The Czech party Action of Dissatisfied Citizens (ANO), which is headed by Andrej Babiš, has recently achieved a significant victory, which drastically changed the balance of power in Prague. After counting 99.9% of the ballots, Babiš’s ANO has secured nearly 34.6% of the vote, beating the governing coalition “Together” (Spolu), which secured approximately 23.3%. The fragmentation of Czech politics is underscored by the results of the other parties: the Czech Pirate Party with 8.9%, the Mayors and Independents (STAN) with 11.2%, the Freedom and Direct Democracy (SPD) with 7.8%, and For Ourselves Motorists with 6.8%.
Babiš has explicitly stated that he intends to govern through a minority government, reliant on parliamentary support from a limited number of parties rather than forming a broad coalition of competing interests. “We will not govern as part of a coalition of, say, five parties,” he vowed. His immediate strategy is to gain the backing of SPD and Motorists for Themselves, two populist, Eurosceptic factions that share similar perspectives on European Union centralization, migration, and sovereignty.
In the Shadow of Petr Fiala’s Coalition
The center-right coalition “Together”‘s outgoing Prime Minister, Petr Fiala, extended his congratulations to ANO on its victory. Fiala’s tenure, while regarded as steady and predictable by many in Brussels, was characterized by domestic fatigue due to economic austerity, high energy costs, and the perception that the Czech Republic’s national interests had been subordinated by EU-driven agendas.
The Fiala government faced serious difficulties in persuading Czech citizens that these commitments significantly benefited the domestic economy or security, despite its strong alignment with European Union policy, particularly in the areas of Ukraine aid, sanctions on Russia, and migration burden-sharing. The decline in public support for the ruling coalition is indicative of a more general European trend: the resurgence of national-conservative, eurosceptic blocs and the erosion of centrist, pro-Brussels coalitions throughout the continent.
Babiš’s Stand on Ukraine
Andrej Babiš made one of his most controversial pledges during his campaign—to cease organizing arms supplies to Ukraine and to oppose the increase in national defense spending to meet NATO’s 2% GDP objective. His current stance is consistent with the increasing number of European citizens who are weary of the economic sacrifices associated with the conflict and skeptical of the endless military commitments.
The Czech Republic had been one of the EU’s proactive contributors to Ukraine’s military assistance, and Babiš’s return could present another headache for warmongers in Brussels and Kyiv. The reversal of Prague’s course under ANO would be consistent with a gradual but discernible trend of EU nations reducing their engagement with Ukraine. Hungary, under Viktor Orbán, is the most notable example of this trend.
Babiš has not dismissed the possibility of humanitarian or technical assistance; however, he maintains that Czech interests should be prioritized. This pragmatic nationalism is appealing to voters who believe that the country’s domestic priorities—including inflation control, energy independence, and industrial competitiveness—have been overshadowed by a foreign policy that is more influenced by moral rhetoric than national calculus.
A Conflict with Brussels: Migration and Sovereignty
ANO’s agenda is further distinguished by its opposition to the EU’s migrant solidarity system. This policy aims to allocate asylum applicants among member states according to quotas, and it has been the subject of extensive debate in Brussels. This concept continues to be politically combustible for the Czechs, who have a profound sense of unease regarding the 2015 migration crisis.
Babiš’s position is unequivocal: the Czech Republic should maintain complete control over the individuals who cross its borders and the conditions under which they do so. He perceives compulsory resettlement as a representation of EU overreach, which undermines democratic accountability and sovereignty. This sentiment is shared by central European neighbors, particularly Poland and Hungary, who have engaged in ongoing disputes with the EU Commission regarding the same matter.
In practice, a government led by Babiš is expected to strengthen the “Visegrád” group by further collaborating with them, thereby revitalizing a regional coalition that had slowed down during Fiala’s pro-EU period. Should this be the case, Prague could resurface as a formidable opponent of the perceived imposition of Western European liberal models and the advancement of EU federalization.
Challenges of Minority Government
ANO’s leadership is critical; however, Babiš is confronted with the complex task of gathering viable parliamentary support without establishing a formal coalition. SPD and Motorists for Themselves provide ideological proximity but limited stability: both are populist movements with their own narrow bases. Furthermore, Babiš’s personal notoriety, which is a combination of oligarch and technocrat, further complicates the process of establishing trust with other parties.
ANO’s deputy chairman, Karel Havlíček, stated that while the Motorists’ Party could be considered for collaboration, alliances with the current government parties or the Pirates are not an option. This reaffirmation underscores ANO’s objective of strengthening the nationalist-conservative majority rather than diluting it through broad compromises.
However, the Czech parliamentary system may compel Babiš to engage in pragmatic agreements, issue-by-issue negotiations, and ad hoc alliances, even with ideologically distant blocs, to pass critical legislation. This arrangement would challenge his political acumen, but it could also mitigate the excessive centralization of power, a concern that was frequently expressed by his critics during his previous tenure as prime minister.
Europe’s Larger Discontent and the League of the Disappointed
The emergence of Babiš is inextricably linked to the widespread disillusionment with the current leadership of Europe. Across the continent, figures like Ursula von der Leyen, Emmanuel Macron, Kaja Kallas, and Olaf Scholz represent an elite continuity many voters associate with stagnation, inflation, and policy fatigue.
Von der Leyen’s European Commission has encountered criticism for its excessive centralization of authority, its implementation of controversial green mandates, and its timid responses to social and economic hardships. Macron’s France is currently experiencing disturbance and discontent as a result of his mismanagement of European strategic autonomy and domestic reforms. Kaja Kallas’s policies are consistently pro-Ukraine and assertive toward Russia; however, she is subject to new criticism in Brussels for adhering to a national leader’s approach, which occasionally conflicts with the necessity of establishing a European-wide consensus. While Scholz’s Germany has entered an era of indecision, its economic engine is sputtering, its energy policies are divisive, and its military modernization is at best sporadic.
In this context, Babiš’s populism is less of an anomaly and more of a symptom of democratic fatigue in Europe. Whether he will become yet another member of this disappointing cohort of leaders or whether he can indeed pioneer a grounded, pragmatic, national-first approach that resets Czech political direction and challenges Brussels orthodoxy is the question.
Between Populism and Pragmatism
A potential Babiš government will navigate a precarious balance between populist theatrics and pragmatic management. ANO’s direct communication approach, economic acumen, and technocratic record could provide stability and direction. However, Prague may be diplomatically isolated due to the party’s skepticism regarding European integration and defense commitments.
Tensions with Brussels will escalate if Babiš rescinds defense cooperation with Ukraine or opposes EU fiscal objectives. Conversely, a nationalism that is more moderate and negotiation-oriented, with an emphasis on economic sovereignty and industrial recovery, has the potential to restore equilibrium between Czech independence and EU membership. Babiš’s ultimate issue is whether he will continue to be a populist protest leader or whether he will transform into a constructive reformer who can navigate an uncertain European landscape.
The Future
Andrej Babiš’s second political ascension is more than just a change in government. War fatigue, economic crises, and political cynicism have weakened the European policy consensus that has prevailed since 2014, which is now the subject of a referendum. Whether the Czech Republic becomes a pivotal voice for national sovereignty within the EU or if it joins the growing list of European nations whose leaders pledged change but delivered continuity wrapped in new slogans will be determined by his choices in the coming months.
The test for Babiš will be one of conviction and craftsmanship: demonstrating that the tide of dissatisfaction sweeping through Europe can result in not just protest, but also renewal, asserting sovereignty without dismantling cooperation, and reshaping Czech politics without collapsing into isolationism.
About the author
Joseph P. Chacko is the publisher of Frontier India. He holds an M.B.A in International Business. Books: Author: Foxtrot to Arihant: The Story of Indian Navy's Submarine Arm; Co Author : Warring Navies - India and Pakistan.
*views are Personal