Against the backdrop of the war in Ukraine, the tension between the EU and the US, the disputes over the Green Deal and the accusations of double standards regarding the rule of law, the European Parliament is becoming an arena of increasingly sharp ideological clashes. In this context, the newly formed group “Europe of Sovereign Nations“ (ESN) declares its ambition to reorder the balance in Brussels and impose a vision of a union of equal, sovereign states. On the internal dynamics in the European Parliament, the “Pfizer“ scandal, and what else… MEP Tomasz Fröhlich from the Alternative for Germany, which is a member of the “Europe of Sovereign Nations” (ESN) group in the European Parliament, spoke to FACTI.
– Mr Fröhlich, what does the European Parliament look like from the inside – is this the Europe of the United Nations, or a place where large countries oppress small ones?
– The European idea is essentially correct and it is precisely for smaller countries that the parliament provides an opportunity for influence that they would hardly have on their own on the world stage. A Bulgarian or Baltic MEP can debate and make decisions here on an equal footing with French or German colleagues. This is a real achievement of European cooperation. At the same time, we must be honest – in political practice, large groups and large member states naturally have more weight. This is to some extent inevitable.
The problem arises when this burden becomes automatic - when Berlin or Paris practically decide what is “European“.
Our goal in the “Europe of Sovereign Nations“ group is to restore this balance. Not against Europe, but for a better Europe - one in which every nation sits equally at the table, and not just receives decisions made elsewhere. And for a Europe that is not globally run over.
– “Pfizer“ is an offensive word when the European Parliament discusses the work of the European Commission and in particular the work of its President Ursula von der Leyen?
– The name “Pfizer“ has become synonymous in the European Parliament with everything that is not working in the von der Leyen Commission. The facts are known: the Commission President negotiated multi-billion euro vaccine contracts via SMS with the head of “Pfizer“ Albert Bourla – bypassing all control mechanisms.
These messages have not been published to this day, although the European Ombudsman has pointed this out as an irregularity, and the European Court of Auditors has criticized the way the negotiations were conducted. We are talking about up to 35 billion euros of public funds. When “Pfizer“ is mentioned in Parliament, it may not yet be an insult, but it is a short formula for one of the biggest transparency scandals and potential corruption in the history of the EU institutions.
The fact that von der Leyen received a second term despite the unexplained affair speaks volumes about the state of democratic control in Brussels. And the fact that she has repeatedly remained in office thanks to a broad cross-party majority – from the far left to the center-right – despite the votes of no confidence submitted by our group, is a mockery of the European peoples.
– A new parliamentary group “Europe of Sovereign Nations“ was created together with the Bulgarian party “Vazrazhdane“. Have they already started to recognize you and take your positions into account?
– The creation of ESN was an important step. We are joining forces from different European countries that share one belief – that
Europe can only function as a union of sovereign nations.
The cooperation with “Vazrazhdane“ and other partners shows that this position has support and creates a bridge between the patriotic and right-wing parties in Europe. Of course, we do not receive recognition from the ruling elite in the classical sense. But our topics are making their way. When even mainstream politicians today talk about border protection, sovereignty and the crisis of European institutions, this is also our contribution. Although we are numerically the smallest group, we have become a driving force whose influence can no longer be ignored.
– If we are talking about a united Europe, how do you assess the negotiations between the EU and the US, especially in the context of the tariffs imposed by Donald Trump and the Commission's acceptance of 15%?
– The Commission's reaction was humiliating. Accepting a 15% tariff and presenting it as a success in the negotiations shows the scale of European weakness.
Europe has an economy comparable to that of the US – there is no reason to be treated as a junior partner.
The problem is not just Trump. The problem is that Brussels has relied on American security guarantees for decades and today has no real leverage. A confident European trade policy requires its own industrial strategy and a willingness to defend European interests even against Washington.
– Can Europe ever negotiate on equal terms with Donald Trump?
– It can, but not in its current state. Trump understands only the language of force, and the EU exudes weakness. Not because of a lack of resources, but because of a lack of political will. As long as Europe remains energy dependent on the US, does not build an independent defense capacity and is lost in internal debates, any American president will exploit this weakness. We must be clear - Trump is not looking for a partnership with Europe, but for American interests. “America First“ does not mean “America and Europe together“. Europe must find a response that is not subservient.
– Is it possible that we will witness a kind of “NATO vs. NATO“ because of the tension over Greenland?
– The debate over Greenland has shattered an illusion – that NATO is an alliance of equals. If the leader of the alliance openly speculates about the forcible acquisition of an ally's territory, the question arises of what actually holds this alliance together.
This is not about the people of Greenland, but about raw materials and geostrategic control over the Arctic.
This is classic great power policy. Europe must build its own security structures that do not depend on the will of one country or one person – especially when that country is not even in Europe.
– What values are we talking about when the world is facing new territorial conflicts?
– The so-called “rules-based order” has always been an order whose rules are determined by the stronger. Putin is violating international law in Ukraine – but Washington reserves the right to overthrow governments in Venezuela, annex territories or bomb sovereign states.
The difference is not in the methods, but in who has the power to avoid the consequences. Europe must stop with its double standards. The right to sovereignty and territorial integrity either applies to everyone or to no one – to Ukraine as much as to Greenland.
– Against whom will the increased EU defense spending be directed?
– This is the key question that Brussels is not giving an honest answer to. Rearmament without strategic autonomy means that Europe buys weapons that it can only use with American permission at a critical moment.
We need a European defense that serves European interests, not an extension of the Pentagon.
It is right for Europe to invest more in its security, but the focus should be on deterrence and territorial defense, not on interventions in other parts of the world.
– Is power politics the new global norm?
– Power politics has never disappeared - it was just hidden behind the facade of multilateral institutions. Trump has destroyed that facade.
The question for Europe is not whether it wants to pursue a power politics, but whether it is even capable of it.
We have the largest internal market in the world, a highly skilled population, technological capabilities. Power is not only military, but requires the will to formulate and defend one's own interests.
– How does the Green Deal affect the European economy?
– In its current form, the Green Deal is a deindustrialization program. While the US subsidizes its industry and China expands its production capacity, Europe imposes new restrictions on itself. The result is the outsourcing of jobs, higher energy costs and a decline in competitiveness.
– Will the Green Deal be revised or repealed?
– The pressure is growing. Economic reality is catching up with ideology. Even within the European People's Party, voices are heard for a serious revision. Officially, it will probably not be repealed - too much political capital has been invested. But in practice, it will have to be softened if Europe does not want to lose even more competitiveness. The question is whether the corrections will come in time or the damage will already be irreversible.
– Cancelled elections in Romania, judicial pressure on the opposition in France, surveillance of the opposition in Germany – is this democracy in the EU?
– What happened in Romania was unprecedented – a democratic election result was annulled because it was not acceptable to Brussels, Paris and Berlin. In France, the judiciary is used against political opponents. In Germany, the opposition is monitored by the services. All this is happening under the watchful eye of the Commission, which supposedly protects the rule of law – but only when it comes to the “inconvenient”. Procedures are being conducted against Hungary and Poland, while violations in Western Europe are ignored. This is a double standard.
– The EU claims to be “united in diversity”. Is that how it looks from the inside?
– This motto has become an empty phrase. Today's EU does not tolerate true diversity - anyone who deviates from the Brussels line is punished.
Europe does not need a centralized bureaucracy that imposes one model on everyone. What is needed is a framework union of free and sovereign nations that cooperate on the basis of mutual respect, without becoming provinces of an opaque and dysfunctional structure.
We are fighting for a different European order - most consistently of all right-wing groups - and we want to influence the other formations to the right of center. Europe can no longer afford half-baked solutions.