The 2017 French Presidential Elections are quickly approaching and Marine Le Pen, leader of the far-right Front National (FN), leads in the polls. Like much of the western world, France has seen an upsurge in far-right, nationalistic sentiment. When comparing the 2017 race to French and European elections gone by, it is difficult to envision Le Pen’s path to the presidency. However, even if she is defeated, Le Pen’s far-right platform will remain a definitive political force in France for the foreseeable future.

The Situation in France

According to recent polls, Le Pen leads a handful of candidates with 26 percent favorability. Assuming polls hold steady, Marine Le Pen will win the first round of voting, scheduled for April 23, but will not accrue the majority required to win the election outright. Le Pen will have to compete in a run off election against the second most popular candidate.

This will not be the first time a Le Pen reaches the run off round of a presidential election. Jean-Marie Le Pen, Marine Le Pen’s father, came second in the first round of votes to earn one of two places in the run off round of the 2002 election. In the first round of voting, Jean-Marie Le Pen earned 16.9 percent of the vote compared to the center-right Jacques Chirac’s 19.9 percent. In the run off, Le Pen lost in a landslide. Le Pen was barely able to improve his 16.9 percent share, while Chirac’s share of the vote soared to 82.2 percent. Chirac was scandal ridden and highly unpopular. However, his left wing opponents backed him in the second round, calling on the French public to “vote for the crook, not the fascist.” Chirac won because he was seen by a Le Pen-fearing coalition as the lesser of two evils.

It is important to note that Jean-Marie Le Pen was an underdog, whereas his daughter is expected to win the first round. It is therefore unlikely that Marine Le Pen’s fate will perfectly map that of her father. However, Le Pen’s defeat to an anti-right wing coalition in the run off still seems imminent. If results in Austria’s 2016 presidential election are anything to go by, even the most popular of right wing politicians can struggle to overcome a two-round electoral system.

Lessons from the Rest of Europe

Like France, Austria’s elections make use of the two-round system. In the run-up to Austria’s first round of voting, Norbert Hofer, a far-right nationalist, held a sizable lead over his competitor. The Austrian nationalist ended up winning the first round by 13.8 percent. However, after an annulled run off election that was too close to call, Hofer lost the rerun by 7.6 percent. Hofer’s lead going into, and coming out of, the first round of voting was considerably greater than the lead Le Pen currently enjoys. Hofer’s first round victory was not particularly shocking. However, even with his sizable first round victory, the Austrian nationalist was unable to overcome the the anti-right wing coalition that formed in the second round.

Over the last few years, there have been a slew of analyses discrediting the viability of a right-wing populist movement. Such predictions were almost invariably disproven. While a Le Pen victory might be unlikely, it would be hardly come as a total surprise considering the state of contemporary western politics. Regardless of whether Le Pen overcomes a prospective anti-FN voter-bloc in the second round, her style of right wing nationalism will demand a response from whomever holds power. In France and elsewhere, far-right mobilizations have now entered the political mainstream.

Though Hofer was unable to win the largely ceremonial presidency, the centrist-controlled Austrian Parliament has already begun to pander to the far-right. In January, the parliament passed laws that would require asylum seekers undergo an “integration year” during which they would be expected to learn German. Austria has also become the latest European country to ban Muslim women from wearing full-face veils in public spaces–a entirely symbolic move considering only about 150 women in Austria wear such veils.

In the UK, the center-right Conservative Party has similarly worked to appease nationalists. Former Prime Minister David Cameron made the decision to call a referendum on EU membership that was seen by observers as a way of appeasing the far-right UK Independence Party and the more conservative members of his own party. Cameron expected the referendum to fail and hoped the public’s support would neutralize his far-right opponents. His plan backfired. The public voted to leave and Cameron resigned. In spite of the fact that a majority of parliamentary conservatives wished to remain in the EU, Theresa May, the new conservative leader, claims she is firmly committed to imposing the type of hardline immigration policies demanded by British nationalists.

The Netherlands has a general election scheduled for March 15 and the center-right People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) is scrambling to maintain control of the government. Geert Wilders’ far-right Party for Freedom (PVV) leads in the polls. Though Wilders’ PVV will not win enough seats to form a government outright, his party is currently projected to win the greatest number of seats. Though Mark Rutt, Prime Minister and Leader of the VVD, has ruled out the possibility that his party would form a coalition government with the far-right PVV, he has been pandering to an increasingly nationalistic public. Last month, he ordered immigrants to “act ‘normal’, or go away.”

What Does this Mean for Far-Right Movements?

Far-right mobilizations have gained, and will likely continue to gain, power, irrespective of whether or not they win elections. Marine Le Pen’s run for the presidency could very well fall short, but her surge in popularity over the past few years is indicative of France’s entrenched far-right movement. Assuming Le Pen loses, the party that achieves power will not have done so by inspiring a united support base or platform. The party in power will reflect a disjointed majority that will collectively disagree with Le Pen but might not agree on that much else. A fragmented leadership will only favor the far-right. As France’s far-right continues to voice their concerns, those in power will be forced to respond. This response will never disarm the far-right if those delivering it are politically impotent and ideologically incoherent.

Callum Cleary

Callum is an editorial intern at Law Street. He is from Portland OR by way of the United Kingdom. He is a senior at American University double majoring in International Studies and Philosophy with a focus on social justice in Latin America. Contact Callum at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Even if Marine Le Pen Loses, French Nationalism Will Still Win appeared first on Law Street.

On October 25, France began dismantling the infamous migrant camp in the city of Calais nicknamed “the Jungle.” The camp was home to thousands of migrants and refugees and has been a source of division and animosity for the surrounding area. However, it is not just Calais that will be affected. In fact, the decision to shut down the camp actually speaks to larger trends both in France and in Europe at large. As the migrant crisis continues, many countries in Europe have had a hard time accommodating the influx of people.

Read on to find out more about what exactly is happening in Calais, where the refugees living there are headed next and how this all fits into the larger backdrop of national and continental politics.

Background

Migrants began settling in Calais, France way back in 1999. The camp survived several closure attempts, including one earlier this year. All the while the population grew, totaling more than 9,000 people, according to recent reports. Many people settled there on their way to the UK, as the camp is located near a tunnel between the two countries.

Read More: The “Great Wall of Calais”: The UK’s Controversial Plan to Stop Migrants

What’s Happening Now?

When authorities decided to tear down the camp, the next question was what exactly that meant for its inhabitants. Before the camp was cleared, there were thousands of people living there and at least 70 operating businesses. The plan is to move all these people and whatever they can carry with them to several sites across France. To expedite this process, the camp’s inhabitants were broken up into four groups: adult men, families, minors, and other vulnerable groups. During the removal process, conflicts and fires broke out as some were reluctant to uproot.

The video below depicts the deconstruction of the jungle:

Where are the Refugees Going?

Those leaving the camp were transported by bus to more than 450 individual reception centers across the country. These centers are generally abandoned hospitals, hotels, and army barracks located in many small towns. Once there, refugees are able to apply for asylum, but if their requests are denied they will face deportation. Not everyone is being forced out, unaccompanied children were allowed to stay in converted shipping containers as the rest of the camp was taken down. Days later, the remaining children were moved to various reception centers throughout the country. But NGOs have warned that since being resettled, many children are living in unsuitable conditions and are being forced to work.

Refugees there have already demonstrated a clear persistence to stay put if possible, with the goal to ultimately make it to England. England is currently set to accept some 200 children from the camp who have proven relatives in the UK, although it has promised not to accept any more.

Breaking down the Calais camp has also reignited the debate over immigration and refugee settlement. In England, politicians have been resistant to accept more refugees even as French President Hollande asks them to take on a greater share. British politicians, however, have been steadfast in their refusal, some have even been calling for dental exams to prove that children claiming refugee status are indeed children and not adults. And many small town residents in France have taken to the streets to protest the settlement of refugees in their communities.

Political Impact

At the forefront of the protests in France is the Front National, a nationalist political party led by Marine Le Pen. Le Pen’s party has spearheaded efforts to protest the settlement of immigrants in small towns. However, Le Pen’s party is certainly not alone. This development is emblematic of a trend across Europe where far-right parties, who oppose immigration as one of their central tenets, are on the rise.

Read more: Right-Wing Groups in Europe: A Rising Force?

This includes countries like Greece, Hungary, and Poland where dissatisfaction with the EU and the rising number of migrants has led to far-right parties securing large portions of parliament and in some cases the governing coalition. Some of these groups, such as the FIDESZ-KDNP in Hungary, have gone even further, espousing anti-Semitic views and seeking to criminalize homosexuality.

This rise is not solely confined to the poorer eastern portions of Europe, several nations, including France, have seen a growing backlash against immigration and immigrants. For example in Sweden, often held up as a golden standard of liberalism, the rise of the far-right Swedish Democrats, a party that strongly opposes immigration, led to the formation of a tenuous coalition government between the Social Democrats and the far-left Green Party.

In the upcoming elections in Germany, a far-right party may gain seats in parliament for the first time since World War II. Following mass reports of sexual assault last New Year’s Eve in Cologne, the Alternative for Germany Party, which has hard-line positions on immigration and strongly opposes Islam, grew in popularity. Perhaps the most significant example is in Austria, where the leader of a nationalist party has a very realistic chance of winning the presidency in the December runoff election. If successful, he would be the first far-right head of state elected in Europe since World War II. Migration also played a prominent role in the UK’s decision to leave the European Union earlier this year.

European Refugee crisis

Much of this reaction to the refugees in Calais is actually part of the larger reaction to a wave of immigrants flooding Europe in general. Europe has several demographic factors that make it an ideal place for immigrants, namely a shrinking native population and an increasing need for caretakers as its population ages. In addition, in terms of personal safety and economic prospects, many migrants see Europe as a significant improvement relative to their home countries.

In 2015, more than a million people arrived in Europe seeking asylum. Of those, about 476,000 have applied for asylum in Germany. While Germany received the most in total, on a per capita basis, Hungary, Sweden, and Austria have received more. Not coincidently, those three have seen a notable rise in far-right parties, all with platforms seeking to dramatically curtail immigration.

In Slovakia, Macedonia, and Hungary border walls have been erected to prevent migrants from getting through. France, Germany, Austria and Sweden, several of the most popular destinations, have instituted border checks. Norway has gone perhaps the furthest, though, by actually confiscating migrants’ valuables to pay for their care. Aside from these individual efforts, the EU as a whole has also worked on a deal with Turkey where, in exchange for billions in aid and reconsidering that country’s EU application, Turkey will prevent more migrants from entering Europe. The following video looks at the migration crisis in Europe:

Conclusion

What tearing down the Jungle actually means is unclear at this point. Particularly because it has been tried before, yet the camp has remained in place for almost 20 years under a range of politicians. What is more telling is the spirit behind the most recent decision to tear down the camp. While refugees are being offered the opportunity to be resettled, many migrants may not be granted asylum and will likely face deportation. Moreover, the situation in Europe has dramatically changed as far-right political parties are seeing their influence and popularity surge.

The refugee crisis has engulfed the continent. While many were first met with open arms, the mood has shifted and now many places are erecting barriers and denying entrance. This has coincided with a rise of far-right parties across the continent (as well as anti-immigrant and anti-refugee sentiment in the United States). Tearing down the Jungle, if it lasts this time, is symbolic as much as anything. However, the exact message being sent, whether hostile or not, remains unclear. The important thing to watch now is how those living the camp are resettled and how residents react to an influx of refugees.

Resources

CNN: Calais ‘Jungle’: Demolition of Massive Migrant Camp Begins

Law Street Media: The “Great Wall of Calais”: The UK’s Controversial Plan to Stop Migrants

NBC News: France Begins Evicting 6,000 Migrants From ‘Jungle’ Near Calais

Vox: France’s ‘Jungle’ Refugee Camp is Being Dismantled and Residents may have Nowhere to go

Reuters: ‘A Lot of Controversy’ Around Resettling Calais ‘Jungle’ Refugees

Law Street Media: Right-Wing Groups in Europe: A Rising Force?

The New York Times: How Far Is Europe Swinging to the Right?

BBC News: Migrant crisis: Migration to Europe Explained in Seven Charts

BBC News: How is the Migrant Crisis Dividing EU Countries

Michael Sliwinski

Michael Sliwinski (@MoneyMike4289) is a 2011 graduate of Ohio University in Athens with a Bachelor’s in History, as well as a 2014 graduate of the University of Georgia with a Master’s in International Policy. In his free time he enjoys writing, reading, and outdoor activites, particularly basketball. Contact Michael at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post After Calais, Europe is Still Struggling to Deal with Refugees appeared first on Law Street.