Anti-Europeanism, Anti-European sentiment, and Europhobia are political terms used in a variety of contexts, implying sentiment or policies in opposition to Europe.
In the context of racial or ethno-nationalist politics, this may refer to the dislike, hatred, prejudice, mistreatment and/or discrimination against/toward the culture or peoples of Europe. In the shorthand of "Europe" (a British usage, standing for the European Union or European integration), it may refer to Euroscepticism, criticism of policies of European governments or the European Union. [1] In the context of United States foreign policy, it may refer to the geopolitical divide between "transatlantic", "transpacific" and "hemispheric" (Pan-American) relations.
In social sciences, anti-Europeanism is defined as opposition to the European Union and to European integration for political, cultural and ideological reasons. [2] Scholars distinguish it from Euroscepticism, which is generally defined as a mistrust of the EU, its policies and its objectives. [3]
In the United Kingdom, "Europhobia" refers to negative attitudes towards mainland Europe, either in the context of anti-German sentiment or of anti-Catholicism, [4] or, more recently, of Euroscepticism in the United Kingdom. [5]
American exceptionalism in the United States [6] has long led to criticism of European domestic policy (such as the size of the welfare state in European countries) [7] and foreign policy (such as European countries that did not support the 2003 US invasion of Iraq). [8]
Under the presidency of Donald Trump, critiques of NATO, particularly its funding, became a prominent issue. Although NATO includes non-European members such as the United States, Canada, and Turkey, the alliance is often perceived, especially by Trump and many Americans, as primarily a European defense treaty aimed at safeguarding European nations. [9]
Trump’s main criticism centered on the disproportionate financial burden shouldered by the United States, which effectively funds the majority of NATO’s military expenditures. He argued that many NATO member states fail to meet their commitment to allocate at least 2% of their GDP to defense spending, a benchmark agreed upon by all members. [10]
This critique gained renewed attention during the Russian invasion of Ukraine, which exposed the underfunding of military capabilities in several NATO countries. [11] Their inability to immediately provide substantial military aid to Ukraine highlighted longstanding concerns about reliance on U.S. defense resources. Many American critics view NATO as a vestige of the Cold War, where the U.S. continues to bear the cost of protecting Europe, particularly against threats from Russia, without equitable contributions from other member states. [12]
In European social science, anti-Europeanism is usually defined as one of three major types of negative attitudes, alongside Eurocriticism and Euroscepticism. [13] .Its defining characteristic is the rejection of European integration and European unity [13] . This distinguishes it from Euroscepticism, which describes mistrust towards the EU integration project, its institutions and its politics [13] [14] . It also is different from Eurocriticism, which refers to criticism of the EU’s actors and policies [13] . Contrarily to anti-Europeanism, Euroscepticism and Eurocriticism do not go as far as to reject the European project [13] . Anti-Europeanism can be observed on both sides of the political spectrum [15] [13] but has, in recent literature, been associated mainly with far right and nationalist discourse [16] [17] .It has also been used in populism, through framing the EU as a corrupt elite [18] [15] [19] .
Anti-Europeanism does not belong to any specific side of the political spectrum. [15] [13] . On the left of the political spectrum, anti-Europeanism is usually an opposition to the European project’s capitalist and globalist nature. This was especially true in the 1960’s and 1970’s, in the opposition with the EEC. For example, the EEC and the integration project were given the name capitalist club by left-wing parties across Europe [13] . The EU and entities alike were truly seen as a tool for liberalism and globalization which weakened national protection for workers [17] [13] .
On the right side of the political spectrum, anti-Europeanism can also be observed [18] [16] . Firstly, concerns about sovereignty, such as control over the economy or immigration can lead to anti-European attitudes [18] [20] . On the far right, there are also concerns over the countries’ national identity and culture [19] [17] [16] . In Eastern-European countries, some individuals and parties argue that the EU’s liberal values and its international nature are not compatible with their country’s values and national identity, and that therefore, the integration cannot work [21] [16] [22] .
The anti-European discourse can also be associated with populism, where far-right politicians promote the idea of a duality between the EU’s “corrupt elites” and the “true, hard-working people” [17] [18] . Anti-Europeanism can also be observed alongside discourses on nativism, the idea that individuals indigenous to a land should be given greater social protection and have their interests promoted over those of immigrants [15] [17] . Indeed, in this view, the EU is seen as detrimental to the country’s autonomy over its borders [15] [17] .Hungarian Prime Minister Victor Orbán is an example of a politician using anti-elitist discourse coherent with anti-Europeanism [23] .
Anti-Europeanism in Europe is sometimes justified through the framing of the European Union as a detimentral to democracy or sovereignty, particularly on issues relating do decisions made in the European Parliament [24] For example, concern for sovereignty is considered to be one of the main reasons behind the "Leave" vote during the 2016 Brexit referendum. [25]
Anti-Europeanism can be defended through political arguments, namely national sovereignty [26] [16] . Anti-European sentiment is often a reaction to a perception of loss of control by countries of their own politics. Some consider the EU as a source of Democratic deficit, in reference to its technocratic aspect, which is perceived as taking the power even further from the citizens [18] . Decisions taken by the European Parliament, on issues like immigration, for example, are also seen by some as a violation of the country's sovereignty [27] [16] . Concern for sovereignty is considered to be one of the main reasons behind the "Leave" vote during the 2016 Brexit referendum [26] [20] .
In other instances, Anti-Europeanism is explained through cultural arguments. Those arguments show concern for the impact of European integration on the country's national identity, culture and values [16] [19] [17] . In some instances, anti-Europeanism is related to nativism and xenophobia [15] [28] . Many European national parties argue that the EU constitutes a "replacing power", seeking to replace the ethnic majority through immigration (see the Great Replacement conspiracy theory) [27] [19] . Some far-right discourse also perceives the EU as a threat to Europe's historical Christian culture [16] [17] . In other instances, the integration is seen as an homogenization that erases local specificities [17] [16] .In some countries, the EU and its values are seen as too "liberal", and incompatible with the country's national identity, therefore making integration impossible. [21] [16] [22] .
Rumsfeld's disdain is as old as America, an extension of Europe, which in a certain sense founded itself as the anti-Europe.
As Libération reports with some shock, after centuries during which the mere mention of la France was 'enough to evoke notions of elegance and refinement' (especially in American trailer parks) suddenly the word 'French' has 'become a dirty word.'
On the economic front, the United States has produced consistently higher growth rates and lower unemployment than many nations in Europe. Some U.S. commentators blame the excessive regulations imposed by the European Community. Others say Europeans are plain lazy. "French voters are trying to preserve a 35-hour workweek in a world where Indian engineers are ready to work a 35-hour day," wrote New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman earlier this month.
The age of wars of national liberation, of massacres and countermassacres, of anti-European propaganda and anticolonial rhetoric dawned in Latin America around 1810. There, as in Greece — grave of many illusions — or later in Italy, nationalists depended on foreign aid, or on the incompetence of the power they challenged.
Continentalist definitions presented a fervent anti-European thinking." Antenor Orrego: "European traditions in Latin America have been even more destructive for the well-being of the continent than US imperialism. European decadence and vices have to be replaced by 'authentic americanism.'" Víctor Raúl Haya de la Torre: "Marxism was a too Eurocentric theory to be applied in Latin American circumstances.
Foreign loans and predatory bankers by the 1870s had wrecked Egyptian finances and were tearing holes in the Egyptian political fabric. The Anglo-French dual financial control, designed to safeguard the foreign bondholders and to restore Egypt as a good risk, provoked anti-European feeling.
Algeria presented France with a set of tactical and political problems as different as the North African terrain differed from that of Indochina. Politically, Algeria was an integral part of the French Republic rather than a colony. Its native Berber and Arab people were technically French citizens. But discrimination was rife, and the European immigrants, the "pieds-noirs," had a stranglehold on local government, owned most of the arable land, and controlled the police. When Arabs and Berbers were belatedly allowed to vote for half of a constituent provincial assembly in 1948 and 1951, blatant fraud gave the pied-noir candidates a sweeping victory. The resulting anti-European riots were savagely repressed at a cost of thousands of lives.
If anti-European and anti-colonial terrorism in Africa had produced good results in the end for Africa, anti-American and anti-Zionist terrorism in the Middle East has not yet found its moment of triumph. Both the Middle East and Africa have been paying a price for the anti-American terrorism. The violent price which the Middle East is paying is obvious, especially in Palestine, Iraq and in neighboring Afghanistan. What is the price which Africa is paying for terrorism against the United States?
We have to distinguish between legitimate, informed criticism of the EU or current European attitudes and some deeper, more settled hostility to Europe and Europeans as such... Anti-Europeanism is not symmetrical with anti-Americanism... [which] is a real obsession for entire countries, notably for France, as Jean-François Revel has recently argued.