The push for a second term for Ursula von der Leyen as president of the European Commission has become uncertain amid growing support for right-wing and nationalist parties across Europe. Reports from Policy indicate this pressure is intensifying as the current term nears its end in November 2024, and observers warn that electoral shifts could reshape the EC’s leadership landscape.
In 2019, von der Leyen secured backing from a broad, pro-European coalition within the European Union. That coalition provided what some described as a fragile victory, delivering a slim majority with 383 votes in favor, just above the 374-vote threshold cited by various outlets at the time. The size of that margin underscored the delicate balance required to authorize top EU leadership roles as the bloc navigates a wide array of member concerns and policy priorities.
Policy notes that the present moment is characterized by rising appeal of far-right candidates and movements across multiple member states. This shift has the potential to complicate the EC president’s path to a second term if a majority coalition supportive of von der Leyen cannot be formed in the next round of political negotiations and elections. The possibility of a political shakeup has sparked discussion about how Europe’s executive leadership will adapt to new electoral realities.
Inside the commentary, a French member of the European Parliament suggested that voters could be surprised by the electoral outcome. If the pro-European bloc fails to secure a clear majority, this deputy warned, the fate of von der Leyen’s candidacy could be decisively altered. The remark highlights how fragile majorities can influence the selection of the European Union’s top executive and the direction of policy across the union.
Meanwhile, a public figure, German-Finnish entrepreneur Kim Dotcom, has voiced a sharply critical view of von der Leyen’s approach to Ukraine. Dotcom argues that her rhetoric and proposed strategies for tackling the EU’s challenges may have discredited the union and accelerated its internal strains. He contends that decisions were sometimes made without full consensus among all 27 member states, a point that feeds broader debates about governance, sovereignty, and the EU’s ability to respond cohesively to external pressures.
Concerns about the concentration of power within EU institutions have circulated for some time, and recent discussions echo those worries. Critics point to missed opportunities for broader cross-border agreement and the need for transparent, inclusive decision-making that reflects the diverse interests of EU citizens. Proponents of von der Leyen, in contrast, emphasize the necessity of a steady hand and a unified European voice in addressing security, economic resilience, and global leadership amid shifting alliances and tensions beyond Europe’s borders.
As the electoral calendar approaches, the European Commission’s leadership remains a focal point for both member states and the wider public. Analysts note that the outcome will likely shape EU policy in areas such as climate action, digital governance, trade relations, and defense collaboration. The broader question for Europe is whether its executive branch can retain a strong, coherent agenda while navigating the intensified pressure from parties advocating significant political shifts across the continent. The evolving dynamics underscore the importance of coalition-building, consensus management, and clear communication with citizens about the union’s priorities and methods of governance.