SHARE
COPY LINK

EUROPEAN UNION

EU faces tide of disinformation as vote looms

Accused on social media of wanting to ban the repair of old cars or hiding insect ingredients in food, the EU faces a tide of disinformation ahead of June's parliamentary elections.

EU faces tide of disinformation as vote looms
The European Parliament in Brussels, on February 21, 2024, ahead of the European elections scheduled between June 6 and June 9, 2024. Photo: Kenzo TRIBOUILLARD/AFP.

These and other spurious claims — for example, that the European Union will require cattle to wear face masks or inject the population with microchips to track their every movement — have gone viral in recent months and have been debunked by AFP’s fact checkers.

In January, the EU’s top diplomat Josep Borrell tweeted that disinformation represents “one of the most significant threats of our time.”

Given the sheer size and complexity of the EU’s decision-making apparatus — affecting the lives of nearly 450 million people in 27 different countries — experts suggest that ignorance plays a role in the negative perception that many people have of the EU and helps feed distrust and even resentment towards its institutions.

“Clearly, low levels of knowledge about even basic aspects of how the EU works contributes to the problem of disinformation,” said Simon Usherwood, professor of Politics and International Studies at The Open University in London.

So when the European Commission proposed in July 2023 to revise regulations on the management of end-of-life vehicles (ELVs), social media users in France, Germany and Greece were quick to pounce on the news and spread the false claim that Brussels was planning to “scrap” or “ban” the repair of vehicles over 15 years old.

All-powerful machine?

Disinformation spreaders are keen to depict the EU as a malevolent, all-powerful machine that encroaches on the sovereignty of member states, as well as on the lives and freedoms of their citizens.

Nevertheless, Cyril Lemieux, a media sociologist who runs a seminar on fake news at the School for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences (EHESS) in Paris, said: “I’m not sure that the topics are much more complex in Brussels than at a national public policy level.”

More fundamentally, “it is an expression, at all levels, of the distrust of the working classes towards elites who are perceived to be too far-removed. And that encourages an adherence to ‘fake news’.”

Jakub Kalensky, senior analyst at the European Centre of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats (Hybrid CoE) in Helsinki, said that pro-sovereignty, anti-EU actors found it easy to weaponise the lack of trust.

Hence, people like British Eurosceptic Nigel Farage, the head of France’s nationalist Popular Republican Union Francois Asselineau and Hungary’s Agriculture Minister Istvan Nagy helped spread false claims that the European Commission wants to make people eat insects without their knowledge.

‘Pro-Kremlin ecosystem’

Kalensky said the pro-sovereignty advocates had developed a “symbiosis” with an adversary even more formidable than the EU — Russia.

The relationship with “the pro-Kremlin disinformation ecosystem” was “mutually beneficial”, especially in the context of the war in Ukraine, the analyst said.

“The pro-Kremlin ecosystem gains new ‘domestic’ actors who provide legitimacy to their messaging and the anti-EU actors receive visibility that they otherwise might not be able to get. It is not a coincidence that these actors so often defend the Kremlin’s interests in the EU,” Kalensky said.

The Open University’s Usherwood said that disinformation targeting the EU “comes from lots of different sources,” and includes messages from “people genuinely confused about (or opposing) the EU, which then get weaponised by more organised political groups.”

Usherwood warned that the risk for the EU would be to simply dismiss any negative messages as disinformation, when the criticism might be legitimate.

“It might be telling a story about the problems of making the integration process work for citizens,” he said.

Member comments

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.

IMMIGRATION

Border centres and ‘safe’ states: The EU’s major asylum changes explained

UPDATE: The EU parliament has adopted a sweeping reform of Europe's asylum policies that will both harden border procedures and force all the bloc's 27 nations to share responsibility.

Border centres and 'safe' states: The EU's major asylum changes explained

The parliament’s main political groups overcame opposition from far-right and far-left parties to pass the new migration and asylum pact — enshrining a difficult overhaul nearly a decade in the making.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen hailed the vote, saying it will “secure European borders… while ensuring the protection of the fundamental rights” of migrants.

“We must be the ones to decide who comes to the European Union and under what circumstances, and not the smugglers and traffickers,” she said.

EU governments — a majority of which previously approved the pact — also welcomed its adoption.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and Greece’s migration minister, Dimitris Kairidis, both called it “historic”.

French President Emmanuel Macron said Europe was acting “effectively and humanely” while Italian Interior Minister Matteo Piantedosi hailed what he termed “the best possible compromise”.

But there was dissent when Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban derided the reform as “another nail in the coffin of the European Union”.

“Unity is dead, secure borders are no more. Hungary will never give in to the mass migration frenzy! We need a change in Brussels in order to Stop Migration!” Orban said in a post on social media platform X.

For very different reasons, migrant charities also slammed the pact, which includes building border centres to hold asylum-seekers and sending some to outside “safe” countries.

Amnesty International said the EU was “shamefully” backing a deal “they know will lead to greater human suffering” while the Red Cross federation urged member states “to guarantee humane conditions for asylum seekers and migrants affected”.

The vote itself was initially disrupted by protesters yelling: “The pact kills — vote no!”, while dozens of demonstrators outside the parliament building in Brussels held up placards with slogans decrying the reform.

The parliament’s far-left grouping, which maintains that the reforms are incompatible with Europe’s commitment to upholding human rights, said it was a “dark day”.

It was “a pact with the devil,” said Damien Careme, a lawmaker from the Greens group.

Border centres

As well as Orban, other far-right lawmakers also opposed the passage of the 10 laws making up the pact as insufficient to stop irregular migrants they accuse of spreading insecurity and threatening to “submerge” European identity.

Marine Le Pen, the figurehead of France’s far-right National Rally, complained the changes would give “legal impunity to NGOs complicit with smugglers”.

She and her party’s leader who sits in the European Parliament, Jordan Bardella, said they would seek to overturn the reform after EU elections in June, which are tipped to boost far-right numbers in the legislature.

The pact’s measures are due to come into force in 2026, after the European Commission first sets out how it would be implemented.

New border centres would hold irregular migrants while their asylum requests are vetted. And deportations of those deemed inadmissible would be sped up.

The pact also requires EU countries to take in thousands of asylum-seekers from “frontline” states such as Italy and Greece, or — if they refuse — to provide money or other resources to the under-pressure nations.

Even ahead of Orban’s broadside, his anti-immigration government reaffirmed Hungary would not be taking in any asylum-seekers.

“This new migration pact practically gives the green light to illegal migration to Europe,” Hungary’s Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said before the vote, adding that Budapest “will not allow illegal migrants to set foot here in Hungary”.

‘EU solidarity’

German’s Scholz said on X that the accord stands for “solidarity among European states” and would “finally relieve the burden on those countries that are particularly hard hit”.

One measure particularly criticised by migrant charities is the sending of asylum-seekers to countries outside the EU deemed “safe”, if the migrant has sufficient ties to that country.

The pact resulted from years of arduous negotiations spurred by a massive inflow of irregular migrants in 2015, many from war-torn Syria and Afghanistan.

Under current EU rules, the arrival country bears responsibility for hosting and vetting asylum-seekers and returning those deemed inadmissible. That has put southern frontline states under pressure and fuelled far-right opposition.

A political breakthrough came in December when a weighted majority of EU countries backed the reforms — overcoming opposition from Hungary and Poland.

In parallel with the reform, the EU has been multiplying the same sort of deal it struck with Turkey in 2016 to stem migratory flows.

It has reached accords with Tunisia and, most recently, Egypt that are portrayed as broader cooperation arrangements. Many lawmakers have, however, criticised the deals.

SHOW COMMENTS