The European Parliament after the 2019 Elections: Testing the Boundaries of the 'Cordon Sanitaire'

IF 1.1 Q2 AREA STUDIES
Ariadna Ripoll Servent
{"title":"The European Parliament after the 2019 Elections: Testing the Boundaries of the 'Cordon Sanitaire'","authors":"Ariadna Ripoll Servent","doi":"10.30950/jcer.v15i4.1121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The European elections of May 2019 have been labelled ‘a fateful election for Europe’. Although the outcome was disappointing for Eurosceptic and populist forces, polarisation and politicisation will make life in the ninth (2019-2024) European Parliament (EP) more complicated. The article shows that, while the EP might not be more Eurosceptic after the elections, it is certainly more complicated. First, hard Eurosceptics became the fifth political force in the EP, falling just behind the Greens, which is likely to give them a stronger voice and more leeway in parliamentary life. Second, polarisation makes it more difficult to build stable coalitions, which has a direct impact on the EP’s chances to be effective in inter-institutional negotiations. Third, although mainstream parties continue to use the ‘cordon sanitaire’ to exclude those deemed ‘undesirable’, with the increase of populist forces inside mainstream groups, it has become more difficult to define who belongs to this group. Finally, it considers the implications of polarisation for the role of the EP within the broader political system of the EU, especially now that it has ceased to be a phenomenon unique to Parliament. Polarisation poses a major challenge for the future life of the European Union and prompts us to think in terms of partisan alliances across EU institutions rather than see institutions as monolithic black boxes.","PeriodicalId":44985,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary European Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contemporary European Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30950/jcer.v15i4.1121","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

Abstract

The European elections of May 2019 have been labelled ‘a fateful election for Europe’. Although the outcome was disappointing for Eurosceptic and populist forces, polarisation and politicisation will make life in the ninth (2019-2024) European Parliament (EP) more complicated. The article shows that, while the EP might not be more Eurosceptic after the elections, it is certainly more complicated. First, hard Eurosceptics became the fifth political force in the EP, falling just behind the Greens, which is likely to give them a stronger voice and more leeway in parliamentary life. Second, polarisation makes it more difficult to build stable coalitions, which has a direct impact on the EP’s chances to be effective in inter-institutional negotiations. Third, although mainstream parties continue to use the ‘cordon sanitaire’ to exclude those deemed ‘undesirable’, with the increase of populist forces inside mainstream groups, it has become more difficult to define who belongs to this group. Finally, it considers the implications of polarisation for the role of the EP within the broader political system of the EU, especially now that it has ceased to be a phenomenon unique to Parliament. Polarisation poses a major challenge for the future life of the European Union and prompts us to think in terms of partisan alliances across EU institutions rather than see institutions as monolithic black boxes.
2019年大选后的欧洲议会:测试“Cordon Sanitaire”的边界
2019年5月的欧洲选举被称为“欧洲决定性的选举”。尽管结果令疑欧派和民粹主义势力感到失望,但两极分化和政治化将使第九届(2019-2024年)欧洲议会的生活更加复杂。这篇文章表明,虽然欧洲议会在选举后可能不会更加怀疑欧洲,但它肯定会更加复杂。首先,强硬的疑欧派成为欧洲议会中的第五股政治力量,仅次于绿党,这可能会给他们在议会生活中更大的发言权和回旋余地。其次,两极分化使建立稳定的联盟变得更加困难,这直接影响了欧洲议会在机构间谈判中发挥作用的机会。第三,尽管主流政党继续使用“卫生警戒线”来排斥那些被认为“不受欢迎”的人,但随着主流团体内部民粹主义势力的增加,界定谁属于这个团体变得更加困难。最后,它考虑了两极分化对欧洲议会在欧盟更广泛的政治体系中的作用的影响,尤其是现在它已经不再是议会独有的现象。两极分化对欧盟未来的生活构成了重大挑战,并促使我们从欧盟各机构的党派联盟的角度进行思考,而不是将各机构视为铁板一块的黑匣子。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
26 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信