Across Europe, nationalist parliament speakers spark controversy

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban speaks during a meeting with US President Donald Trump in the Cabinet Room of the White House in Washington, DC. (Reuters)
Short Url
Updated 08 November 2025
Follow

Across Europe, nationalist parliament speakers spark controversy

  • According to Catherine Fieschi, a researcher at the Robert Schuman Center at the European University Institute of Florence, PM Orban “has paved the way” for the current trend

VIENNA: As far-right parties have topped polls across Europe in recent years, nationalist politicians have taken the helm of four parliaments, stirring controversy.
Czech lawmakers elected the country’s first-ever far-right parliament speaker on Wednesday, becoming the latest parliament in Europe to be headed by a nationalist and pro-Russian politician since Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine.
One day after Czech far-right leader Tomio Okamura — who has called for an end to aid for Ukraine — was elected parliament speaker, he ordered the removal of the Ukrainian flag from the building, where it had been hoisted in solidarity.
Austrian historians this week also urged the Alpine country’s first far-right parliamentary speaker to call off a planned event on November 11 that “honors a declared antisemite,” the late politician Franz Dinghofer, Austria’s vice chancellor in the 1920s and a Nazi party member during World War II.
In Italy, Austria, Slovakia and the Czech Republic, nationalist politicians have won the parliamentary presidency, joining Hungary, where nationalist Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s party has held the post since 2010.
In all four countries, the change followed an agreement with other political parties, as the nationalists lacked an absolute majority.
And the elected parliament speakers were not from the same political party as the head of government, as is the case in Hungary.
According to Catherine Fieschi, a researcher at the Robert Schuman Center at the European University Institute of Florence, Orban “has paved the way” for the current trend.
Since Orban’s return to power in 2010, he “has shown that it is possible to remain in the European Union” without respecting its treaties, she said.
Moreover, the trend has accelerated since Donald Trump’s return to the White House, with the US president’s “character hardly acting as a repellent” in European countries marked by a different “political culture” and an “ambiguous” relationship with Russia, she added.
Due to some countries’ shared communist past and their geographical proximity to Moscow, they try to refrain from any “escalation” with Russia, Fieschi said.
These countries also benefit considerably from European funds, and fear they might have to share money from Brussels with countries such as Albania, Montenegro or even Ukraine that aim to join the EU, she added.

- ‘Gaining respectability’ -

For nationalist parties, which have seized on such concerns, taking the helm of parliament is a major step forward, experts told AFP.
In Slovakia, the Hlas party got the parliamentary presidency in March thanks to its support for nationalist premier Robert Fico’s party and the far-right SNS party since joining a coalition in 2023.
The Socialists and Democrats Group in the European parliament excluded Hlas from its parliamentary group, saying its positions on “Russia’s war in Ukraine, migration, the rule of law and the LGBTQ community have raised serious concerns and have no place in the progressive family.”
Austria’s far-right parliamentary speaker Walter Rosenkranz — who faces widespread criticism for being a member of a far-right student fraternity known for its strident pan-German nationalism — has not tried to build consensus beyond his own political camp since assuming office last year.
“For these parties, which have long been outside the system, taking control of presidencies allows them to counterbalance the executive branch, as governing parties have often sought coalitions due to their weakened position,” said Cyrille Bret, associate researcher at the Jacques Delors Institute.
This position is “particularly suited to protest parties in the process of gaining power,” he said.
“They can use their powers of oversight to criticize the government without assuming responsibility themselves, not to mention the budgetary gains.”
This also allows them to “raise their profile and gain respectability.”


Russia awaits an answer from the US on New START as nuclear treaty ticks down

Updated 4 sec ago
Follow

Russia awaits an answer from the US on New START as nuclear treaty ticks down

  • Russian leader Vladimir Putin has proposed keeping the treaty’s limits
  • US President Donald Trump has said Putin’s proposal sounded ‘like a good idea’
MOSCOW: Russia on Wednesday said it was still awaiting a formal answer from Washington on President Vladimir Putin’s proposal to jointly stick to the last remaining Russian-US arms control treaty, which expires in less than two months.
New START, which runs out on February 5, caps the number of strategic nuclear warheads that the United States and Russia can deploy, and the deployment of land- and submarine-based missiles and bombers to deliver them.
Putin in September offered to voluntarily maintain for one year the limits on deployed strategic nuclear weapons set out in the treaty, whose initials stand for the (New) Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty.
Trump said in October it sounded “like a good idea.”
“We have less than 100 days left before the expiry of New START,” said Sergei Shoigu, the secretary of Russia’s powerful Security Council, which is like a modern-day politburo of Russia’s most powerful officials.
“We are waiting for a response,” Shoigu told reporters during a visit to Hanoi. He added that Moscow’s proposal was an opportunity to halt the “destructive movement” that currently existed in nuclear arms control.
Nuclear arms control in peril
Russia and the US together have more than 10,000 nuclear warheads, or 87 percent of the global inventory of nuclear weapons. China is the world’s third largest nuclear power with about 600 warheads, according to the Federation of American Scientists.
The arms control treaties between Moscow and Washington were born out of fear of nuclear war after the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. Greater transparency about the opponent’s arsenal was intended to reduce the scope for misunderstanding and slow the arms race.
US and Russia eye China’s nuclear arsenal
Now, with all major nuclear powers seeking to modernize their arsenals, and Russia and the West at strategic loggerheads for over a decade — not least over the enlargement of NATO and Moscow’s war in Ukraine — the treaties have almost all crumbled away. Each side blames the other.
In the new US National Security Strategy, the Trump administration says it wants to reestablish strategic stability with Russia” — shorthand for reopening discussions on strategic nuclear arms control.
Rose Gottemoeller, who was chief US negotiator for New START, said in an article for The Arms Control Association this month that it would be beneficial for Washington to implement the treaty along with Moscow.
“For the United States, the benefit of this move would be buying more time to decide what to do about the ongoing Chinese buildup without having to worry simultaneously about new Russian deployments,” Gottemoeller said.