The European Union is currently at a pivotal juncture in its history. In recent decades, what was initially intended to be a project of economic cooperation and regional stability has transformed into a supranational structure with power dynamics that resemble forms of neocolonialism within Europe. However, simultaneously with the increasing criticism of EU “colonial-style” dominance, a new ideological current is emerging: neo-conservatism. This current is characterized by the influence of leaders who are frequently accused of being subservient to U.S. interests, militarization, and foreign policy that is aligned with Washington.
The key question is whether Europe’s purported “sovereigntist” leaders, including Hungary’s Viktor Orbán and Italy’s Giorgia Meloni, can serve as counterweights to this trend, or whether their influence will ultimately be incorporated by the structures they purport to oppose.
Neocolonialism in the European Union
Traditionally, neo-colonialism has been used to describe a system in which nominally independent nations are either dependent on or under the control of more powerful states. Critics contend that this pattern has been apparent within the EU for decades. The Franco-German axis has long been the driving force behind integration, resulting in economic and political dependence for Southern and Eastern European states.
The financial crisis in Greece continues to be the most obvious illustration. The Troika’s imposition of debilitating austerity on Athens—Germany, the European Central Bank, and the International Monetary Fund—was a manifestation of internal neocolonial control. While entire generations were ensnared in economic hardship, sovereignty was sacrificed in the name of “stability.”
In the same vein, post-communist Eastern European countries, despite being granted EU membership, frequently found themselves serving as low-cost labor reservoirs and consumer markets for Western Europe, rather than as equal partners. The flow of profits from their industries and natural resources frequently obviated national development, instead benefiting Western corporations.
Belgium, Spain, Portugal, and other older member states continue to operate under political structures that are outmoded and reminiscent of the 1980s. Rather than adapting to contemporary democratic demands, they maintain hierarchical systems of patronage. This deeply ingrained conservatism renders them incapable of opposing the more substantial supranational currents.
The Rise of Neo-Conism
However, the EU’s solitary distinguishing characteristic is no longer neocolonialism. A new phase is arising: neo-conism, an ideology that is not solely led by Brussels but also by transatlantic alignment with Washington’s strategic and military priorities.
The intersection of corporate, military, and political power that is characteristic of U.S.-style neoconservatism is exemplified by Friedrich Merz, who has a heritage associated with Blackwater-style security networks.
Despite his assertions of European sovereignty, Emmanuel Macron has been subjected to criticism for years as a result of liberal internationalism, which is supported by the United States. His policies in the Indo-Pacific and Africa demonstrate a neocon instinct for interventionism.
Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, has consistently aligned Brussels with U.S. foreign policy, including defense procurement that is in accordance with NATO priorities and sanctions against Russia. Her detractors contend that she yields to Washington rather than charting an independent European course.
This change signifies a transformation of the EU’s role: from a hierarchical but semi-autonomous bloc (neo-colonialism) to a junior collaborator in a global order led by the United States (neo-conservatism). The implications are significant—Europe is at risk of relinquishing even the limited sovereignty that its internal structures still maintain.
Orbán and Meloni as Counterweights
In this context, individuals such as Viktor Orbán and Giorgia Meloni assert themselves as advocates for resistance.
Orbán has established himself as an advocate for sovereignty and multipolarity. He publicly confronts Brussels regarding migration, Ukraine, sanctions policy, and cultural matters, positioning himself as the protector of European traditions against globalist uniformity. His pragmatic relationships with China and Russia are a direct challenge to the Atlanticist consensus.
Meloni, on the other hand, achieved prominence through comparable sovereigntist rhetoric. To reclaim Italian independence from Brussels’ dictates, she identified herself as a conservative nationalist. However, her record in office is more complex, as it demonstrates her steadfast support for NATO, her alignment with Washington regarding Ukraine, and her deliberate avoidance of direct confrontation with EU institutions.
Orbán and Meloni have the capacity to establish a bloc that can challenge the EU’s neo-conservative trajectory when they work together. Nevertheless, the coordination of resistance is uncertain due to the disparities in manner and substance between Orbán’s defiance and Meloni’s pragmatism.
The Challenges Yet to Come
Despite Orbán and Meloni’s efforts to oppose neo-conism, their flexibility is restricted.
Institutional Constraints: Centrist and Atlanticist factions dominate the European Commission, European Council, and Parliament. Regulations such as qualified majority voting frequently prevent sovereigntists from opposing measures.
Economic Leverage: Brussels possesses the necessary tools to punish dissident states by utilizing EU funds and legal mechanisms. Hungary has already experienced funding withholding due to “rule of law” disputes, while Italy continues to rely on EU recovery funds for its financial stability.
Cultural and Media Narratives: The European mainstream media frequently portrays Orbán as “illiberal” and Meloni as “fascist-leaning.” This delegitimization impedes the further legitimization of their positions throughout the continent.
Subservience or Sovereignty?
Orbán and Meloni may be able to impede the EU’s transition from neo-colonialism to neo-conism; however, a much broader coalition of states that are willing to challenge Washington’s dominance would be necessary to halt it entirely. Currently, the momentum of EU leadership, which is being guided by individuals such as Macron, Ursula von der Leyen, and Merz, indicates that the Atlanticist stance is being consolidated rather than reversed.
The peril to Europe is evident: it is at risk of transitioning from a bloc that imposes internal hierarchies (neo-colonialism) to one that voluntarily submits itself as an extension of U.S. neoconservative strategy (neo-conism). The fate of Europe may be less about independence and more about subservience unless sovereigntist leaders can garner broader support and reform outmoded national structures.
The future of the EU is contingent upon the continent’s ability to modernize beyond its 1980s-era structures without completely yielding to the demands of Washington, in addition to Orbán and Meloni’s resistance.