France: Europe needs an action-oriented left
First published at Rosa-Luxemburg-Stiftung.
The forward march of extremist forces in Europe continued apace in the 2024 super election year, with far-right parties watching their election results surge in country after country. Their recent instalment into leadership positions within the European Commission — a historic first for the continent — is now eating away at the foundations of the bloc’s traditional governing coalition, which has tended to span from the centre-right to the centre-left. Meanwhile, the stunning re-election of Donald Trump as President of the United States will almost certainly accentuate the shift to the right on both sides of the transatlantic alliance.
The situation for the European Left, by contrast, appears bleaker, but becomes a bit more nuanced upon closer inspection. The European elections saw left-wing parties make significant gains in several countries, such as the Scandinavian member-states, while in countries like Germany, on the other hand, the Left faced its worst result in decades. Simmering tensions subsequently broke out into open division, when, just a few weeks after the election, a number of parties announced their departure from the Party of the European Left, founded in 2004, and formed the European Left Alliance for People and the Planet (ELA). Both parties will continue to operate within the same parliamentary group, known simply as “The Left”.
Given this highly uneven terrain, how can socialist forces regroup? What can they learn from the recent election results, and what issues and demands should be prioritized in the coming years? To find out, Nessim Achouche spoke with the co-chair of the Left in the European Parliament, Manon Aubry, about her take on the state of left-wing mobilization in Europe as well as developments in her own party, La France Insoumise.
The Left’s performance in the European elections was quite mixed, with big gains in some countries and big losses elsewhere. How would you now characterize the Left’s position in the European Parliament and in Europe as a whole?
If you look at the overall position of the Left parliamentary group, we used to have 38 members, and now we have 46. So, the group actually progressed, especially given that overall, the Left did not perform well. The Greens collapsed across the European Union, while the Socialists remained stable. In that sense, one could say that we are the only left-wing group that actually made significant gains, despite the fact that many predictions going into the elections were pessimistic. We had strong results in France, Finland, and Sweden, for example, and are particularly pleased about the Italian Left returning to the European Parliament, especially given the far-right government in that country.
It’s clear that in some other countries, the Left is going through difficult times. This brings us to a broader question about the Left’s position in the context of the rise of the far right. Similar questions were raised after the US elections and the re-election of Donald Trump. Strategically, the Left must decide whether we want to chase after the centre or remain radical, with strong social and ecological ambitions, without diluting ourselves to appeal to the centre or centre-right. That’s exactly what Kamala Harris did. She tried to convince the so-called moderate wing of the Republicans, and instead, she ended up losing among a lot of groups where the Democrats were supposed to be strong, like Latinos.
Of course, the US and EU contexts are not exactly the same, but I think it should push us to reflect, especially given the strength of the far right in the European Parliament and the emergence of a new coalition between the traditional Right and the far right. The Socialists continue to blindly follow their old habit of building alliances with the centre-right, but by doing so, they weaken themselves, because the European People’s Party (EPP), as we have seen, prefers to side with the far right against the centre-left. We saw it with the budget, we saw it with the Venezuela resolution, and we saw it with the deforestation regulations that were now postponed for another year.
The Socialists have to choose: do they want to bloc with the EPP and the Right, trapping them in their own coalition, or do they want to build a united front with us?
You pointed out that the Left group actually grew in the last election, but there have also been some major tensions within the group, expressed by the decision of seven organizations, including La France Insoumise, to leave the Party of the European Left and found a new coalition, the European Left Alliance for People and Planet. Why was this new formation necessary, and how will it differ to your former party?
The context we just discussed calls for a new dynamic for the Left — one that is more attuned to current issues and resonates with the youth by addressing both social and ecological issues within a unified strategy. Secondly, we need a party that’s more agile, dynamic, and representative of the new left-wing movements across the EU. The Party of the European Left doesn’t have much representation in the European Parliament anymore, and doesn’t represent new left movements, such as La France Insoumise, that emphasize feminism, anti-racism, and the intersection of ecological and social issues.
Our goal isn’t to compete or divide the Left, but to create a fresh start that’s open to everyone. We simply came to the conclusion that it would be easier to build new structures to pursue our political and strategic objectives.
Those objectives are clear. Politically, we aim to be the only left-wing party outside Ursula von der Leyen’s coalition, which includes many MEPs currently aligned with the Socialist and Greens. We stand for clear values and a will to govern. We also aim to pressure Social Democrats to join us in advancing a strong left-wing alternative, as seen in France, where we restructured the Left around clear goals. It isn’t about compromise — it’s about a clear vision that is ready to govern, as shown by our work on the budget in France.
Another goal is to provide an alternative to the rise of the far right and neoliberal policies that exacerbate inequality and environmental destruction. We want a Left that produces new ideas to tackle the ten priorities listed in our political platform, and learns from experiences in different countries. In France, for example, we nearly entered government, demonstrating the potential of a united Left with a radical foundation.
Finally, we want an action-oriented Left that builds strong ties with trade unions, NGOs, and social movements — not just a technocratic circle that discusses abstractly in some fancy building. This means building campaigns around housing, taxing the rich, protecting the climate, ending the war in Gaza, and countering the far right’s influence. One idea I have is to create an observatory to document the actions of the far right in the European Parliament and in countries where they govern, to clearly expose their anti-feminist, anti-social and racist positions.
Within the ELA, there are still political differences, particularly around the question of arms shipments to Ukraine. Does this mean that the debates that were a part of the Party of the European Left will continue in the Left Alliance?
Our political platform is very clear on Ukraine: we condemn Russia’s attack, defend Ukraine’s territorial integrity, and support financial and humanitarian assistance. There may be nuances around the question of military support, but this is minor. We agree on condemning and sanctioning Russia, supporting Ukraine, and pushing for a ceasefire and peace negotiations. These three elements define our common position and, in my view, should be the Left’s path towards peace. Zelensky is also calling for negotiations, which proves that ultimately diplomacy should be the way forward to end this war.
You mentioned La France Insoumise’s experience as an instructive example for other countries. Indeed, many on the European Left were inspired by the success of the New Popular Front (NFP) during the legislative elections last June. Despite coming first in the election, however, the NFP was excluded from government by President Emmanuel Macron, who prefers to work with the far right. What does this say about the state of democracy in France and the general rightward shift across Europe, including within the European Commission?
It shows that liberals often prefer the far right over a popular front, which, unfortunately, threatens to drag us into a repeat of the 1930s. We’ve seen that the far right protects elite interests, as was particularly evident during the budget debate, with the far right aligning with Macron to protect financial and wealthy interests.
The current French government is a coalition between wealth and racism, and the Left must confront it head-on. Macron’s approach is to favour the far right and reject democracy by disregarding election results. Appointing a prime minister from the party that performed poorest in the legislative elections highlights this democratic deficit.
Our challenge is to maintain voter engagement. Macron’s strategy seems to be to encourage popular resignation and a sense that voting doesn’t matter. This is dangerous for us, as the Left’s success relies on mobilization. Recent events in the US show that lower electoral participation tends to harm our side. To win a clear majority next time, we’ll need a bigger turnout than ever. Macron wants to demoralize us, but we must persist and resist.
Do you think the NFP can continue as a political alliance outside of elections?
For me, The Left must stay united around the New Popular Front for all upcoming elections, and reject a dilution of its programme. Some in the Socialist Party want to weaken this unity and lower our ambitions. Our goal, by contrast, is to mobilize the fourth bloc — the non-voting population.
French society is divided into four segments: the Left, the liberals, the far right, and non-voters. We’ve seen that the more they participate, the more the Left gains. Studies show that the far right isn’t as dominant as some might think, and there’s strong support for left-wing demands such as retirement at 60, a higher minimum wage, and taxing the rich. Thus, there’s a real chance for us to win if we can mobilize additional non-voters. La France Insoumise has done well in mobilizing these groups, as shown by the increase in turnout during the last elections, which was key to our legislative success.
You mentioned the return of Donald Trump to the White House. What implications do you think a second Trump presidency will have for the EU, and how can Europe — and, more specifically, the European Left — respond to the threat he poses?
Obviously, Donald Trump’s victory is a disaster, especially for those who are going to suffer the most under Trump’s policies, such as migrants, women, and the LGBTQ community. But it shouldn’t be a surprise. The reality of the last few years in American society is that working people have faced very high inflation and extreme price increases, which the Democrats failed to tackle. The Democrats lost the working class, while Donald Trump provided easy answers to desperate American voters. I think it was naive to think that the Democrats were in a position to win given all that.
The Democrats’ defeat also stems from their refusal to promote peace in Palestine and their failure to make a clear break with Trump on this issue. Trump will continue to blindly support Netanyahu, which underscores the need for Europe to champion the voice of peace and stop being complicit in the crimes committed by Israel. This includes imposing sanctions, establishing an arms embargo, and terminating the Association Agreement between the EU and Israel.
I would like to think that Trump’s win will be a wakeup call for the EU, but the reality is that I already know the answer. There will be lots of elite talk about how “we can’t be naive anymore, we shouldn’t be aligned with the US”, and so on, but ultimately they will present a European defence strategy that is fully aligned with NATO and continue to sign free trade agreements with the US and other countries that undermine our sovereignty.
The EU is about to sign a free trade agreement with Mercosur, which means opening up our borders to agricultural products from the other side of the world, produced under less stringent sanitary and environmental conditions. While the US is putting 100-percent tariffs on cars, for example, the EU is timid, introducing a 30-percent tariff. This is ridiculous. The EU is not able to protect its industry at a time when Audi, Volkswagen, and so many other companies are eliminating jobs. So, in that sense, it looks like the EU is not learning any lessons from Trump’s victory at all.