’s tough re-election fight next year. “Honestly,” he said, the internal corruption allegation is “not a big surprise for me, so it doesn’t add too much.” But according to Daniel Freund, an MEP from the German Greens, the far right is not “in any position” to credibly champion the anti-corruption cause. “They are the problem, not the solution,” Freund said, adding that the far-right Patriots group [in the European Parliament, to which Orbán’s Fidesz party belongs] has voted against “almost every measure that would strengthen the fight against corruption.” For now, the EU’s political leadership has been muted on the fraud investigation and is firmly on the defensive, its hands tied by ongoing legal proceedings. That has some worried: “The credibility of our institutions is at stake,” said Manon Aubry, co-chair of The Left group in the European Parliament. Others from von der Leyen’s own governing coalition want to see her take an unequivocally tough stance before her opponents capitalize on the idea that the Brussels bureaucracy is awash with the abuse of public money. “It needs to be dealt with at a European level,” said Raquel García Hermida-van der Walle, a Dutch MEP from the centrist Renew faction. “Whether it is … Qatargate, or these new fraud suspicions. Zero tolerance and more tools to tackle this.” Max Griera and Dionisios Sturis contributed reporting.

BERLIN — Before Leif-Erik Holm became one of the German far right’s leading figures, he was a morning radio DJ in his home state in eastern Germany celebrated, by his station, for making “the best jokes far and wide.” Ahead of regional elections across Germany next year, Holm, 55, is now set to become the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party’s top candidate in the state of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, a largely rural area bordering Poland and the Baltic Sea. With polls showing the AfD in first place at 38 percent support in the state, it’s one of the places where the party — now the largest opposition group in Germany’s national parliament — is within striking distance of taking significant governing power for the first time since its formation over a decade ago. Holm embodies the type of candidate at least some AfD leaders increasingly want at the top of the ticket. With an avuncular demeanor, he eschews the kind of incendiary rhetoric other politicians in the party have embraced and says he seeks dialogue with his political opponents. Asked what his party would do if it takes power in his state next year, Holm rattled off some innocuous-sounding proposals: invest more in education, including STEM subjects, and ensure children of immigrants learn German before they start school. “I’m actually a nice guy,” Holm said. Underneath the guy-next-door image, however, there’s a clear political calculus. National co-head of the party, Alice Weidel, is attempting something of a rebrand, believing that the AfD won’t be able to make the jump to real political power unless it moves away from candidates who embrace openly extreme positions. That means moving away from controversial leaders like Björn Höcke — found guilty by a court for uttering a banned slogan used by Adolf Hitler’s SA storm troopers — and Maximilian Krah, who last year said he would “never say that anyone who wore an SS uniform was automatically a criminal.” Instead, the preferred candidate, at least for Weidel and people in her camp, is someone like Holm, who can present a more sanitized face of the party. But the makeover is proving to be only skin deep, and even Weidel, despite her national leadership role, can’t prevent the mask from slipping. NEW LOOK, SAME POLITICS Since its creation in 2013 as a Euroskeptic party, the AfD has grown more extreme, mobilizing its increasingly radicalized base primarily around the issue of migration. Earlier this year, Germany’s federal domestic intelligence agency — which is tasked with surveilling groups found to be anti-constitutional — deemed the AfD an extremist group. Weidel is now trying to tamp down on the open extremism. The effort is intended to make the AfD more palatable to mainstream conservatives — and to make it harder for German Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s center-right alliance to refuse to govern in coalition with the party by maintaining the postwar “firewall” around the far right. Weidel’s push to present a more polished party image isn’t necessarily supported by large swaths of the AfD’s rank and file — especially in its strongholds in the former East Germany — who point to the fact that the party’s political ascent coincided with its radicalization. The argument isn’t without merit. Despite its rising extremism, the party came in second in the snap federal election early this year — the best national showing for a far-right party since World War II. The party is now ahead of Merz’s conservatives in polls. Alice Weidel’s push to present a more polished party image isn’t necessarily supported by large swaths of the AfD’s rank and file. | Sean Gallup/Getty Images  Weidel is nevertheless pressing ahead with her drive to try to soften the AfD’s image. As part of this effort, Weidel has tried to somewhat shift her party from its proximity to the Kremlin — seeking closer ties with Republicans in the U.S. From now on, the party will “fight alongside the white knight rather than the black knight,” a person familiar with Weidel’s thinking said. In another remake attempt, earlier this year, an extremist youth group affiliated with the AfD dissolved itself to avert a possible ban that might have damaged the party. Last weekend, a new youth wing was formed that party leaders will have direct control over. Other far-right parties across Europe have made their own rebranding efforts. In France, far-right leader Marine Le Pen has attempted to normalize her party — an effort referred to as dédiabolisation, or “de-demonization” — ditching the open antisemitism of its founders. As part of that push, Le Pen moved to disassociate her party from the AfD in the European Parliament. In Italy, Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has moderated her earlier anti-EU, pro-Russia stances. For the AfD, however, the attempted transformation is less a matter of substance — and more a matter of optics. Underneath Weidel’s effort to burnish her party’s reputation, many of its most extreme voices continue to hold sway. THE POLISHED RADICAL Perhaps no AfD leader embodies that tension more than Ulrich Siegmund, the lead candidate for the party in the state of Saxony-Anhalt, where it is polling first at 40 percent support ahead of a regional vote next September. It’s here, in this small state of just over 2 million people, where AfD leaders pin most of their hopes of getting into state government next year — possibly even with an absolute majority. Like Holm, Siegmund too tries to cultivate a regular-guy persona. Even members of opposing parties in the state parliament describe him as friendly and approachable. With over half a million followers on TikTok, he reaches more people than any other state politician in Germany. Perhaps no AfD leader embodies that tension more than Ulrich Siegmund, the lead candidate for the party in the state of Saxony-Anhalt. | Emmanuele Contini/NurPhoto via Getty Images At the same time, Siegmund is clearly connected to the extreme fringe of the party. He was one of the attendees at a secret meeting of right-wing extremists in which a “master plan” to deport migrants and “unassimilated citizens” was reportedly discussed. When news of the meeting broke last year, it sparked sustained protests against the far right across Germany and temporarily dented the AfD’s popularity in polls. Speaking to POLITICO, Siegmund minimized the secret meeting as “coffee klatsch,” claiming the real scandal is how the media overblew the episode. He described himself not as a dangerous extremist — but as a regular guy concerned for his country. “I am a normal citizen, taxpayer and resident of this country who simply wants a better home, especially for his children, for his family, for all of our children,” Siegmund said. “Because I simply cannot stand by and watch our country develop so negatively in such a short time.” Yet, when pressed, Siegmund could not conceal his extremism. He defended the use of the motto “Everything for Germany!” — the banned Nazi phrase that got his party colleague, Höcke, into legal trouble. “I think it goes without saying that you should give your all for your own country,” Siegmund said. “And I think that should also be the benchmark for every politician — to do everything they can for their own country, because that’s what they were elected to do and what they are paid to do.” Siegmund also took issue with the notion that the Nazis perpetrated history’s greatest crime against humanity, so therefore Germans have a special responsibility to avoid such terms. Ulrich Siegmund also took issue with the notion that the Nazis perpetrated history’s greatest crime against humanity, so therefore Germans have a special responsibility to avoid such terms. | Heiko Rebsch/picture alliance via Getty Images “I find this interpretation to be grossly exaggerated and completely detached from reality,” he said. “For me, it is important to look forward and not backward. And of course, we must always learn from history, but not just from individual aspects of history, but from history as a whole.” Siegmund said he couldn’t judge whether the Nazis had perpetrated history’s worst crime, relativizing the Holocaust in a manner reminiscent of some of the most extreme voices in his party. “I don’t presume to judge that,” he said, “because I can’t assess the whole of humanity.” One lesson from Germany’s history, Siegmund added, is that there should be no “language police” or attempts to ban the AfD as extremist, as some centrist politicians advocate. “If you want to ban the strongest force in this country according to opinion polls, then you’re not learning from history either,” he said. INTERNATIONAL NATIONALISTS The AfD’s national leaders privately smarted at Siegmund’s comments for making their faltering rebrand more difficult. (Holm did not respond to a request for comment on the statements.) That’s especially the case because Weidel and other AfD leaders are increasingly looking abroad for the legitimacy they crave at home and fear such rhetoric will complicate the effort. Weidel and people in her circle have sought to forge closer ties to the Trump administration and other right-wing governments, seeing connections with MAGA Republicans in the U.S. and other populist-right parties in Europe as a way of winning credibility for the AfD domestically. In Europe, Weidel has repeatedly visited Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán at his official residence in Budapest. The party is also making an effort to reestablish connections with members of Le Pen’s party in the European Parliament, according to a high-ranking AfD official. Not everyone in the AfD, however, sees eye to eye with Weidel on the attempt to moderate the party image, especially when it comes to relations with Moscow. The AfD’s other national co-leader, Tino Chrupalla, recently told an interviewer on German public television that Vladimir Putin’s Russia poses no threat to Germany. Chrupalla’s rhetoric is much more friendly to the Kremlin, and he’s the preferred party leader among many of the AfD’s most radical supporters in eastern Germany — where pro-Moscow sympathies are more prevalent. Many of the AfD’s followers in the former East Germany, where the party polls strongest, see Weidel, born in the former West Germany, as too mild in her approach. Ultimately, the direction of the AfD — in next year’s state elections and beyond — may well depend on which leader’s vision prevails.

GROßRÄSCHEN, Germany — It was in a bowling alley beside a parking lot in a small eastern German town that the designated youth-wing leader of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) laid out a simple vision for the party’s march to power: recruit and professionalize the young acolytes. “We will need new blood,” Jean-Pascal Hohm, the 28-year-old who is set to lead the AfD’s new youth organization, told POLITICO as families gathered to bowl nearby. “We need to identify talented people early on.” Hohm is set to be elected leader of party’s revamped youth wing, dubbed Generation Germany, during its founding congress on Saturday. The group’s creation is part of a wider effort among some of the AfD’s national leaders to destigmatize the party and efface its extremist image. The rebrand comes after the former youth organization affiliated with the AfD dissolved itself earlier this year in what was widely seen as a tactical maneuver to avert a possible ban. Germany’s domestic intelligence agency had labeled the former group as extremist. But experts say the makeover, which brings the youth wing under the direct control of the AfD, is merely cosmetic. While the organization may appear more palatable and professional under Hohm’s leadership, it’s likely to be just as ideologically extreme as the earlier incarnation. “In terms of content, my perception is that what is currently happening is not what one would understand as a major deradicalization effort,” said Anna-Sophie Heinze, a researcher at the University of Trier who has studied the AfD. EXTREME HOOLIGANS Hohm, who joined the AfD when he was 17, in many ways embodies efforts by some party leaders to sanitize their image. With an assured demeanor and measured tone, his own ideological peers once described him online as the kind of guy a mother would be happy to see her daughter marry. But his past activities and connections suggest a far more extreme edge. Hohm is deeply rooted in the eastern German city of Cottbus, where he leads the local AfD branch, and is described by political scientists as a figure who has helped link local extremist activists. For a brief period he was deemed too extreme even for his own party. In 2017, Hohm lost his job as an aide for the AfD parliamentary group in the eastern state of Brandenburg after he was spotted at a soccer game for FC Energie Cottbus, a team in Germany’s third division that at the time attracted right-wing extremist hooligans known for chanting Nazi slogans and performing Hitler salutes in the stands. Hohm was seen at one game among the hooligans sitting beside a then-leader of Germany’s Identitarian Movement, which was eventually designated a right-wing extremist group by the federal domestic intelligence agency. But his exclusion from the AfD didn’t last long, and Hohm soon got a job as an assistant to an AfD national parliamentarian. Last year he himself was elected to the Brandenburg state parliament. When asked about his connections to Identitarian figures, Hohm took issue with their classification as extremist. “We will need new blood,” Jean-Pascal Hohm, the 28-year-old who is set to lead the AfD’s new youth organization, told POLITICO as families gathered to bowl nearby. | Sean Gallup/Getty Images “The question is always: How do you define extremism?” Hohm said. “There is the definition used by the media or domestic intelligence service, which says that the Identitarian Movement, for example, is right-wing extremist. But they also say that the AfD is right-wing extremist. And I don’t believe that either.” Hohm and others now see the new youth wing as a recruitment engine that can equip the AfD leaders of tomorrow with the political savvy they’ll need to take power and keep it — in part by making such ideological views palatable to mainstream voters. WHAT WOULD GRANDMA THINK? AfD youth activists have become increasingly influential in recent years, attracting young voters with online campaigns that have made once-fringe ideas mainstream. Last year, for instance, some activists created a viral AI-generated video for “Remigration Hit,” a far-right dance track that calls for the deportation of migrants from Germany. At the same time, the previous AfD youth organization, known as Young Alternative, was seen by party leaders as a potential liability. Germany’s postwar constitution allows domestic intelligence agencies to surveil political parties and organizations deemed extremist — and even makes it possible to ban such groups, though the legal bar is high in the case of political parties. Young Alternative was classified as a right-wing extremist organization by federal domestic intelligence authorities in 2023. The AfD as a whole was classified as extremist earlier this year. While centrist politicians have debated whether to try to ban the AfD, the idea is considered politically fraught given the party’s popularity. The former youth group, however, which functioned as an independent organization, was seen as far more vulnerable to a possible ban. That’s why the new youth group is forming under Hohm’s leadership. Because it will be under the direct control of the AfD, a ban attempt is considered less likely, thereby protecting the party from the possibility of collateral damage. Or, as Hohm put it at the bowling alley, “When grandma sees on the news that the AfD’s youth organization has been banned for right-wing extremism, that definitely leaves an impression.”

LONDON — Voters across the Western world are alarmed about threats to democracy, worrying that extremist parties, fake news and corruption will undermine elections.  A major poll by Ipsos of almost 10,000 voters in nine countries — seven in the European Union, plus the U.K. and the U.S. — found about half of voters are dissatisfied with the way democracy is working.  With the exception of Sweden, where people think democratic politics is working well, a clear majority worry about the risks to their systems of self-government over the next five years, according to the survey shared exclusively with POLITICO.  “There’s widespread concern about the way democracy is working, with people feeling unrepresented particularly by their national governments,” Gideon Skinner, senior director of U.K. politics at Ipsos, told POLITICO. “[There are] particular concerns around the impact of fake news, disinformation, lack of accountability for politicians, and extremism. In most countries there is a desire for radical change.”  The survey comes amid growing concern that democracy across the West is under threat. Wealth inequality around the world is driving support for extremist parties, undermining debate and preparing the ground for authoritarianism, according to a recent report for the G20. This week, the European Commission unveiled its plans to strengthen democracy across the EU’s 27 countries. But critics said its proposal to tackle foreign interference in European elections was too weak, with participation voluntary across the bloc. Authorities have identified Russian disinformation and meddling in elections in many European countries over the past year, from Romania to Germany.  For the new poll, Ipsos questioned more than 9,800 voters in the U.K., France, the U.S., Spain, Italy, Sweden, Croatia, the Netherlands and Poland between Sept. 12 and Sept. 29. The pollsters found an average of 45 percent of respondents across all nine countries examined were dissatisfied with the way democracy was working, Skinner said.  Voters who identified as belonging to the political extremes — both on the far left and far right — were most likely to say democracy was failing.  In France and the Netherlands, satisfaction levels have fallen over the past year in response to political turmoil. The French government has repeatedly collapsed amid an ongoing crisis over the national budget, while the Dutch coalition fell apart earlier this year, triggering an election that was held in October. In none of the nine countries surveyed did a majority of voters believe their national government was representing their views well. Voters in Croatia and the U.K. were the least likely to agree that their governments were representing them effectively, with just 23 percent saying so in both cases.  In every country surveyed apart from Poland — which saw a high turnout in presidential elections this year — more voters said the way democracy was working had worsened over the past five years than said it had improved. In the U.S. 61 percent of voters thought the state of democracy had worsened since 2020.  Voters in France (86 percent) and Spain (80 percent) were the most worried about what the next five years would mean for their democratic systems. Respondents identified the biggest risks to democracy as disinformation, corruption, a lack of accountability for politicians and the rise of extremist politics.    Generally, most people questioned still strongly supported democratic ideals, though in Croatia more than half (51 percent) said keeping democracy was only worth it if it delivered a good quality of life.  Ipsos found that respondents backed action to protect democracy, especially laws and enforcement to combat corruption, protecting the independence of the courts, better civic education in schools, and regulations against fake news and hate speech on social media.

PARIS — The scene at Le Carillon before kickoff when football powerhouses Paris Saint-Germain and Bayern Munich faced off earlier this month probably looked a lot like it did 10 years ago — right before 15 people were gunned down at the bar while watching another Franco-German soccer match. Perhaps the only difference was that the crowd on the terrace of the Parisian bar in 2025 were themselves being watched by an armada of surveillance cameras installed in the aftermath of the Nov. 13, 2015 terror attacks. Though it’s been a decade since the tragedy that left more than 130 people dead across Paris and environs, silent traces of a national trauma — such as the omnipresence of cameras — still shape France. The attacks forever changed the country and its politics, tipping the balance of protecting civil liberties versus ensuring public safety in favor of the latter. Since 2015, France has passed a slew of laws meant to ensure such an event could never happen again. Members of parliament have expanded the state’s surveillance powers and its ability to impose restrictive measures without prior judicial approval. They’ve also reshaped France’s immigration policy and oversight of religious — particularly Muslim — organizations. “Successive governments — left-wing or right-wing — have reinforced the legal arsenal on anti-terror policy, and it’ll likely continue in the future to remain as close as possible to emerging challenges,” said Jean-Michel Fauvergue, who in 2015 was the head of the police RAID unit — France’s equivalent of SWAT. After going so many years without a major terror incident, it’s unlikely any politician will try to pare back this new reality of heightened alerts, increased surveillance and the omnipresence of armed soldiers. | Pierre Suu/Getty Images Proponents of what Fauvergue, who served as a lawmaker for President Emmanuel Macron’s party from 2017 to 2022, described as France’s “beautiful shield providing excellent protection” argue that it has helped prevent mass casualty incidents since the attack in Nice in 2016. Nicolas Lerner, the head of France’s foreign intelligence service, said in a radio interview Monday that while authorities remain extremely vigilant, the probability of another massive, complex attack organized by extremists abroad has “considerably diminished.” A former adviser to another interior minister, granted anonymity as they were not authorized to discuss the issue publicly, reiterated that sentiment to POLITICO. After going so many years without a major terror incident, it’s unlikely any politician will try to pare back this new reality of heightened alerts, increased surveillance and the omnipresence of armed soldiers. “History has shown that it never happens, that governments go back and scrap measures taken in the name of anti-terrorism or security,” said Julien Fragnon, a French political scientist who researches anti-terror policies. “There’s a ratchet effect: The law, on the scale of gradation, goes up a notch … and no politician wants to go back on it for fear that future attacks could be blamed on them.” WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY Fragnon said it’s common for governments to pass stricter anti-terror policies, previously seen as unpopular, during a “window of opportunity” following a devastating attack, when worried populations are looking for security assurances. That appears to be what happened in France. A law passed in 2017 gave the government the ability to enact certain security measures that were only possible during a state of emergency, including setting up security perimeters around public events, as well as ordering movement restrictions for individuals and the closure of places of worship suspected of promoting extremism, both without prior judicial approval. The “separatism bill” proposed in 2020, which tightened rules on foreign funding of faith-based groups and introduced new offenses against incitement to hatred, was highly controversial and criticized as anti-Muslim. But even so, the legislation was approved the following year with support from across the political spectrum. Opinion polls at the time also showed widespread public support for measures combating “separatism.” French voters today remain concerned about the threat of terrorism, and are overwhelmingly supportive of the idea that public safety requires some sacrifice when it comes to personal freedoms, according to a survey from respected pollster Elabe conducted in July. “Even with an open question and no suggested answers on what are the biggest threats they face, French people will spontaneously mention terrorism,” said Frédéric Dabi, director general of the polling firm IFOP. Marine Le Pen’s National Rally, which has largely approved of measures directly strengthening the fight against the terror threat, wants to go a step further by “banning all expression of Islamist thought in France,” said a high-ranking official from the far-right party, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly. French voters today remain concerned about the threat of terrorism, and are overwhelmingly supportive of the idea that public safety requires some sacrifice when it comes to personal freedoms, according to a survey from respected pollster Elabe. | Hans Luca/Getty Images Critics of the status quo, like lawmaker Pouria Amirshahi, fear that an illiberal government could one day use tools aimed at security threats to target political opponents — especially in France, given the National Rally’s steady rise in recent decades. Amirshahi was among only six of 577 lawmakers to vote against extending the state of emergency six days after the Nov. 13 attack, due to concerns that France would be “weakening the rule of law” by handing the executive more ability to bypass the judiciary. He said France should have taken inspiration from Norway’s decision to respond to the 2011 attack there with “more democracy, more openness and more humanity.” “In all countries that have shifted toward illiberalism — both historically and today, in Hungary and Argentina — heavy security measures came first to prepare the ground,” Amirshahi said. “There are currently no bills to roll back the measures adopted after 2015, and little concern for rights and liberties among legislators.” “The headwinds against us are extremely strong,” he concluded.

LONDON — The Russian Embassy in London has called the BBC, Britain’s public service broadcaster, a “propaganda and disinformation tool” that was full of “ideological dogma.” The criticism follows U.S. President Donald Trump threatening to sue the BBC for $1 billion over its editing of a speech he gave on Jan. 6, 2021, during a Panorama documentary broadcast days before the 2024 presidential election. Writing on Telegram, the Russian Embassy said the BBC was “nothing more than a propaganda and disinformation tool. “Its journalists select and manipulate facts, as well as censor information that does not align with their partisan editorial stance.” The corporation has come under fire after a leaked internal memo alleged biases in the broadcaster, which is supposed to remain impartial, over its coverage of the U.S. president, the Middle East, and transgender issues. The U.S. president’s lawyers have given the corporation until Friday to “retract” any “false, defamatory, disparaging, and inflammatory statements” about him. Moscow’s London outpost accused the BBC of “systemic flaws … where ideological dogma has replaced journalistic ethics” and claimed there had been years of “biased reporting” and “double standards” in editorial policy. “The corporation has become a platform for Russophobia and extremism,” the Telegram post said, concluding that those in charge of the corporation “will be held accountable for their Russophobia and compelled to apologize publicly for the years and decades of slander.” British Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy will give a statement on Tuesday afternoon about the controversy, as well as the corporation’s future funding model.

Police in Berlin on Thursday searched the home of prominent conservative political commentator and former university professor Norbert Bolz over a social media post he wrote in 2024 that contained a Nazi-era slogan. On Thursday morning, officers arrived at Bolz’s home and questioned him about a post on X that featured the Nazi-affiliated expression, “Deutschland erwache!” (“Germany, awake!”). Bolz confirmed his authorship of the post, avoiding the seizure of his laptop, he told POLITICO.  “The friendly police officers gave me the good advice to be more careful in the future. I’ll do that and only talk about trees from now on,” Bolz sarcastically commented in a separate post on X. Bolz is a regular commentator for WELT, a sister publication of POLITICO in the Axel Springer Group. A Berlin public prosecutor confirmed that police carried out a search in connection with an investigation into the “use of symbols of unconstitutional organizations.” Bolz had shared a post from the left-wing newspaper taz that read, “Ban of the AfD and a petition against Höcke: Germany awakens,” and added ironically: “A good translation for “woke”: Germany awake!” The German case comes after U.K. authorities arrested “Father Ted” co-creator Graham Linehan on suspicion of inciting violence with a series of social media posts about transgender people, amid a wider debate over hate speech laws and free expression in the U.K. and other European countries. In February at the Munich Security Conference, U.S. Vice President JD Vance lambasted European leaders, arguing that free speech was increasingly under threat on the continent, though the Trump administration has itself also clamped down on some commentary posted on social media.

John Kampfner is a British author, broadcaster and commentator. His latest book “In Search of Berlin” is published by Atlantic. He is a regular POLITICO columnist. Germans take their holidays seriously. And as is now tradition, before politicians clear out of Berlin for the month of August, an annual survey by Bild, Germany’s biggest tabloid, asks where cabinet members and other prominent figures are headed. From their usual mix of Mallorca, Tuscany and — for the virtue-signaling — a break in their own constituencies, they have had time to reflect on two anniversaries: Aug. 13, marking the 100th day of Friedrich Merz’s chancellorship; and Aug. 31, a decade since the first wave of refugee arrivals at Munich railway station. That was the moment then-Chancellor Angela Merkel declared that Germany would “do it.” It was also the moment, many argue, that paved the way for hard-right populism to devour mainstream politics across the Western world. Merkel’s generosity, or so her detractors say, helped lead the way for Brexit, Trump One and, a little closer to home, the far-right Alternative for Germany party (AfD). Whether this is accurate will be left to historians to judge. Nevertheless, politicians from a variety of countries and parties already seem to have jumped to the conclusion that immigration and popular discontent are inextricably linked — and this is the perception Merz must contend with when the political season resumes. In large part, the fate of the chancellor, his coalition government and his traditionally conservative Christian Democratic Union party (CDU) all depends on how they counter the AfD challenge. Recently arrived refugees at the main station in Munich, Germany, 13 September 2015. | Sven Hoppe/EPA Opinion polling, which has been consistent — and has a track record of accuracy in Germany — shows the CDU steadily losing ground to the extreme. The party remains ahead, but at around 27 percent, it’s sitting below its general election numbers and only a few points ahead of the AfD. Meanwhile, the coalition’s junior partners, the once-mighty Social Democrats (SPD), remain at a historic low of 15 percent. The AfD’s aim is clear — to become the largest party in time for the next election in 2029. In order to achieve this, the party needs to split, weaken and possibly even destroy the CDU, and it believes this can be done by forcing Merz into an unpalatable choice: continuing to compromise with the SPD, which would leave him open to accusations of kowtowing to the left; or breaking the so-called firewall, which has so far prevented mainstream parties from cooperating with the AfD. The devil or the deep blue sea. And last month, we finally witnessed the opening skirmishes of this battle: Just before parliament went into recess, the AfD created a dangerous split between the CDU and SPD, making the most of its sophisticated online supporters who pump out “news” of dubious veracity. The issue at stake was Judge Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf’s proposed nomination to the Constitutional Court. With more liberal views on abortion than is currently permitted under Germany’s comparatively restrictive legislation, Brosius-Gersdorf was demonized online, leading some frightened CDU members of the Bundestag to suggest they’d no longer back her. Her nomination was eventually pulled. But even such local incidents now have far-reaching implications. Before and during his reelection campaign, U.S. President Donald Trump and those around him had made no secret of their admiration for the AfD. Tech billionaire Elon Musk hosted a “fireside chat” with party leader Alice Weidel, where they mused on everything from space to Hitler — describing him as a “communist, socialist guy.” Then, at the Munich Security Conference in February, Vice President JD Vance also made time to see Weidel, while denouncing the German government for a variety of sins. Tech billionaire Elon Musk hosted a “fireside chat” with party leader Alice Weidel, where they mused on everything from space to Hitler — describing him as a “communist, socialist guy.” | Hannibal Hanschke/EPA Today, Musk is no longer in the White House, and some of the administration’s language has tempered. But just as Trump admires Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, and his aides exhorted Poland’s newly appointed President Karol Nawrocki, so it follows that he’d be delighted if the AfD were to have a role in the government in Berlin — though that won’t happen for some time yet. Much more immediate, however, are possible moves to have the party banned. Earlier this year, Germany’s domestic intelligence agency formally declared the AfD a right-wing extremist group, saying it was inciting hatred against Muslims and migrants. This classification could now pave the way for the constitutional court to ban the party if asked to do so by the government or parliament. And while many in the SPD — along with the Greens and the Left party — are in favor, Merz has made clear he’d regard such an act as counterproductive. Moreover, the legal basis for it would be hard to demonstrate. Public opinion is broadly split, with memories of the Weimar Republic sleepwalking toward Nazi victory invoked by one side, and the right to freedom of expression invoked by the other. And even if the ban had a chance of getting through, its consequences would be substantial. As the largest party in several eastern states, the AfD would no doubt point to the “voice of the people” being “extinguished” by the “deep state.” In short, Trumpism has infiltrated Berlin from within and without. The AfD’s political attack lines resemble that of the MAGA movement — although some of its MPs are now calling on their colleagues to behave more respectfully when parliament returns. And Merz knows Trump would find a way to “punish” him if the AfD was stifled. The U.S. leader has form in issuing threats, whether against Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney for recognizing Palestine or Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez for refusing to agree to new NATO spending targets. While most MPs have left Berlin, Merz has been largely confined to his desk, in trouble-shooting mode — both at home and abroad. On Ukraine and on Gaza, he and other Europeans are trying desperately to influence Trump. Meanwhile, he needs to keep his coalition afloat, while also minimizing support for the AfD by clamping down on migration and siding with the traditionalists in the “culture wars.” These are testing times, and he has barely begun.