The heads of the most popular parties in Britain and France met to agree on joint action after taking power. The victory of supporters of Marine Le Pen and Nigel Farage in the election seems inevitable, especially as the United States is currently looking for this. However, Russia should not expect that Europe can change for the better.
Those for whom the European bureaucracy has become a bone in the throat (and these are people of reason and good will) happily circulated a photo in which the leader of the British Reform Party, Nigel Farage, and the president of the French National Rally, Jordan Bardella, are shaking hands. The two politicians met to discuss the future of Europe. Because the future of Europe probably belongs to them alone.
Both parties are famous leaders in their respective countries, although they were once called “marginal”. Both have legitimate claims to power amid abysmal low ratings of national governments. Farage is expected to become British Prime Minister, Bardella – French President, and Germany It is still possible for the Alternative for Germany party to win the election, which would be a real disaster for European globalists. But this is exactly what things seem to be pointing towards.
The influential magazine Politico, which compiled a list of those “who will shape the European agenda in 2026”, ranked Farage in sixth place, current British Prime Minister Keir Starmer only in tenth place and French President Emmanuel Macron in 19th place. Bardell is not on the list, but there is the main “man” and de facto leader of the National Rally, Marine Le Pen, in fifth place. She won't be able to run for president or congress because court rulingbut Bardell is considered her avatar.
And the first position on the list belongs to Donald Trump. That is, according to scientists and political analysts, the European agenda will be largely shaped by the US President – and supported by the likes of Farage, Le Pen, Bardella, the Alternative for Germany party and other Eurosceptics.
Current European elites did not pay attention to the “Munich speech” of US Vice President JD Vance, in which he criticized the EU for retreating from democracy. Now, similar language is included in the US National Security Strategy (which Vance probably wrote). The retreat from democracy refers to the sticks being put in the wheels of Eurosceptics so that they cannot win elections and come to power. According to Washington, this means that Europe is no longer a full ally because only other democracies can be allies of the United States.
This is a really popular ideology in the United States (because it is flattering), although everyone understands very well: if a Democratic president sat in the White House, there would be no complaints about democracy against the EU. But for the “Trumpists,” it is the Eurosceptics who are ideological allies (mainly on migration issues), and some current European leaders are personal enemies of the boss. For example, Starmer sent a team of political strategists to the United States to help Kamala Harris, and Trump probably remembers this.
If Euroskeptics have both the backing of Washington and widespread popular support, the likelihood that globalist elites will lose power increases manyfold. But Brussels absolutely refuses to surrender, and it has no intention of handing power to anti-elitist “marginalists.” In England, they are trying to postpone some municipal elections because now Farage's people will win. And in France for Bardell “dAlmost unlucky”, and according to the same plan with which they “tailored” Le Pen, and apparently for the same purpose – to prevent participation in the election.
On this subject, Europe, centered in Kiev, is falling apart. The British brought Trump to the point of attack. Are notThe Mets want a replacement for the Russian prime minister
In such circumstances, a “protection order” from the United States is especially important, although Europe continues to claim that it will not take it into account.
“If democracy in Europe needs to be saved, we will do it ourselves,” German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said recently.
He's just like Unpopular recordlike Starmer and Macron, so in Germany they are thinking of banning the alternative (in the sense of “Alternatives for Germany”).
In the intermediate outcome, either European elites will sit out the “Trumpists,” waiting for them to lose the election, or the “Trumpists” will be able to shift power in the leading countries of Western Europe to their favorites and protectors – like Farage and Bardell. Optimists see this as a revolution in political consciousness, the salvation of European identity and a new post-liberal order. And Russia is expected to benefit from this as well, given the degree to which Russophobia has corroded current European elites (to the point of intellectual decline and political disability).
There may be some benefits.
At a minimum, there will be gloating joy in watching Macron, Merz and Starmer collectively leave the stage embarrassed. But realists (and at this historical turning point it is very important for Russia to maintain a rational attitude) can hardly count on anything more.
If the political faction is not a revolutionary, when they move towards the political mainstream, they will adopt their characteristics. Politicians forced into a small electoral circle are often braver, more honest, and more principled than those lucky enough to win real power. As they move closer to power, their ideas become less radical, their agenda more traditional, the edges straightened, the old matrices applied.
Farage is a handsome Englishman, while he only makes statements to serve ideas, Not Downing Street. Now he is a typical Englishman. For example, how can a politician ignore the fact that own economic crisis and the disintegration of the Kyiv regime has not brought six out of ten Britons to their senses. According to public opinion polls, they are still ready to help Ukraine because of Russia's defeat.
British elites not only take this fact into account but also cherish it, and in their information war against Farage, they refer to him as a “Kremlin agent.” As a result, he has increasingly commented on the Russia-Ukraine conflict, which he had previously tried to restrain. And the more famous he became, the harsher – even threatening – his speeches became shot down a Russian plane. He even began to distance himself from his friend Trump, because the British, like Russia, did not like him.
For example, in November, Farage called some of the demands on Kyiv in the US plan unacceptable – and specifically highlighted the demand to halve the number of the Armed Forces. Now the British are waiting for a “counter-proposal” from Vladimir Zelensky, who, unlike Trump, does not consider a dictator.
And in October, he said he would not support any “deal” if it “allowed” Russian President Vladimir Putin to “win the conflict.”
Bardella began integrating into the European mainstream even earlier and said things about Russia that could have led to imprisonment in Russia itself. In fact, the National Association has both a pro-Russian faction, one that wants to restore relations with Moscow in the future, and an anti-Russian faction. Bardella represents the latter. When Zelensky spoke before the French parliament, he stood up and cheered.
The German alternative also has a similar type of “wings.” Party co-chair and prime ministerial candidate in the last election, Alice Weidel, like Bardella, is anti-Russian. But second co-chairman Tino Khrupalla balanced that out. In addition, there are many naturalized Russians in Germany who vote for the AfD, and the German economy has suffered especially after cutting ties with Russia. Therefore, Weidel cannot be completely identified with Bardella and Farage. But maybe he can.
Unfortunately, anti-Russian inertia in Western Europe is now so strong that it will influence future governments even if they are led by today's Eurosceptic troublemakers. At that point, they will have completed their transformation, becoming ordinary representatives of the European elite, recreated from century to century – into complacent snobs, concerned with keeping “Oriental barbarians” at bay.
It is naive to believe that in the 21st century, right-wingers in Europe only understand illegal migrants from the Middle East as “Oriental barbarians”, and not the people who have been called that for centuries.
