The Complexities of European Politics: From Spitzenkandidat to Criminalisation of Solidarity

The Complexities of European Politics: From Spitzenkandidat to Criminalisation of Solidarity

Introduction:
European politics is a convoluted web of alliances, power struggles, and policy battles. In recent years, two significant issues have emerged - the demise of the Spitzenkandidat system and the criminalisation of solidarity towards migrants. While seemingly unrelated, these topics highlight the challenges and complexities faced by the European Union (EU) and its member states.

The Spitzenkandidat System:
The Spitzenkandidat system was introduced in 2014 as a way to connect European Parliament elections with the selection of the European Commission president. The idea was that each pan-European alliance of national parties would nominate a lead candidate, or Spitzenkandidat, who would also be their candidate for Commission president. However, this system proved to be confusing for voters, and different interpretations of its rules led to post-election battles.

One of the major criticisms of the Spitzenkandidat system was the lack of awareness among voters. The vast majority of voters were completely unaware of the pan-European alliances and their lead candidates. This lack of awareness undermined the democratic legitimacy of the system.

Furthermore, the system relied on the support of EU member country leaders who ultimately cast aside the lead candidate system. The leaders argued that they have their own democratic legitimacy as elected leaders and that the system limited their choices for Commission president. This rejection by EU leaders weakened the Spitzenkandidat system and opened the possibility for non-Spitzenkandidat candidates to be chosen.

The rejection of the Spitzenkandidat system was also influenced by factors such as the candidates' qualifications and language abilities. The system allowed for candidates who had no experience of senior executive public office, which increased the chances of EU leaders rejecting their candidacy as unqualified. Additionally, the tradition that the Commission chief should be able to speak French was ignored by the European People's Party (EPP) when selecting their candidate.

The Criminalisation of Solidarity:
In the aftermath of the major arrivals of migrants and refugees in 2015-2016, the EU failed to establish a fair mechanism for sharing the responsibility of managing asylum seekers. Civil society organizations stepped in to fill the gaps in search and rescue missions and reception activities. However, these acts of solidarity were met with increased policing and criminalization.

Populist leaders labeled the actions of these organizations as a 'pull factor' for new arrivals, resulting in intimidation, harassment, and charges against individuals and civil society organizations. The criminalization of solidarity had a chilling effect, as people refrained from helping migrants due to fears of being criminalized.

The consequences of this criminalization were dire for refugees and migrants. Search and rescue ships were seized, leading to lost lives at sea. In addition, refugees and migrants experienced inhuman and degrading treatment in Libyan camps and even in the EU's reception centers, further highlighting the need for a fair and humane approach to migration.

Connecting the Dots:
While the Spitzenkandidat system and the criminalization of solidarity towards migrants may seem unrelated, they both shed light on the complexities of European politics. Both issues highlight the challenges of democratic decision-making and the influence of national interests within the EU.

In the case of the Spitzenkandidat system, the rejection by EU member country leaders demonstrated a disregard for the democratic will of the European Parliament and the potential for power struggles between national leaders and the supranational institutions of the EU.

Similarly, the criminalization of solidarity towards migrants revealed the tensions between national interests and humanitarian values. The labeling of humanitarian actions as facilitating irregular migration showcased the political manipulation of the migration issue for domestic political gain.

Actionable Advice:

1. Enhance voter education: To prevent a lack of awareness among voters, it is crucial to improve voter education on pan-European alliances and their lead candidates. This can be achieved through increased media coverage, public debates, and educational campaigns.

2. Strengthen solidarity networks: Civil society organizations and individuals providing support to migrants need to form strong networks and alliances to protect themselves from intimidation and criminalization. Collaborative efforts can amplify their voices and advocate for fair and humane migration policies.

3. Foster dialogue and cooperation: EU member country leaders must engage in open and constructive dialogue to bridge the gap between national interests and the collective responsibility of managing migration. Cooperation and solidarity are essential to address the challenges posed by migration effectively.

Conclusion:
The demise of the Spitzenkandidat system and the criminalization of solidarity towards migrants highlight the complexities and challenges faced by the EU and its member states. These issues call for a deeper examination of democratic decision-making processes and the need for fair and humane policies. By enhancing voter education, strengthening solidarity networks, and fostering dialogue, the EU can navigate these challenges and work towards a more inclusive and effective political system.