Professor of Public Policy Nick Sitter spoke with NRK TV on January 7 about the state of Hungarian right-wing parties. Read excerpts from his interview below. You can also watch it here starting at 15:40 (in Norwegian).
What are the common aspects of PiS and Fidesz?
Both are populist rather than conservative in the West European sense, with a heavy focus on nationalism and Christianity. In contrast to West European populists on the right, these are big, governing parties. Ideologically they share a mistrust of markets, a hostile attitude toward the EU, and reject the notion that governments that represent the "national will" should be constrained by checks and balances. The EU can therefore expect further problems along two lines (as already demonstrated by Hungary): economic nationalism that challenges or violates EU Single Market rules; and political centralization of power that challenges the fundamental rules, principles, and values on which the EU is built.
Is this an East European phenomenon?
Yes, to some extent it is. Since 1989 the region has seen a struggle between populist and market-liberal parties over who should be the main right-wing party. The former get some inspiration from the conservatism of the 1930s; the latter look to their West European sister parties. This is quite unlike the West European right, where populist and radical right-wing parties are challengers to mainstream conservatives and/or the battle between nationalist and free-market forces on the right takes place within the established parties. In Hungary the populist right won that battle in the 1990s; in Poland the political right is still contested.
Do developments in Poland make this a bigger challenge for the EU?
Yes, for three reasons. First, the Fidesz government's two-thirds majority in parliament allows it to change the constitution singlehandedly (it wrote a new one). This leaves its measures less open to criticism as unconstitutional. Second, as a member of the Centre-right European Peoples' Party, Fidesz has enjoyed considerable protection from criticism in the European Parliament. PiS is more vulnerable. Third, Fidesz had an alternative: to look to Russia rather than the EU (likewise, it could hint that at home the far-right Jobbik was a bigger threat to EU rules and values). For historical reasons, this is not an option for PiS. In addition, the problems that Hungary posed for the EU could be dismissed as a one-off, in a small country. With PiS embarking on a similar course in Poland, this begins to looks like a pattern and it involves one of the big EU member states. But there is considerable uncertainty as to what the EU might do, linked to three question: do EU leaders have the political will to deal with this; does the EU have the tools to do so; and what kind of backlash could action against the EU's "illiberal democracies" lead to?