A closer look at scenario RCP8.5

Posted on December 13, 2015 by curryja

by Larry Kummer
Original link:  https://judithcurry.com/2015/12/13/a-closer-look-at-scenario-rcp8-5/

The United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP21) in Paris climate was preceded by a surge of studies and articles warning of a dismal future if we do not take strong policy action. One scenario in the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) provides the basis for these: RCP8.5. Even a casual examination of this shows it to be a useful worst-case scenario, but not “business as usual”.

(1) An introduction to scenarios about our future

In AR5 four Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) describe scenarios for future emissions, concentrations, and land-use, ending with radiative forcing levels of 2.6, 4.5, 6.0, and 8.5 W/m² by 2100. Strong mitigation policies result in a low forcing level (RCP2.6). Two medium stabilization scenarios lead to intermediate outcomes: (RCP4.5, RCP6.0).

Detlef P. van Vuuren et al, Climatic Change, 2011.

RCP8.5 gets the most attention. It assumes the fastest population growth (a doubling of Earth’s population to 12 billion), the lowest rate of technology development, slow GDP growth, a massive increase in world poverty, plus high energy use and emissions. For more about the RCPs see “The representative concentration pathways: an overview” by Detlef P. van Vuuren et al, Climatic Change, Nov 2011.

RCP8.5 assumes a nightmarish world even before climate impacts, resulting from substantial changes to long-standing trends. It provides AR5 with an essential worst case scenario necessary for conservative planning.

Unfortunately scientists often inaccurately describe RCP8.5 as the baseline scenario — a future without policy action: “a relatively conservative business as usual case with low income, high population and high energy demand due to only modest improvements in energy intensity” from “RCP 8.5: A scenario of comparatively high greenhouse gas emissions” by Keywan Riahi et al in Climate Change, November 2011, This is a material misrepresentation of RCP8.5. Scientists then use RCP8.5 to construct horrific visions of the future. They seldom mention its unlikely assumptions.

(2) About RCP8.5, the stuff nightmares are made from

(a) Rapid population growth

RP8.5 assumes population growth at the high end of the current UN forecasts: 80% odds of between 9.6 and 12.3 billion people by 2100 (Gerland, P. et al, Science 10 Oct 2014). Most of this growth occurs in Africa, assuming that the collapse in fertility seem in the rest of the world will not occur there (Iran’s fertility was 6.0% in 1980, it is ~1.6 now, below the replacement rate of 2.1).

Gerland makes a purely probabilistic forecast, without considering if Africa can support the same population density as China does today. Their high end forecast, used in RCP8.5, is that Nigeria’s population will grow from 175 million today to 1.5 billion in 2100. See this for more information about the Gerland 2014 forecast.

Detlef P. van Vuuren et al, Climatic Change, Nov 2011.

(b) Technological stagnation: back to the 19th Century’s coal-driven world

RCP8.5’s assumes that the centuries long progress of technology will slow. Most importantly, it assumes that three centuries of evolution to ever more efficient energy sources reverses and we burn off almost all of Earth’s fossil fuel reserves.

Keywan Riahi et al in Climate Change, November 2011.

RCP8.5 describes a hot dirty future for the world, in which coal use increases to become the major source of power for the world.

There is an analytical basis for these forecasts. For example, see “Drivers for the renaissance of coal” by Jan Christoph Steckel et al in PNAS, 2015. The authors predict that coal use will increase not just in China and India, but also in fast-growing poor countries. There are a lot of poor nations in RCP8.5.

But this assumes that the long shift away from coal continues. Data from the Energy Information Agency shows that world coal consumption fell by 98 million short tons (1.2%) in 2012 (most recent data) following peaking in many nations, both poor and rich nations. North American use peaked in 2005; 2012 was down an astonishing 21% since then (USA use in Q1 2015 was down 24% from Q1 2005). Europe peaked in 2007, after 6 of its 9 largest coal-consuming nations peaked: UK and Poland in 2006; Czech, Germany, and Greece in 2007; and Turkey in 2011. Africa peaked in 2008 and Asia in 2011.

History shows that as poor nations grow into the middle income brackets, people become willing to pay for a cleaner environment. That often drives regulations on the mining and burning of coal, which raises its cost (in the US perhaps going to uneconomic levels). We see the first signs of that now in India and China. A March report by the Sierra Club describes the situation:

“From 2005 to 2012, worldwide coal-fired generating capacity boomed, growing at three times the previous pace. The increase in the global coal fleet was twice the size of the entire existing U.S. coal fleet. That boom is now busting. In India, projects shelved or cancelled since 2012 outnumber project completions by six to one, and new construction initiations are at a near-standstill. In both Europe and the U.S., the coal fleet is shrinking, with retirements outnumbering new plants. China faces a looming glut in coal-fired generating capacity, with plant utilization rates at a 35-year low.”

China has been the largest driver of global commodity consumption, including coal. Excluding China, world coal use is flat for 5 years, up only 13% for 10 years, and up only 7% in the previous 25 years (there is no Energy Information Agency data after 2012).

China has shown little concern about climate change, but air pollution from coal is a major public policy problem. “The cost of China’s reliance on coal: 670,000 smog-related deaths a year“. “Beijing to Shut All Major Coal Power Plants to Cut Pollution“. There are headlines like this almost monthly as public pressure grows for drastic action (see this Pew Research poll).

The Sierra Club report describes this and other drivers of China’s shift away from coal…

“Within China, the following policy trends are playing a significant role in determining future coal capacity: (1) Small Plant Replacement Policy, (2) air pollution mitigation, (3) economic restructuring, (4) expanding renewable, gas, nuclear, and hydro power sources, (5) climate policies, (6) energy efficiency initiatives, and (7) shifts in the regional distribution of generating capacity.”

Perhaps these trends will reverse, but that cannot logically be considered the “business as usual” scenario.

The Phoenix making Earth’s first warp flight on 5 April 2063. Powered by coal?

(c) Technological stagnation: energy efficiency

RCP8.5 assumes no decarbonization of world power sources from new technology (e.g., solar, wind, fission, fusion) or regulations to reduce not just climate change but also air pollution and toxic waste. Although possible, how likely is this? For example, use of solar and wind is skyrocketing as these technologies improve.

RCP8.5 also assumes a slowing of technological innovation, most clearly seen in energy use. By 2100 energy efficiency has improved only slightly, so that despite GDP being one-third lower than under RCP2.6, energy consumption is over twice as large. That breaks the decades long trend, as partially shown in this graph of energy efficiency from the World Bank. There is not reason to assume this progress will halt.

GDP per kilogram of oil equivalent of energy use

(d) A more realistic view of our energy future

More speculatively, new technology to produce energy might lie in our future. There are dozens of advanced nuclear and fusion projects under development. A new report by Third Way describes that some have matured to the stage attracting private capital:

The American energy sector has experienced enormous technological innovation over the past decade in everything from renewables (solar and wind power), to extraction (hydraulic fracturing), to storage (advanced batteries), to consumer efficiency (advanced thermostats). What has gone largely unnoticed is that nuclear power is poised to join the innovation list.

A new generation of engineers, entrepreneurs and investors are working to commercialize innovative and advanced nuclear reactors. … Third Way has found that there are nearly 50 companies, backed by more than $1.3 billion in private capital, developing plans for new nuclear plants in the U.S. and Canada. The mix includes startups and big-name investors like Bill Gates, all placing bets on a nuclear comeback, hoping to get the technology in position to win in an increasingly carbon-constrained world.

(3) Conclusions

The designers of the RCP’s made a methodological choice that was logical, but was either not understood or ignored by the IPCC’s authors. They started with targets for forcings and created scenarios that would produce them.

The RCP8.5 scenario assumes ominous breaks in several important and long-standing trends. As such it provides a valuable warning against complacency and a reminder to prepare for extreme outcomes. But that meant that there was no business as usual scenario, a critical component for forecasting. None of the RCPs is even remotely close to fulfilling this role.

Worse was the labeling — with no supporting analysis — of RCP8.5 as the business as usual scenario (see the history here). Doing so preceded AR5, as in “Compared to the scenario literature RCP8.5 depicts thus a relatively conservative business as usual case with low income, high population and high energy demand due to only modest improvements in energy intensity” from “RCP 8.5: A scenario of comparatively high greenhouse gas emissions” by Keywan Riahi et al in Climate Change, November 2011.

I have written a description of the year 2100 assuming continuation of existing trends — including substantial advances in fusion. It’s a non-analytical discussion piece, showing that there is a more plausible alternative to RCP8.5’s nightmarish world of 2100. It shows that we need another RCP, one describing a base case showing reasonable projection of current trends.

Preparing that requires extrapolating trends for GDP, population, energy intensity, sources of energy, etc — assuming no breakthroughs in technology (e.g., fusion, a male contraceptive pill) — then calculating the resulting forcing. This should be done by a multidisciplinary team (imo tapping too-narrow a disciplinary base is one of the most serious weakness in climate science today). The cost would be trivial compared to its benefits.

As COP21 has shown, the public policy debate about climate change is gridlocked. Repeating what we have already done, with higher volume, seems unlikely to break it. Let’s draw outside the box and try different tactics.

(4) For More Information

For a detailed look at RCP8.5 see “Scenarios of long-term socio-economic and environmental development under climate stabilization” by Keywan Riahia, Arnulf Grüblera, and Nebojsa Nakicenovica, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, September 2007 (gated). To better understand the evolution of IPCC’s scenarios I recommend this by John Nielsen-Gammon (Prof Atmospheric Science at Texas A&M, Texas State Climatologist).

United States of Europe

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

European Union

Council of Europe

European Free Trade Association

European Economic Area

The United States of Europe, the European state, the European superstate, the European federation and Federal Europe are names used to refer to several similar hypothetical scenarios of the unification of Europe as a single sovereign federation of states (hence superstate), similar to the United States of America, both as projected by writers of speculative fiction and science fiction and by political scientists, politicians, geographers, historians and futurologists. At present, while the European Union (EU) is not officially a federation, various academic observers regard it as having the characteristics of a federal system.

Specifically, the term "United States of Europe" – as a direct comparison with the United States of America – would imply that all the European states would acquire a status similar to that of a U.S. state, becoming constituent parts of a European federation acting as one country.

Traditionally, the term "European Superstate", particularly within the United Kingdom, is used as a criticism of further integration into the EU with the term implying a forced loss of national sovereignty, although the term has occasionally been used positively in the British press.

History

Various versions of the concept have developed over the centuries, many of which are mutually incompatible (inclusion or exclusion of the United Kingdom, secular or religious union, etc.). Such proposals include those from Bohemian King George of Podebrady in 1464; Duc de Sully of France in the seventeenth century; and the plan of William Penn, the Quaker founder of Pennsylvania, for the establishment of a "European Dyet, Parliament or Estates". George Washington also allegedly voiced support for a "United States of Europe", although the authenticity of this statement has been questioned.

19th century

Felix Markham notes how, during a conversation on St. Helena, Napoleon Bonaparte remarked: "Europe thus divided into nationalities freely formed and free internally, peace between States would have become easier: the United States of Europe would become a possibility". "United States of Europe" was also the name of the concept presented by Wojciech Jastrzębowski in About eternal peace between the nations, published 31 May 1831. The project consisted of 77 articles. The envisioned United States of Europe was to be an international organisation rather than a superstate. Giuseppe Mazzini was an early advocate of a "United States of Europe" and regarded European unification as a logical continuation of the unification of Italy. Mazzini created the Young Europe movement.

The term "United States of Europe" (French: États-Unis d'Europe) was used by Victor Hugo, including during a speech at the International Peace Congress held in Paris in 1849. Hugo favoured the creation of "a supreme, sovereign senate, which will be to Europe what parliament is to England" and said: "A day will come when all nations on our continent will form a European brotherhood ... A day will come when we shall see ... the United States of America and the United States of Europe face to face, reaching out for each other across the seas". Hugo planted a tree in the grounds of his residence on the Island of Guernsey and was noted in saying that when this tree matured the United States of Europe would have come into being. This tree to this day is still growing in the gardens of Maison de Hauteville, St. Peter Port, Guernsey, Victor Hugo's residence during his exile from France.

In 1867, Giuseppe Garibaldi and John Stuart Mill joined Victor Hugo at a congress of the League for Peace and Freedom in Geneva. Here the anarchist Mikhail Bakunin stated: "That in order to achieve the triumph of liberty, justice and peace in the international relations of Europe, and to render civil war impossible among the various peoples which make up the European family, only a single course lies open: to constitute the United States of Europe". The French National Assembly also called for a United States of Europe on 1 March 1871.

Early 20th century

"Under a capitalist regime, the United States of Europe are either impossible or reactionary."

V. I. Lenin

Following the catastrophe of the First World War, some thinkers and visionaries again began to float the idea of a politically unified Europe. In 1923, the Austrian Count Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi founded the Pan-Europa Movement and hosted the First Paneuropean Congress, held in Vienna in 1926. The aim was for a Europe based on the principles of liberalism, Christianity and social responsibility. Before the communist revolution in Russia, Leon Trotsky foresaw a "Federated Republic of Europe — the United States of Europe", created by the proletariat.

In 1929, Aristide Briand, French Prime Minister, gave a speech before the Assembly of the League of Nations in which he proposed the idea of a federation of European nations based on solidarity and in the pursuit of economic prosperity and political and social co-operation. At the League's request, Briand presented a "Memorandum on the organisation of a system of European Federal Union" in 1930.^{[citation needed]} In 1931, French politician Édouard Herriot and British civil servant Arthur Salter both penned books titled The United States of Europe.

After the First World War, Winston Churchill had seen continental Europe as a source of threats and sought to avoid Britain's involvement in European conflicts. On 15 February 1930, Churchill commented in the American journal The Saturday Evening Post that a "European Union" was possible between continental states, but without Britain's involvement:

We see nothing but good and hope in a richer, freer, more contented European commonality. But we have our own dream and our own task. We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked but not compromised. We are interested and associated but not absorbed.

During the 1930s, Churchill was influenced by and became an advocate of the ideas of Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi and his Paneuropean Union, though Churchill did not advocate Britain's membership of such a union. (Churchill revisited the idea in 1946).

During the World War II victories of Nazi Germany in 1940, Wilhelm II stated that "the hand of God is creating a new world and working miracles. ... We are becoming the United States of Europe under German leadership, a united European Continent".

In 1941, the Italian anti-fascists Altiero Spinelli and Ernesto Rossi finished writing the Ventotene Manifesto, encouraging a federation of European states.

Post World War II

Churchill used the term "United States of Europe" in a speech delivered on 19 September 1946 at the University of Zurich, Switzerland. In this speech given after the end of the Second World War, Churchill concluded:

We must build a kind of United States of Europe. In this way only will hundreds of millions of toilers be able to regain the simple joys and hopes which make life worth living.

Churchill's was a more cautious approach ("the unionist position") to European integration than was the continental approach that was known as "the federalist position". The Federalists advocated full integration with a constitution, while the Unionist United Europe Movement advocated a consultative body and the Federalists prevailed at the Congress of Europe. The primary accomplishment of the Congress of Europe was the European Court of Human Rights, which predates the European Union.

By the 1950s and 1960s, Europe saw the emergence of two different projects, the European Free Trade Association and the much more political European Economic Community.

Early 21st century

Individuals such as the former German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer have said (in 2000) that he believes that the EU must in the end become a single federation, with its political leader chosen by direct elections among all of its citizens. However, claims that the (then) proposed Treaty of Nice aimed to create a "European superstate" were rejected by former United Kingdom European Commissioner Chris Patten and by many member-state governments. (As of 2018, the post "President of the European Union" does not exist, nor are there any plans that it should do so).

Proposals for closer union

The member states of the European Union do have many common policies within the EU and on behalf of the EU that are sometimes suggestive of a single state. It has a common executive (the European Commission), a single High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, a common European Security and Defence Policy, a supreme court (European Court of Justice – but only in matters of European Union law) and an intergovernmental research organisation (the EIROforum with members like CERN). The euro is often referred to as the "single European currency", which has been officially adopted by nineteen EU countries while seven other member countries of the European Union have linked their currencies to the euro in ERM II. In addition a number of European territories outside the EU have adopted the euro unofficially such as Montenegro, the Republic of Kosovo, Monaco, San Marino, the Vatican City and Andorra.

Schengen Area

Eurozone

Several pan-European institutions exist separate from the EU. The European Space Agency counts almost all the EU member nations in its membership, but it is independent of the EU and its membership includes nations that are not EU members, notably Switzerland and Norway. The European Court of Human Rights (not to be confused with the European Court of Justice) is also independent of the EU. It is an element of the Council of Europe, which like ESA counts EU members and non-members alike in its membership.

At present, the European Union is a free association of sovereign states designed to further their shared aims. Other than the vague aim of "ever closer union" in the Solemn Declaration on European Union, the EU (meaning its member governments) has no current policy to create either a federation or a confederation. However, in the past Jean Monnet, a person associated with the EU and its predecessor the European Economic Community, did make such proposals. A wide range of other terms are in use to describe the possible future political structure of Europe as a whole and/or the EU. Some of them, such as "United Europe", are used often and in such varied contexts, but they have no definite constitutional status.

In the United States, the concept enters serious discussions of whether a unified Europe is feasible and what impact increased European unity would have on the United States of America's relative political and economic power. Glyn Morgan, a Harvard University associate professor of government and social studies, uses it unapologetically in the title of his book The Idea of a European Superstate: Public Justification and European Integration. While Morgan's text focuses on the security implications of a unified Europe, a number of other recent texts focus on the economic implications of such an entity. Important recent texts here include T.R. Reid's The United States of Europe and Jeremy Rifkin's The European Dream. Neither the National Review nor the Chronicle of Higher Education doubt the appropriateness of the term in their reviews.

European federalist organisations

Various federalist organisations have been created over time supporting the idea of a federal Europe. These include the Union of European Federalists, the European Movement International, the (former) European Federalist Party and Stand Up For Europe.

Union of European Federalists

The Union of European Federalists (UEF) is a European non-governmental organisation campaigning for a Federal Europe. It consists of 20 constituent organisations and it has been active at the European, national and local levels for more than 50 years. A young branch called the Young European Federalists also exists in 30 countries of Europe.

European Movement International

The European Movement International is a lobbying association that coordinates the efforts of associations and national councils with the goal of promoting European integration, and disseminating information about it.

European Federalist Party

The European Federalist Party was a pro-European, pan-European and federalist political party from 2011 to 2016 which advocated further integration of the European Union.

Stand Up for Europe

As the successor movement of the European Federalist Party, Stand Up For Europe is a pan-European NGO that advocates the foundation of a European Federation. Contrary to movements like the UEF or the former EFP, Stand Up for Europe does not command any national levels anymore, but only consists of regional city teams and the European level.

Volt Europa

Volt Europa is a pan-European, progressive movement that stands for a new and inclusive way of doing politics and that wants to bring change for European citizens. The party claims that a new pan-European approach is needed to overcome current and future challenges, such as - among others - climate change, economic inequality, migration, international conflict, terrorism, and the impact of the technological revolution on jobs. Volt says that national parties are powerless in front of these challenges, because they go beyond national borders and need to be tackled by Europeans, as one people. As a transnational party, it believes it can help the European people unite, create a shared vision and understanding, exchange good practices across the continent, and come up with working policies.

Politicians

Guy Verhofstadt

Following the negative referendums about the European Constitution in France and the Netherlands, the Belgian ex prime minister Guy Verhofstadt released in November 2005 his book, written in Dutch, Verenigde Staten van Europa ("United States of Europe") in which he claims – based on the results of a Eurobarometer questionnaire – that the average European citizen wants more Europe. He thinks a federal Europe should be created between those states that wish to have a federal Europe (as a form of enhanced cooperation). In other words, a core federal Europe would exist within the current EU. He also states that these core states should federalise the following five policy areas: a European social-economic policy, technology cooperation, a common justice and security policy, a common diplomacy and a European army. Following the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon (December 2009) by all member states of the EU, the outline of a common diplomatic service, known as the External Action Service of the European Union (EEAS), was set in place. On 20 February 2009, the European Parliament also voted in favour of the creation of Synchronised Armed Forces Europe (SAFE) as a first step towards a forming a true European military force.

Verhofstadt's book was awarded the first Europe Book Prize, which is organised by the association Esprit d'Europe and supported by former President of the European Commission Jacques Delors. The prize money was €20,000. The prize was declared at the European Parliament in Brussels on 5 December 2007. Swedish crime fiction writer Henning Mankell was the president of the jury of European journalists for choosing the first recipient.

While receiving the reward, Verhofstadt said: "When I wrote this book, I in fact meant it as a provocation against all those who didn't want the European Constitution. Fortunately, in the end a solution was found with the treaty, that was approved".

Viviane Reding

In 2012, Viviane Reding, the Luxembourgish Vice-President of the European Commission called in a speech in Passau Germany and in a series of articles and interviews for the establishment of the United States of Europe as a way to strengthen the unity of Europe.

Matteo Renzi

The Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi said in 2014 that under his leadership Italy would use its six-month-long presidency of the European Union to push for the establishment of a United States of Europe.

Martin Schulz

In December 2017, Martin Schulz, who was then the new leader of the German Social Democratic Party, called for a new constitutional treaty for a "United States of Europe". He proposed that this constitution should be written by "a convention that includes civil society and the people" and that any state that declined to accept this proposed constitution should have to leave the bloc. The Guardian's view was that his proposal was "likely to be met with some resistance from [Angela] Merkel and other EU leaders". On that day he also stated that he would like to see a "United States of Europe" by 2025.

Notable individuals

Freddy Heineken

The United States of Europe to Heineken's draft with corrections after 2016.

  Members of the United States of Europe (50 states)

  Members of the European Union (10 countries)

In 1992, Dutch businessman Freddy Heineken, after consulting with historians of the University of Leiden, Henk Wesseling and Willem van den Doel published a brochure "United States of Europe, Eurotopia?". In his work he put forward the idea of creating the United States of Europe as a confederation of 75 states that would be formed according to an ethnic and linguistic principle with a population of 5 to 10 million people. It is noteworthy that in their work in 1992 the authors divided the territory of Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia, which, in time, disintegrated almost identically to the plan that the brochure had described.

Predictions

Future superpower

The United States of Europe is widely hypotheticised, fictionalised or depicted as a superpower that is as powerful as, or more powerful than, the United States. Some people, such as T.R. Reid, Andrew Reding and Mark Leonard, believe that the power of the hypothetical United States of Europe will rival that of the United States in the twenty-first century. Leonard cites seven factors: Europe's large population, Europe's large economy, Europe's low inflation rates, Europe's central location in the world, the unpopularity and perceived failure of American foreign policy in recent years and certain European countries' highly developed social organisation and quality of life (when measured in terms such as hours worked per week and income distribution). Some experts claim that Europe has developed a sphere of influence called the "Eurosphere".

A small power

Norwegian foreign policy scholar and commentator Asle Toje has argued that the power and reach of the European Union more closely resembles a small power. In his book The EU As a Small Power, he argues that the EU is a response to and function of Europe's unique historical experience in that the EU contains the remnants of not one but five past European orders. Although the 1990s and early 2000s have shown that there is policy space for greater EU engagement in European security, the EU has been unable to meet these expectations.

Asle Toje expresses particular concerns over the EU's security and defence dimension Common Security and Defence Policy, where attempts at pooling resources and forming a political consensus have failed to generate the results expected. These trends, combined with shifts in global power patterns, are seen to have been accompanied by a shift in EU strategic thinking whereby great power ambitions have been scaled down and replaced by a tendency towards hedging vis-à-vis the great powers. The author uses the case of the EUFOR intervention in Darfur and Chad to illustrate that the EU's effectiveness is hampered by a consensus–expectations gap, owing primarily to the lack of an effective decision-making mechanism. In his view, the sum of these developments is that the EU will not be a great power and is taking the place of a small power in the emerging multi-polar international order.

Opposition

The European Union does not include every nation in Europe and there is no consensus among the existing member state governments towards becoming even a loose confederation.
In June 2016, the United Kingdom voted 52% to 48% to leave the European Union.

Polls

Attitude toward further development of the EU into a federation of nation states according to the Eurobarometer Poll of spring 2014.

  EU members with more people in favour of a federation than against it

According to Eurobarometer (2013), 69% of citizens of the EU were in favour of direct elections of the President of the European Commission and 46% support the creation of a united EU army.

Two thirds of respondents think that the EU (instead of a national government alone) should make decisions on foreign policy and more than half of respondents think that the EU should also make decisions on defense.

44% of respondents support the future development of the European Union as a federation of nation states, 35% are opposed. The Nordic countries were the most negative towards a united Europe in this study, as 73% of the Nordics opposed the idea. A large majority of the people for whom the EU conjures up a positive image support the further development of the EU into a federation of nation states (56% versus 27%).

Fiction

In the fictional universe of Eric Flint's best selling alternate history 1632 series, a United States of Europe is formed out of the Confederation of Principalities of Europe, which was composed of several German political units of the 1630s.

Science fiction has made particular use of the idea: Incompetence, a dystopian novel by Red Dwarf creator Rob Grant, is a murder mystery political thriller set in a federated Europe of the near future, where stupidity is a constitutionally protected right. References to a European Alliance or European Hegemony have also existed in episodes of Star Trek: The Next Generation (1987–1994). In the Spy High series of books for young adults, written by A. J. Butcher and set around the 2060s, a united Europe exists in the form of "Europa", and Andrew Roberts's 1995 book The Aachen Memorandum details a United States of Europe formed from a fraudulent referendum entitled the Aachen Referendum.

Since the 2000s a number of computer strategy games set in the future have presented a unified European faction alongside other established military powers such as the United States and Russia. These include Euro Force (a 2006 expansion pack to Battlefield 2) and Battlefield 2142 (also released in 2006, with a 2007 expansion pack). In Battlefield 2142 a united Europe is shown as one of the two great superpowers on Earth, the other being Asia, despite being mostly frozen in a new ice age. The disaster theme continues with Tom Clancy's EndWar (2009), in which a nuclear war between Iran and Saudi Arabia, destroying the Middle Eastern oil supply, prompts the EU to integrate further as the "European Federation" in 2018. One game not to make bold claims of full integration is Shattered Union (2005), set in a future civil war in the United States, with the EU portrayed as a peacekeeping force. The video game series Wipeout instead makes a clear federal reference without a military element: one of the core teams that has appeared in every game is FEISAR. This acronym stands for Federal European Industrial Science and Research. In the video game series Mass Effect set in the 22nd century, the European Union is a sovereign state.

In the backstory of the Fallout series, several European nations joined together after the end of the Second World War, becoming known as the European Commonwealth. Heavily dependent on oil imports from the Middle East, the Commonwealth began a military invasion of the region in April 2052 once oil supplies began to run dry. This marked the beginning of the Resource Wars. After the oil dried up completely in 2060 and both sides were left in ruins, the Commonwealth collapsed into civil war as member states fought over whatever resources remained. It is not specified whether the European Commonwealth is a single federated nation or just an economic bloc similar to the EU.

New Antennas Will Take CubeSats to Mars and Beyond

25 Jan 2018 | 16:00 GMT

By Nacer E. Chahat

Original link:  https://spectrum.ieee.org/aerospace/satellites/new-antennas-will-take-cubesats-to-mars-and-beyond

By packing big antennas into tiny satellites, JPL engineers are making space science cheap

Illustration: John MacNeill

One morning in November 2014, Kamal Oudrhiri, a colleague of mine at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), in Pasadena, Calif., burst into my office with an intriguing proposition. A first-of-its-kind satellite was headed for Mars. The satellite would fly alongside NASA’s InSight Mars Lander, relaying data in real time back to Earth during the lander’s critical entry, descent, and landing. “We have to achieve 8 kilobits per second, and we’re limited in terms of power. Our only hope is a large antenna,” Oudrhiri explained. “Oh, and the satellite itself will be only about the size of a briefcase.”

Nothing as diminutive as the Mars satellite—which belongs to a class called CubeSats—had ever gone farther than low Earth orbit. The antenna would be stowed during launch, occupying only about 830 cubic centimeters. Shortly thereafter, it would unfurl to a size three times as large as the satellite itself. It would have to survive the 160-million-kilometer flight to the Red Planet, including the intense vibration of launch and the radiation and extreme temperatures of deep space. How hard could that be?

Fortunately, my colleagues and I love a challenge, and we welcomed the chance to push CubeSat technology to its limits. These tiny spacecraft have become the go-to vessel for researchers and startups doing Earth imaging and monitoring. Compared with traditional satellites, they are relatively inexpensive and small, weighing just a few kilograms, and they can be ready to launch in a matter of months, rather than the years it typically takes to prepare a standard spacecraft. Over time, the onboard sensors and processing that CubeSats can carry have been the beneficiaries of Moore’s Law advancements in electronics, growing more powerful and sophisticated, lighter in weight, and energy efficient.

Photo: JPL/NASA

 

RainCube's Umbrella: The radar antenna for the tiny RainCube satellite folds up into a 10-by-10-by-15-centimeter canister. Upon deployment, its 30 ribs extend like an umbrella to form a parabolic dish that's still small enough to test in a thermal vacuum chamber.

But a CubeSat’s small size can be a huge liability when it comes to communications. In particular, it’s been too difficult to outfit the satellites with antennas big enough to achieve high data rates or high-resolution radar. And so the tiny satellites have been limited to Earth orbit, unable to advance the scientific frontier beyond the immediate environs of our own planet. If we could somehow figure out a way to equip a CubeSat with a powerful high-gain antenna, vast new opportunities for research and exploration would open up. Earth-orbiting CubeSats could finally start doing radar-based science, such as measuring wind and precipitation. And with high-data-rate antennas, CubeSats could venture out and explore the solar system.

After a couple of years of dedicated effort, the antenna team at JPL finally solved the problem—and in two different ways. In one project, called Radar in a CubeSat (or RainCube), we designed a deployable antenna that will fan out like an umbrella once the satellite reaches orbit. In another project, called Mars Cube One (MarCO) and due for launch in May, we created a flat antenna that unfolds from the surface of the CubeSat. Our success has led NASA to start considering these tiny platforms for missions that were once thought possible only with a large, conventional satellite. Our antenna technology has also been patented and licensed to several commercial space companies. Here’s how we pulled off an engineering feat that many considered too hard and what we learned in the process.

CubeSats aren’t the only tiny satellites around, but they are the most adaptable and have received the widest attention. The basic building block is a cube that’s 10 centimeters on a side and weighs a little over a kilogram at most. From there, such “one unit” or “1U” cubes can be joined together as necessary; common variations are built from 3, 6, or 12 cubes.

Engineers at Stanford University and California Polytechnic State University initially developed CubeSats in 1999 as a way to introduce students to the hands-on process of designing, fabricating, launching, and operating a satellite. Since then, a large variety of CubeSat subsystems have been fielded, and they’ve become versatile tools for specialized missions.

Best of all, they are quick to assemble. At JPL we’ve gone from formulation to delivering the finished design to the assembly and test facility in 10 to 12 months, instead of the three or more years it would take for a larger, less modular spacecraft.

Of course, a conventional satellite weighing thousands of kilograms can carry many more instruments than a tiny CubeSat can. But for a mission with a specific goal, CubeSats can be a cheap and attractive option. What’s more, launching constellations of CubeSats will boost the spacecraft’s temporal resolution, allowing them to remotely sense the same area more frequently than a larger spacecraft could. With some help from our new antennas, RainCube’s and MarCO’s missions are not only feasible but eminently sensible.

Photo: JPL/NASA

 

Antenna Engineers: The Jet Propulsion Laboratory team that developed the RainCube antenna included Jonathan Sauder (in checked shirt) and Nacer E. Chahat.

As its name suggests, RainCube is built to watch the weather. Its radar will help NASA study precipitation and improve weather-forecasting models. NASA scientists are planning to launch a constellation of such satellites to achieve better temporal resolution than a single large satellite can provide.

This tiny radar craft is only about the size of a cereal box (“6U” in CubeSat parlance). The power system, the computer, the control system, and everything else must fit into that box. And like any box of cereal, it needs room for a prize: the radar. Through some ingenious engineering, RainCube’s principal investigator, Eva Peral, managed to simplify the radar instrumentation and shrink it by an order of magnitude. Still, by the time everything else had been crammed in, only one-fourth of the space was left for the radar and its antenna.

The satellite will send and receive radar signals through a parabolic antenna. The main dish will reflect the signals onto a device called a subreflector, which will channel them into a “feedhorn” and from there into the satellite’s radar circuitry. At an altitude of 450 to 500 km, RainCube’s radar will survey the clouds it’s flying over, and so it requires a half-meter-wide antenna to achieve a 10-km-wide radar footprint. Prior to being deployed, however, that antenna needs to fold up into a canister measuring 10 by 10 by 15 cm. And the 35.75-⁠gigahertz frequency at which the radar operates means that the reflector must deploy so precisely that its shape deviates from perfection by no more than 200 micrometers.

Clearly, we had some tough design challenges to overcome. After some intense brainstorming, the RainCube antenna team—which consisted of Jonathan Sauder, Mark Thomson, Richard Hodges, Yahya Rahmat-Samii, and me—settled on an antenna that works a bit like an umbrella stuffed into a jack-in-the-box. This approach was the simplest solution, given the volume available.

When an umbrella opens, the ribs extend outward and stretch the fabric until it’s taut. RainCube’s antenna works the same way: During deployment, a series of ribs pull the antenna into the right shape to transmit and receive signals.

The precision and the accuracy of that shape are dictated by the number of ribs. If we used just three ribs, the absolute minimum, it would create a three-sided pyramid, while an infinite number of ribs would in theory create a perfectly accurate parabolic surface. But adding more ribs also increases the chance of things going wrong during deployment.

We eventually determined that 30 was the optimal number of ribs for RainCube. That’s enough ribs to provide a sufficiently accurate surface while keeping the risk of deployment failure acceptably small. To further improve the overall accuracy of the radar antenna system, the engineers designed the subreflector to account for the shape of the 30-rib antenna—including its minute deviations from the ideal—and to focus the radar properly. This tuning of the subreflector boosts the antenna’s efficiency by 6 percent, which translates into a 12 percent improvement in the radar’s signal-to-noise ratio.

It wasn’t just the antenna’s shape that had to be rethought. In a deployable structure, coaxial cable is the common choice to get radio-frequency signals from a feedhorn into the body of a satellite. But at the Ka-band frequencies that RainCube will use, a cable would lose too much of the signal. So JPL engineers designed a waveguide feed—consisting of a hollow metal tube through which the signals propagate—that will remain in place while the rest of the antenna slides along it and unfolds.

RainCube’s umbrella design was clever, but space is a challenging environment for any electromechanical system. The antenna will endure intense vibrations during launch as well as huge temperature variations in orbit—typically –20 °C to 85 °C for internal components—as the CubeSat moves in and out of Earth’s shadow. Up there, a failure in even a minor component can scrub an entire mission, as NASA engineers know all too well.

RainCube’s antenna has obvious similarities to the 18-rib high-gain antenna on the Galileo probe, which failed to deploy in 1991. But we had an advantage here. Unlike Galileo’s 4.8-meter-wide antenna, RainCube’s is small enough to test inside a vacuum chamber, so we were able to run trials in all conditions. And indeed, after the first vibration test, one of the ribs didn’t deploy, which the team traced to a design flaw in a single spring. After we redesigned this part, the antenna passed all its tests. It’s now ready for launch, which could happen as soon as this May. A successful mission will be a watershed event, opening the way for entire constellations of CubeSats carrying scientific experiments into Earth orbit.

Photos: JPL/NASA

 

Messages From Mars: The twin MarCO CubeSats [bottom] will launch this May to Mars, where they’ll send data from the InSight lander back to Earth, 160 million kilometers away. The satellites use a flat antenna called a reflectarray, the surface of which is patterned to mimic a parabolic dish, concentrating signals toward Earth. The MarCO antenna team [top] includes [from left] Richard Hodges, Joseph Vacchione, Phillip Walkemeyer, the author, Savannah Velasco, Vinh Bach, and Emmanuel Decrossas.      

It’s hard to imagine something as tiny and intricate as a CubeSat surviving the void of interplanetary space. Nevertheless, that’s what we expect two briefcase-size CubeSats to do this year. The twin Mars Cube One (MarCO) CubeSats will be the first to travel into deep space, flying with NASA’s InSight lander when it launches in May. Arriving at the Red Planet in November, these CubeSats will help provide real-time communication between the lander and NASA’s Deep Space Network here on Earth. They’ll be working alongside the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO), which has been orbiting the planet since 2006.

The MarCO CubeSats are designed to receive data from InSight’s entry, descent, and landing using a deployable UHF loop antenna. Each satellite’s software-defined radio will then retransmit the data at a higher X-band frequency for the 160-million-km trip across interplanetary space back to Earth. One of the Deep Space Network antennas, which each measure 70 meters across, will receive the data. Given the limited RF output power of the CubeSat radio, the tiny satellite’s antenna needs an aperture of 33.5 by 60 cm to establish a reliable radio link at 8 kilobits per second.

Ideally, the MarCO CubeSats would have parabolic antennas like RainCube’s, but there just isn’t room. The team was given only 4 percent of the spacecraft payload’s volume to work with, and our solution had to weigh less than a kilogram. As if that weren’t daunting enough, we were confined to using just one side of the CubeSat. MarCO’s tight schedule—nine months from the beginning of antenna development to integration on the spacecraft—meant that we didn’t have time to design custom parts. So we needed a simple design that relied on off-the-shelf parts wherever possible.

We created a flat antenna, called a reflectarray, which consists of a three-part panel that flips out from the side of the spacecraft and opens under the power of spring-loaded hinges. As the panel flips away from the body of the spacecraft, the antenna feedhorn also pops up, rotating around an off-the-shelf connector. We dotted the antenna’s flat surface with a reflective pattern so that it can mimic a parabolic antenna and concentrate signals in the direction of Earth.

When the MarCOs launch, they will likely carry the first reflectarrays into deep space. If the mission succeeds, we could see more such CubeSats fulfilling similar roles. Right now, for instance, data from Mars rovers and landers is relayed back to Earth via larger spacecraft such as the MRO. Future CubeSats could go into orbit around Mars and help relay that data, at a much lower cost.

The antennas that RainCube and MarCO will use can do much more than what’s called for in their specific missions. Indeed, our team is already working on larger deployable antennas based on the same principles. Next up is the One Meter Reflectarray (OMERA) antenna, which is a square reflectarray that measures 1 meter on a side. We believe such an antenna could be used for deep-space communications as well as higher-resolution RainCube-like orbiters.

It’s an exciting era for CubeSats and other small satellites, and there is much more to come. Exploration Mission 1, the first planned flight of NASA’s replacement for the space shuttle, will carry 13 CubeSat missions. Some will visit the moon, others will depart for deep space, but all of these tiny spacecraft will have one thing in common: small antennas capable of supporting big science.

This article appears in the February 2018 print magazine as “A Mighty Antenna From a Tiny CubeSat Grows.”

About the Author

Nacer E. Chahat is a senior engineer at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, in Pasadena, Calif.

Euroscepticism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Euroscepticism (also known as EU-scepticism) means criticism of the European Union (EU) and European integration. It ranges from those who oppose some EU institutions and policies and seek reform ("soft Euroscepticism"), to those who oppose EU membership outright and see the EU as unreformable ("hard Euroscepticism" or "anti-European Unionism"/"anti-EUism"). The opposite of Euroscepticism is known as pro-Europeanism (or European Unionism).

The main sources of Euroscepticism have been beliefs that integration undermines national sovereignty and the nation state; that the EU is elitist and lacks democratic legitimacy and transparency; that it is too bureaucratic and wasteful; that it encourages high levels of migration; or perceptions that it is a neoliberal organisation serving the business elite at the expense of the working class and responsible for austerity.

Euroscepticism is found in groups across the political spectrum, both left-wing and right-wing, and is often found in populist parties. Although they criticise the EU for many of the same reasons, Eurosceptic left-wing populists focus more on economic issues (such as the European debt crisis) while Eurosceptic right-wing populists focus more on nationalism and immigration (such as the European migrant crisis). The recent rise in radical right-wing parties is strongly linked to a rise in Euroscepticism.

Eurobarometer surveys of EU citizens show that trust in the EU and its institutions has declined strongly since a peak in 2007. Since then it has been consistently below 50%. A 2009 survey showed that support for EU membership was lowest in the United Kingdom (UK), Latvia and Hungary. By 2016, the countries viewing the EU most unfavourably were the UK, Greece, France and Spain. A referendum on continued EU membership was held in the UK in 2016, which resulted in a 51.9% vote in favour of leaving the EU. Since 2015, trust in the EU has risen slightly in most EU countries as a consequence of falling unemployment rates and accelerating economic growth.

Euroscepticism should not be confused with anti-Europeanism, which is a dislike of European culture and European ethnic groups by non-Europeans.

Global outlook

While having some overlaps, Euroscepticism and anti-Europeanism are different. Anti-Europeanism has always had a strong influence in American culture and American exceptionalism, which sometimes sees Europe on the decline or as a rising rival power, or both. Some aspects of Euroscepticism in the United Kingdom have been mirrored by U.S. authors.

Terminology

Flag of the "EUSSR", a common trope among right-wing hard Eurosceptics who seek to match the EU to the USSR.

 

There can be considered to be several different types of Eurosceptic thought, which differ in the extent to which adherents reject integration between member states of the European Union (EU) and in their reasons for doing so. Aleks Szczerbiak and Paul Taggart described two of these as hard and soft Euroscepticism.

Hard Euroscepticism

According to Taggart and Szczerbiak, hard Euroscepticism (also called anti-EU-ism) is "a principled opposition to the EU and European integration and therefore can be seen in parties who think that their countries should withdraw from membership, or whose policies towards the EU are tantamount to being opposed to the whole project of European integration as it is currently conceived."

The Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy group in the European Parliament, typified by such parties as the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP), displays hard Euroscepticism. In western European EU member countries, hard Euroscepticism is currently a characteristic of many anti-establishment parties.

Some hard Eurosceptics prefer to call themselves 'Eurorealists' rather than 'sceptics', and regard their position as pragmatic rather than "in principle". Additionally, Tony Benn, a left-wing Labour Party MP who fought against European integration in 1975 by opposing membership of the European Communities in that year's referendum on the issue, emphasised his opposition to xenophobia and his support of democracy, saying: "My view about the European Union has always been not that I am hostile to foreigners, but that I am in favour of democracy [...] I think they're building an empire there, they want us to be a part of their empire and I don't want that."

The Czech president Václav Klaus rejected the term "Euroscepticism" for its purported negative undertones, saying (at a meeting in April 2012) that the expressions for a Eurosceptic and their opponent should be "a Euro-realist" and someone who is "Euro-naïve", respectively.

François Asselineau of the French Popular Republican Union has criticised the use of the term 'sceptic' to describe hard Eurosceptics, and would rather advocate the use of the term "Euro opponent". However, he believes the use of the term 'sceptic' for soft Eurosceptics to be correct, since other Eurosceptic parties in France are "merely criticising" the EU without taking into account the fact that the Treaty of Rome can only be modified with a unanimous agreement of all the EU member states, something he considers impossible to achieve.

Soft Euroscepticism

Soft Euroscepticism is support for the existence of, and membership of, a form of European Union, but with opposition to specific EU policies; or, in Taggart's and Szczerbiak's words, "where there is NOT a principled objection to European integration or EU membership but where concerns on one (or a number) of policy areas lead to the expression of qualified opposition to the EU, or where there is a sense that 'national interest' is currently at odds with the EU's trajectory." The European Conservatives and Reformists group, typified by centre-right parties such as Czech Civic Democratic Party, along with the European United Left–Nordic Green Left which is an alliance of the left-wing parties in the European Parliament, display soft Euroscepticism.

Criticism of terms 'soft' and 'hard' Euroscepticism

Some have claimed that there is no clear line between the presumed 'hard' and 'soft' Euroscepticism. Kopecky and Mudde have said that if the demarcation line is the number of and which policies a party opposes, then the question arises of how many must a party oppose and which ones should a party oppose that makes them 'hard' Eurosceptic instead of 'soft'.

Other terms

Some scholars consider the gradual difference in terminology between 'hard' and 'soft' Euroscepticism inadequate to accommodate the large differences in terms of political agenda. Therefore, "hard Euroscepticism" has also been referred to as "Europhobia" as opposed to mere "Euroscepticism". Other alternative names for 'hard' and 'soft' Euroscepticism include, respectively, "withdrawalist" and "reformist" Euroscepticism.

Eurobarometer surveys

From the Parlameter 2018 poll, to the question "Taking everything into account, would you say that [our country] has on balance benefited or not from being a member of EU?", the interviewed answered "Benefited" with the following percentages:

 

  91-100%

  81-90%

  71-80%

  61-70%

  51-60%

  41-50%

From the Parlameter 2018 poll, to the question "If a referendum was held tomorrow regarding [our country]'s membership of the EU, how would you vote?", the interviewed answered "I would vote to remain in the EU" with the following percentages:

 

  91-100%

  81-90%

  71-80%

  61-70%

  51-60%

  41-50%

A survey in November 2015, conducted by TNS Opinion and Social on behalf of the European Commission, showed that, across the EU as a whole, those with a positive image of the EU are down from a high of 52% in 2007 to 37% in autumn 2015; this compares with 23% with a negative image of the EU, and 38% with a neutral image. About 43% of Europeans thought things were "going in the wrong direction” in the EU, compared with 23% who thought things were going "in the right direction" (11% "don't know"). About 32% of EU citizens tend to trust the EU as an institution, and about 55% do not tend to trust it (13% "don't know"). Distrust of the EU was highest in Greece (81%), Cyprus (72%), Austria (65%), France (65%) and Germany, the United Kingdom (UK) and the Czech Republic (all 63%). Overall, more respondents distrusted their own government (66%) more than the EU (55%). Distrust of national government was highest in Greece (82%), Slovenia (80%), Portugal (79%), Cyprus (76%) and France (76%).

A Eurobarometer survey carried out four days prior to and six days after the U.S. presidential election in November 2016 revealed that the surprise victory of Donald Trump caused an increase in the popularity of the European Union in Europe. The increase was strongest among the political right and among respondents who perceived their country as economically struggling.

A survey carried out in April 2018 for the European Parliament by Kantar Public consulting found that support for the EU was “the highest score ever measured since 1983”. Support for the EU was up in 26 out of 28 EU countries, the exceptions being Germany and the UK, where support had dropped by about 2% since the previous survey. Almost half (48%) of the 27,601 EU citizens surveyed agreed that their voice counted in the EU, up from 37% in 2016, whereas 46% disagreed with this statement. Two-thirds (67%) of respondents felt that their country had benefited from EU membership and 60% said that being part of the bloc was a good thing, as opposed to 12% who felt the opposite. At the height of the EU's financial and economic crises in 2011, just 47% had been of the view that EU membership was a good thing. Support for EU membership was greatest in Malta (93%), Ireland (91%), Lithuania (90%), Poland (88%), Luxembourg (88%), Estonia (86%) and Denmark (84%) and lowest in Greece (57%), Bulgaria (57%), Cyprus (56%), Austria (54%), the UK (53%) and Italy (44%). When asked which issues should be a priority for the European Parliament, survey respondents picked terrorism as the most pressing topic of discussion, ahead of youth unemployment and immigration. Not all countries shared the same priorities, however. Immigration topped the list in Italy (66% of citizens surveyed considered it a priority issue), Malta (65%) and Hungary (62%) but fighting youth unemployment and support for economic growth were top concerns in Spain, Greece, Portugal, Cyprus and Croatia. Social protection of citizens was the top concern for Dutch, Swedish and Danish respondents.

History in the European Parliament

1999–2004

A study analysed voting records of the Fifth European Parliament and ranked groups, concluding: "Towards the top of the figure are the more pro-European parties (PES, EPP-ED, and ALDE), whereas towards the bottom of the figure are the more anti-European parties (EUL/NGL, G/EFA, UEN and EDD)."

2004–09

In 2004, 37 Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) from the UK, Poland, Denmark and Sweden founded a new European Parliament group called "Independence and Democracy" from the old Europe of Democracies and Diversities (EDD) group.

The main goal of the ID group was to reject the proposed Treaty establishing a constitution for Europe. Some delegations within the group, notably that from UKIP, also advocated the complete withdrawal of their country from the EU, while others only wished to limit further European integration.

2009 elections

The elections of 2009 saw a significant fall in support in some areas for Eurosceptic parties, with all such MEPs from Poland, Denmark and Sweden losing their seats. However, in the UK, the Eurosceptic UKIP achieved second place in the election, finishing ahead of the governing Labour Party, and the British National Party (BNP) won its first ever two MEPs. Although new members joined the ID group from Greece and the Netherlands, it was unclear whether the group would reform in the new parliament.

The ID group did reform, as the Europe of Freedom and Democracy (EFD) and is represented by 32 MEPs from nine countries.

2014 elections

The elections of 2014 saw a big anti-establishment vote in favour of eurosceptic parties, which took around a quarter of the seats available. Those that won their national elections included: UKIP in the UK (the first time since 1906 that a party other than Labour or the Conservatives had won a national vote), the National Front in France, the People's Party in Denmark and Syriza in Greece. Second places were taken by Sinn Féin in Ireland and the Five Star Movement in Italy. Herman Van Rompuy, the President of the European Council, agreed following the election to re-evaluate the economic area's agenda and to launch consultations on future policy areas with the 28 member states.

Euroscepticism in the EU member states

Austria

Heinz-Christian Strache, leader of the Austrian hard Eurosceptic party FPÖ.

As of 2013, six parties together held all 183 National Council seats, and all bar one of the 62 Federal Council seats and 19 European Parliament seats. The Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (SPÖ - social democrats), which holds 56/183 NC, 24/62 FC, and 5/19 EP seats, is pro-European integration, as is the Österreichische Volkspartei (ÖVP - conservative/Christian), which holds 51/183 NC, 28/62 FC, and 6/19 EP seats, and Die Grünen – Die Grüne Alternative (green), which holds 20/183 NC, 3/62 FC, and 2/19 EP seats.

The Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (FPÖ), established in 1956, is a right-wing populist party that mainly attracts support from young people and workers. In 1989, it changed its stance over the EU to Euroscepticism. It opposed Austria joining the EU in 1994, and opposed the introduction of the euro in 1998. The party would like to leave the EU if it threatens to develop into a country, or if Turkey joins. The FPÖ received 20–27% of the national vote in the 1990s, and more recently received 17.5% in 2008. It currently has 34/183 National Council seats, 4/62 Federal Council seats, and 2/19 European Parliament seats.

The Bündnis Zukunft Österreich (BZÖ), established in 2005, is a socially conservative party that has always held Eurosceptic elements. In 2011 the party openly supported leaving the eurozone, and in 2012 it announced that it supported a full withdrawal from the European Union. The party has also called upon a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. In polls it currently receives around 10%–15%, although in one state it did receive 45% of the vote in 2009. It currently has 13/183 National Council seats, 0/62 Federal Council seats, and 1/19 European Parliament seats.

Team Stronach, established in 2012, has campaigned to reform the European Union, as well as to replace the euro with an Austrian Euro. In 2012, it regularly received 8–10% support in national polls. Politicians from many different parties (including the Social Democratic Party and the BZÖ) as well as previous independents switched their allegiances to the new party upon creation. In two local elections in March 2013, it won 11% of the vote in Carinthia, and 10% of the vote in Lower Austria. It currently has 6/183 National Council seats, 1/62 Federal Council seats, and 0/19 European Parliament seats.

Ewald Stadler, a former member of FPÖ (and later of BZÖ) was very Eurosceptic, but in 2011 became member of the European Parliament due to the Lisbon Treaty. Before Stadler accepted the seat, this led to heavy critics by Jörg Leichtfried (SPÖ) "Stadler wants to just rescue his political career" because Stadler before mentioned he would never accept a seat as MEP if this was only due to the Lisbon Treaty. On 23 December 2013 he founded a conservative and Eurosceptic party called The Reform Conservatives.

In the 2014 European Parliament election, the FPÖ increased its vote to 19.72% (up 7.01%), gaining 2 new MEPs, making a total of 4; the party came third, behind the ÖVP and the SPÖ. EU-STOP (the electoral alliance of the EU Withdrawal Party and the Neutral Free Austria Federation) polled 2.76%, gaining no seats, and the Reform Conservatives 1.18%, with Team Stronach putting up no candidates.

Belgium

The main Eurosceptic party in Belgium is Vlaams Belang.

In the 2014 European Parliament election, Belgium's Vlaams Belang lost over half of its previous vote share, polling 4.26% (down 5.59%) and losing 1 of its 2 MEPs.

Bulgaria

Volen Siderov, leader of the Bulgarian Eurosceptic party Attack.

 

European flag in Bulgaria torn down by supporters of the Eurosceptic party Attack

Parties with mainly Eurosceptic views are Union of Communists in Bulgaria, NFSB, Attack, and VMRO – BND, which is a member of the Eurosceptic European Conservatives and Reformists). Bulgaria's Minister of Finance, Simeon Djankov, stated in 2011 that ERM II membership to enter the Euro zone would be postponed until after the Eurozone crisis had stabilised.

In the 2014 European Parliament election Bulgaria remained overwhelmingly pro-EU, with the Eurosceptic Attack party receiving 2.96% of the vote, down 9%, with the splinter group National Front for the Salvation of Bulgaria taking 3.05%; neither party secured any MEPs. A coalition between VMRO – BND and Bulgaria Without Cencorship secured an MEP position for Angel Dzhambazki from IMRO, who is a soft eurosceptic.

Followers of Eurosceptic Attack tore down and trampled the European flag on 3 March 2016 at a meeting of the party in the Bulgarian capital Sofia, dedicated to the commemoration of the 138th anniversary of the liberation of Bulgaria from the Ottoman Empire.

Croatia

Parties with Eurosceptic views are mainly small right-wing parties like Croatian Party of Rights, Croatian Party of Rights dr. Ante Starčević, Croatian Pure Party of Rights, Autochthonous Croatian Party of Rights, Croatian Christian Democratic Party and Only Croatia – Movement for Croatia.

The only parliamentary party that is vocally eurosceptic is the Human Shield that won 5 out of 151 seats at the 2016 parliamentary election,. Their position is generally considered to waver between hard and soft Euroscepticism; it requests thorough reform of the EU so that all member states would be perfectly equal.

Czech Republic

Vaclav Klaus, former Eurosceptic President of the Czech Republic.

In May 2010, the Czech president Václav Klaus claimed that they "needn't hurry to enter the Eurozone".

Petr Mach, an economist, a close associate of president Václav Klaus and a member of the Civic Democratic Party between 1997 and 2007, founded the Free Citizens Party in 2009. The party aims to mainly attract dissatisfied Civic Democratic Party voters. At the time of the Lisbon Treaty ratification, they were actively campaigning against it, supported by the president Vaclav Klaus, who demanded opt-outs such as were granted to the United Kingdom and Poland, unlike the governing Civic Democratic Party, who endorsed it in the Chamber of Deputies. After the treaty has been ratified, Mach's party is in favour of withdrawing from the European Union completely. In the 2014 European Parliament election, the Free Citizens Party won one mandate and allied with UKIP in the Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy (EFD).

The 2017 Czech legislative election brought into Parliament three Eurosceptic parties. The soft Eurosceptic Civic Democratic Party (ODS) is the second largest, the new hard Eurosceptic Freedom and Direct Democracy (SPD) is the fourth largest and the Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia (KSČM) that is largely regarded as a Eurosceptic party is the fifth largest party in the Czech parliament.

Cyprus

Parties with mainly Eurosceptic views in Cyprus are New Internationalist Left, the Progressive Party of Working People, Committee for a Radical Left Rally and ELAM.

Denmark

Pia Kjærsgaard, Speaker of the Parliament of Denmark; member (and former leader) of the hard Eurosceptic party Danish People's Party (Dansk Folkeparti), the second-largest represented in the Danish parliament and the most represented in the European Parliament.

The People's Movement against the EU only takes part in European Parliament elections and has one member in the European Parliament. The soft Eurosceptic June Movement, originally a split-off from the People's Movement against the EU, existed from 1992 to 2009.

In the Danish Parliament, the Unity List has withdrawal from the EU as a policy. The Danish People's Party also advocates withdrawal, but has claimed to support some EU structures such as the internal market, and supported the EU-positive Liberal-Conservative coalition between 2001 and 2011.

The Socialist People's Party, minorities within the Social Liberal Party and Social Democratic Party, and some smaller parties were against accession to the European Union in 1972. Still in 1986, these parties advocated a no vote in the Single European Act referendum. Later, the Social Liberal Party changed to a strongly EU-positive party, and EU opposition within the Social Democratic Party faded. The Socialist People's Party were against the Amsterdam Treaty in 1998 and Denmark's joining the euro in 2000, but has become increasingly EU-positive, for example when MEP Margrete Auken left the European United Left–Nordic Green Left and joined The Greens–European Free Alliance in 2004.

In the 2014 European Parliament election, the Danish People's Party came first by a large margin with 26.6% of the vote, gaining 2 extra seats for a total of 4 MEPs. The People's Movement against the EU polled 8.1%, retaining its single MEP.

Estonia

The Independence Party and Centre Party were against accession to the EU, but only the Independence Party still wants Estonia to withdraw from the EU. The Conservative People's Party (EKRE) also has some Eurosceptic policies.

Finland

The largest Eurosceptic party in Finland is the Finns Party. In the European Parliament election, 2014, the Finns Party increased their vote share by 3.1% to 12.9%, adding a second MEP.
In Eurobarometer 77 (fieldwork in Spring 2012), 41% of Finns trusted the European Union (EU-27 average: 31%), 51% trusted The European Parliament (EU-27average: 40%), and 74% were in favour of the euro currency (EU-27 average: 52%).

France

Marine Le Pen, prominent French MEP, former leader and former presidential candidate of the National Front (France) and of the Europe of Nations and Freedom group.

In France there are multiple parties that are Eurosceptic to different degrees, varying from advocating less EU intervention in national affairs, to advocating outright withdrawal from the EU and the Eurozone. These parties belong to all sides of the political spectrum, so the reasons for their Euroscepticism may differ. In the past many French people appeared to be uninterested in such matters, with only 40% of the French electorate voting in the 2009 European Parliament elections.

Right-wing Eurosceptic parties include the Gaullist Debout la République, and Mouvement pour la France, which was part of Libertas, a pan-European Eurosceptic party. In the 2009 European Parliament elections, Debout la République received 1.77% of the national vote, and Libertas 4.8%. In a similar way to some moderate parties, the French right and far-right in general are naturally opposed to the EU, as they criticise France's loss of political and economic sovereignty to a supranational entity. Some of these hard Eurosceptic parties include the Popular Republican Union and the Front National (FN). Front National and Popular Republican Union both seek France's withdrawal from the EU and the euro, although Popular Republican Union also seeks France's withdrawal from NATO. The FN received 33.9% of the votes in the French presidential election, 2017, making it the largest Eurosceptic party in France.

Eurosceptic parties on the left in France tend to criticise what they see as the neoliberal agenda of the EU, as well as the elements of its structure which are undemocatic and seen as top-down. These parties include the Parti de Gauche and the French Communist Party, which formed the Front de Gauche for the 2009 European Parliament elections and received 6.3% of the votes. The leader of the Left Front defends a complete reform of the Monetary Union, rather than the withdrawal of France from the Eurozone. Some of the major far-left Eurosceptic parties in France include the New Anticapitalist Party which received 4.8% and Lutte Ouvrière which received 1.2%. The Citizen and Republican Movement, a left-wing Eurosceptic and souverainist party, have not participated in any elections for the European Parliament.

The party Chasse, Pêche, Nature & Traditions, is an agrarianist Eurosceptic party that claims to be neither left nor right.

In the European Parliament election, 2014, the National Front won the elections with 24.85% of the vote, a swing of 18.55%, winning 24 seats, up from 3 previously. The former French President François Hollande had called for the EU to be reformed and for a scaling back of its power.

Germany

"Referendum on saving the euro!" Poster from the party Alternative for Germany (AfD) regarding Germany's financial contributions during the Eurozone crisis

The Alternative for Germany (AfD) is Germany's largest Eurosceptic party. It has been elected into the German Parliament with 94 seats in September 2017. Initially the AfD was a soft Eurosceptic party, that considered itself pro-Europe and pro-EU, but opposed the euro, which it believed had undermined European integration.

In the European Parliament election, 2014, the Alternative for Germany came 5th with 7% of the vote, winning 7 seats and is a member of the Eurosceptic European Conservatives and Reformists. The Alternative for Germany went on to take seats in three state legislatures in the Autumn of 2014.

The party became purely Eurosceptic in 2015, when a split occurred in the party, leading to Frauke Petry's leadership and a more hard line approach to the European Union.

In July 2015 a split from AfD created a new soft Eurosceptic party called Alliance for Progress and Renewal.

Greece

Golden Dawn, Communist Party of Greece (KKE), ANEL, Course of Freedom, Popular Unity, and LAOS are the main Eurosceptic parties in Greece. According to the London School of Economics, Greece is the 2nd most Eurosceptic country in the European Union, with 50% (only behind UK) of the Greeks thinking that their country has not benefited at all from the EU. Meanwhile, 33% of the Greeks views Greek membership in EU as a good thing, marginally ahead of UK. 81% of the Greeks say that the EU is going in the wrong direction. These figures represent a major increase in Euroscepticism in Greece since 2009.

In June 2012, the Eurosceptic parties in Greece that were represented in the parliament before the Election in January 2015 (ANEL, Golden Dawn, KKE) got 45.8% of the votes and 40.3% of the seats in the parliament. In the legislative election of January 2015 the pro-European (left and right-wing) parties (ND, PASOK, Potami, KIDISO, EK and Prasinoi-DIMAR) got 43.28% of the votes. The Eurosceptic parties got 54.64%. The Eurosceptic left (KKE, ANTARSYA-MARS and KKE (M–L)/M–L KKE) got 42.58% of the votes and the Eurosceptic right (Golden Dawn, ANEL and LAOS) got 12.06% of the votes, with Syriza ahead with 36.34%. The Eurosceptic parties got 194 seats in the new parliament and the pro-EU parties got 106 seats.

According to the polls conducted in June and July 2015 (12 polls), the Eurosceptic left would get on average 48.03% (excluding extraparliamentary parties as ANTARSYA-MARS and KKE (m–l)/ML-KKE), the parliamentary pro-EU parties (Potami, New Democracy and PASOK) would get 33.82%, the extra-parliamentary (not represented in the Hellenic Parliament) pro-EU parties (KIDISO and EK) would get 4.44% and the Eurosceptic right would get 10.2% (excluding extraparliamentary parties, such as LAOS, not displayed on recent opinion polls). The soft Eurosceptic parties would get 42.31%, the hard Eurosceptic parties (including KKE, ANEL and Golden Dawn) would get 15.85%, and the pro-EU parties (including extra-parliamentary parties displayed on opinion polls) would get 38.27% of the votes.

In the European Parliament election, 2014, Syriza won the election with 26.58% of the vote (a swing of 21.88%) taking 6 seats (up 5), with Golden Dawn coming 3rd taking 3 seats, the Communist Party taking 2 seats and the Independent Greeks gaining their first ever seat. Syriza's leader Tsipras said he's not anti-European and does not want to leave the euro. According to The Economist, Tsipras is willing to negotiate with Greece's European partners, and it is believed a Syriza victory could encourage radical leftist parties across Europe. Alexis Tsipras vowed to reverse many of the austerity measures adopted by Greece since a series of bailouts began in 2010, at odds with the Eurogroup's positions. The current government coalition in Greece is composed by Syriza and ANEL (right-wing hard Eurosceptic party, led by Panos Kammenos, who is the current Minister of Defence).

Hungary

Viktor Orbán, Prime Minister of Hungary

Viktor Orbán is the soft Eurosceptic Prime Minister of Hungary for the national-conservative Fidesz Party. Another Eurosceptic party in Hungary is Jobbik, a radical, xenophobic and far-right party.

In Hungary 39% of the population have a positive image of the EU, 20% have a negative image, and 40% neutral (1% "Don't know").

In the 2014 Hungarian parliamentary election, Fidesz got 44.54% of the votes, Jobbik got 20.54% of the votes and the communist Hungarian Workers' Party got 0.58% of the votes. Thus, Eurosceptic parties in Hungary obtained 65.66% of the votes, one of the highest figures in Europe.

The green-liberal Politics Can Be Different classifies as a soft or reformist Eurosceptic party given its self-professed euro-critical stance. During the European parliamentary campaign of 2014 party Co-President András Schiffer described LMP as having a pronounced pro-integration position on environmental, wage and labour policy however, as supporting member state autonomy on the self-determination of local communities concerning land resources. So as to combat the differentiated integration of the multi-speed Europe which discriminates against Eastern and Southern member states, LMP would like to initiate an eco-social market economy within the union.

Ireland

Euroscepticism is a minority view in Ireland, with opinion polls from 2016 to 2018 indicating growing support for EU membership, moving from 70% to 92% in that time.

The Irish people initially voted against ratifying the Nice and Lisbon Treaties. However following renegotiations, second referendums on both were passed with approximately 2:1 majorities in both cases. Some commentators and smaller political groups questioned the validity of the Irish Government's decision to call second referendums.

The left-wing Irish republican party Sinn Féin expresses soft Eurosceptic positions on the current structure of the European Union and the direction in which it is moving. The party expresses, "support for Europe-wide measures that promote and enhance human rights, equality and the all-Ireland agenda", but has a "principled opposition" to a European superstate. However, in its manifesto for the 2015 UK general election, Sinn Féin pledged that the party would campaign for the UK to stay within the EU.^[92] In the last European Parliament election in 2014, Sinn Féin won 3 seats coming second with 19.5% of the vote up 8.3%.

The Trotskyist organisation, the Socialist Party, supports Ireland leaving the EU and supported the Brexit result. It argues that the European Union is institutionally capitalist and neoliberal. The Socialist Party campaigned against the Lisbon and Nice Treaties and favours the foundation of an alternative Socialist European Union.

Italy

Beppe Grillo, leader of the Italian Five Star Movement, a Eurosceptic party.

 

Matteo Salvini with the Eurosceptic economist Claudio Borghi Aquilini during No Euro Day.

The Five Star Movement (M5S), an anti-establishment movement founded by the former comedian Beppe Grillo, is often considered a Eurosceptic party. The M5S gained 25.5% of vote in the 2013 general election, becoming the largest anti-establishment and Eurosceptic party in Europe. The party also advocates a non-binding referendum on the withdrawal of Italy from the Eurozone (but not from the European Union) and the return to the lira. The M5S's popular support is evenly distributed all across Italy, but in 2013 the party was particularly strong in Sicily, Liguria and Marche, where it gained more than 30% of the vote. Another Eurosceptic party is Lega Nord, a regionalist movement led by Matteo Salvini favouring Italy's exit from the Eurozone and the re-introduction of the lira. When in government, LN however approved the Treaty of Lisbon. The party won 6.2% of the vote in the 2014 European Parliament elections, but two of its leading members are presidents of Lombardy and Veneto (where LN gained 40.9% of the vote in 2015).

In the European Parliament election, 2014 the Five Star Movement came second, gaining 17 seats and 21.2% of the vote in contesting EP seats for the first time. Lega Nord took 5 seats and The Other Europe with Tsipras gained 3 seats.

Other minor eurosceptic organizations include right-wing political parties (e.g., Brothers of Italy, Tricolour Flame, New Force, National Front, CasaPound, National Movement for Sovereignty, the No Euro Movement), left-wing political parties (e.g., the Communist Party of Marco Rizzo, the Italian Communist Party) and other political movements (e.g., the Sovereignist Front, MMT Italy). In addition, the European Union is criticized (especially for the austerity and the creation of the euro) by some left-wing thinkers, like the trade unionist Giorgio Cremaschi and the journalist Paolo Barnard, and some academics, such as the economists Alberto Bagnai and Vladimiro Giacchè, the philosopher Diego Fusaro and the mathematician Marino Badiale.

According to the Standard Eurobarometer 87 conducted by the European Commission in the spring of 2017, 48% of Italians tend not to trust the European Union compared to 36% of Italians who trust it.

In the 2018 general election the Eurosceptic parties (including Five Star Movement, Lega Nord, Brothers of Italy, Power to the People, CasaPound, Italy for the Italians and Communist Party) won 57.18% of the votes, while the pro-EU parties (including Democratic Party, Forza Italia, Free and Equal, More Europe, Us with Italy-UdC, Together and Popular Civic List) won 41.54% of the votes.

Latvia

The National Alliance (For Fatherland and Freedom/LNNK/All for Latvia!), Union of Greens and Farmers and For Latvia from the Heart are parties that are described by some political commentators as bearing soft Eurosceptic views. A small hard Eurosceptic party Eurosceptic Party of Action exists, but it has failed to gain any administrative seats throughout history of its existence.

Lithuania

The Order and Justice party has mainly Eurosceptic views.

Luxembourg

The Alternative Democratic Reform Party is a soft Eurosceptic party. It is a member of the Alliance of European Conservatives and Reformists.

Malta

The Labour Party was not in favour of Malta entering the European Union. However, it was in favour of a partnership with the EU. After a long battle, the Nationalist Party led by Eddie Fenech Adami won the referendum and the following election, making Malta one of the states to enter the European Union on 1 May 2004. The party is now pro-European.

Netherlands

Geert Wilders, leader of the Party for Freedom, a hardline Dutch Eurosceptic party and a prominent anti-Islamic radicalism party.

Historically, the Netherlands have been a very pro-European country, being one of the six founding members of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1952, and campaigning with much effort to include the United Kingdom into the Community in the 1970s and others after that. It has become slightly more Eurosceptic in the 2000s, rejecting the European Constitution in 2005 and complaining about the relatively high financial investment into the Union or the democratic deficit amongst other issues.

• The nationalist Party for Freedom (founded in 2006) wants the Netherlands to leave the EU in its entirety, because it believes the EU is undemocratic, costs money and cannot close the borders for immigrants.
• The Socialist Party believes the European Union has already brought Europe 50 years of peace and prosperity, and argues that European co-operation is essential for tackling global problems like climate change and international crime. However, the SP opines that the current Union is dominated by the big businesses and the big countries, while the labour movement, consumer organisations and smaller companies are often left behind. "Neoliberal" measures have supposedly increased social inequality, and perhaps the Union is expanding too fast and taking on too much power in issues that should be dealt with on a national level.
• The conservative Protestant Reformed Political Party and the Christian Union favour co-operation within Europe, but reject a superstate, especially one that is dominated by Catholics, or that infringes on religious rights and/or privileges.
• The ecologist Party for the Animals favours European co-operation, but believes the current EU does not respect animal rights enough and should have a more active policy on environment protection.

Despite these concerns, in 2014 the majority of the Dutch electorate continued to support parties that favour ongoing European integration: the Social Democrats, the Christian Democrats, the Liberals, but most of all the (Liberal) Democrats.

In 2016, a substantial majority in a low-turnout referendum rejected the ratification of an EU trade and association treaty with Ukraine.

Poland

"Trumna dla rybaków" ("Coffin for fishermen"). A sign visible on the sides of many Polish fishing boats. It depicts an obscene Slavic gesture. Polish fishermen protest against the EU's prohibition of cod fishing on Polish ships.

Parties with mainly Eurosceptic views are Liberty, Congress of the New Right, National Movement (together with Real Politics Union).

Former president of Poland Lech Kaczyński resisted giving his signature on behalf of Poland to the Treaty of Lisbon, objecting specifically to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Subsequently, Poland got an opt-out from this charter. As Polish President, Kaczyński also opposed the Polish government's intentions to join the euro.

In 2015, it was reported that Euroscepticism was growing in Poland, which was thought to be due to the "economic crisis, concern over perceived interference from Brussels and migration". Polish president Andrzej Duda indicated that he wished for Poland to step back from further EU integration. He suggested that the country should "hold a referendum on joining the euro, resist further integration and fight the EU’s green policies", despite getting largest share of EU cash.

Portugal

The main Eurosceptic parties in Portugal are National Renovator Party (PNR), Portuguese Communist Party (PCP), and Left Bloc (BE). Opinion polling in Portugal in 2015 indicated that 48 per cent tended not to trust the EU, while 79 per cent tended not to trust the Portuguese government (then led by Portugal Ahead). Eurosceptic political parties hold a combined total of 34 seats out of 230 in Portugal's parliament (BE 19, PCP 15, PNR 0) and a combined total of 4 out of Portugal's 21 seats in the European parliament (PCP 3, BE 1, PNR 0).

In the last European Parliament election, 2014, the Portuguese Communist Party won three seats and the Left Bloc won one seat.

Romania

Several parties espousing Eurosceptic views exist on the right, such as the New Republic the Greater Romania Party and Noua Dreaptă, but as of August 2016 none of these parties are represented in European Parliament. Euroscepticism is relatively unpopular in Romania; all mainstream political parties are pro-European and a 2015 survey found 65% of Romanians had a positive view of the country's EU membership.

Slovakia

Parties with primarily hard Eurosceptic views represented in the National Council are People's Party - Our Slovakia and We Are Family. Prominent Slovak Eurosceptic politicians include Richard Sulík, Boris Kollár and Marian Kotleba. Soft Eurosceptic views are represented in Freedom and Solidarity, Slovak National Party and New Majority.

Slovenia

Parties with mainly Eurosceptic views are Slovenian National Party and United Left.

Spain

Candidatura d'Unitat Popular, a left-wing to far-left political party with about 1,300 members, advocates independence for Catalonia outside of the European Union.

Spain was one of the few countries to vote Yes for the European Constitution in a referendum in February 2005, though by a lower margin in Catalonia and the Basque Country. However, trust in the EU later declined. As of 2015, according to a Eurobarometer public opinion survey, 61 per cent of the Spanish people did not trust the EU, compared to 25% that trust it (14% "don't know").

Sweden

Anti-EU posters in Sweden

The Left Party of Sweden is against accession to the eurozone and wants Sweden to leave the European Union.

The right-wing populist party Sweden Democrats are also strongly against the Union but not to withdraw EEA and Schengen Agreement.

The June List, a Eurosceptic list consisting of members from both the political right and left won three seats in the 2004 Elections to the European Parliament and sat in the EU-critical IND/DEM group in the European Parliament. The movement Folkrörelsen Nej till EU favours a withdrawal from the EU.

Around 75% of the Riksdag members represent parties that officially supports the Sweden membership.

In the European Parliament election, 2014, the Sweden Democrats gained 2 seats with 9.67% of the vote, up 6.4%, and the Left Party took one seat with 6.3% of the vote.

United Kingdom

Nigel Farage, former Leader of the UK Independence Party and co-leader of the Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy group in the European Parliament. Farage is one of the most prominent Eurosceptic figures in the UK.

Euroscepticism in the United Kingdom has been a significant element in British politics since the inception of the European Economic Community (EEC), the predecessor to the EU. The European Union strongly divides the British public, political parties, media and civil society.

The UK Independence Party has backed the idea of the UK unilaterally leaving the European Union (Brexit) since its inception. During the 23 June 2016 referendum on the issue, the Conservatives had no official position on the issue; although its leader David Cameron was in favour of remaining in the EU, the party was split on the issue. The Labour Party officially supported remaining in the EU, although party leader Jeremy Corbyn did suggest early on in the campaign that he would consider withdrawal; which he advocated years previously. The Liberal Democrats were the most adamantly pro-EU party, and since the referendum, pro-Europeanism has been their main policy.

The referendum resulted in an overall vote to leave the EU, as opposed to remaining an EU member, by 51.9% to 48.1%, on a turnout of 72.2%. The vote was split between the constituent countries of the United Kingdom, with a majority in England and Wales voting to leave, and a majority in Scotland and Northern Ireland, as well as Gibraltar (a British Overseas Territory), voting to remain. As a result of the referendum, the government notified the EU of its intention to withdraw on 29 March 2017 by invoking Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty.

Euroscepticism in other possible members

Iceland

The three main Eurosceptic parties in Iceland are the Independence Party, Left-Green Movement and the Progressive Party. The Independence Party and the Progressive Party won the parliamentary election in April 2013 and they have halted the current negotiations with the European Union regarding Icelandic membership and tabled a parliamentary resolution on 21 February 2014 to withdraw the application completely.

Moldova

The two main Eurosceptic parties in Moldova are the left-wing Party of Socialists of the Republic of Moldova, which officially declared its main purpose to be the integration of Moldova in the Eurasian Economic Union and the Party of Communists of the Republic of Moldova, even if nowadays its leader speech became more soft on the issue of Euroscepticism. As of November 2014 both parties are represented in Moldovan Parliament, with 45 MPs out of a total of 101 MPs.

Montenegro

All parliamentary parties in Montenegro officially support the country's bid for accession to the European Union. The only party that rejected the European integration and instead publicly advocates a tighter political and economic integration with Russia was the non-parliamentary far-right party Serb List.

Norway

Norway has rejected EU membership in two referendums, 1972 and 1994. The Centre Party, Christian Democratic Party, Socialist Left Party and Liberal Party were against EU membership in both referendums. The Centre Party, Socialist Left Party, Capitalist Party, Christians and Red Party are also against Norway's current membership of the European Economic Area.

Russia

Russian President Vladimir Putin is an outspoken Eurosceptic who has successfully promoted an alternative Economic Union with Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan – the Eurasian Economic Union.

Parties with mainly Eurosceptic views are the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, United Russia and Liberal Democratic Party of Russia.

Following the 2014 Crimean crisis, the European Union issued sanctions on the Russian Federation "in response to the illegal annexation of Crimea and deliberate destabilisation of a neighbouring sovereign country". In response to this, Alexey Borodavkin – Russia's permanent representative with the UN – said "The EU is committing a direct violation of human rights by its actions against Russia. The unilateral sanctions introduced against us are not only illegitimate according to international law, they also undermine Russian citizens' freedom of travel, freedom of development, freedom of work and others". In the same year, Russian president Vladimir Putin said: "What are the so-called European values? Maintaining the coup, the armed seizure of power and the suppression of dissent with the help of the armed forces?"

San Marino

A referendum was held in the landlocked microstate on 20 October 2013 in which the citizens were asked whether the country should submit an application to join the European Union. The proposal was rejected because of a low turnout, even though 50.3% of voters approved it. The "Yes" campaign was supported by the main left-wing parties (Socialist Party, United Left) and the Union for the Republic whereas the Sammarinese Christian Democratic Party suggested voting with a blank ballot, the Popular Alliance declared itself neutral, and We Sammarinese and the RETE movement supported the "No" campaign. The Citizens' Rights Directive, which defines the right of free movement for the European citizens, may have been an important reason for those voting no.

Serbia

Parties with mainly Eurosceptic views are Serbian Radical Party, Democratic Party of Serbia, Dveri and Serbian People's Party of Nenad Popović.

Switzerland

Switzerland has long been known for its neutrality in international politics. Swiss voters rejected EEA membership in 1992, and EU membership in 2001. Despite the passing of several referendums calling for closer relations between Switzerland and the European Union such as the adoption of bilateral treaties and the joining of the Schengen Area, a second referendum of the joining of the EEA or the EU is not expected, and the general public remains opposed to joining.

In February 2014, the Swiss voters narrowly approved a referendum limiting the freedom of movement of EU citizens to Switzerland.

Eurosceptic political parties include the Swiss People's Party, which is the largest political party in Switzerland, with 29.4% of the popular vote as of the 2015 federal election. Smaller Eurosceptic parties include, but are not limited to, the Federal Democratic Union, the Ticino League, and the Geneva Citizens' Movement, all of which are considered right-wing parties.

In addition, the Campaign for an Independent and Neutral Switzerland is a political organisation in Switzerland that is strongly opposed to Swiss membership of or further integration otherwise with the European Union.

Regionally, the German-speaking majority as well as the Italian-speaking areas are the most Eurosceptic, whilst French-speaking Switzerland tends to be more pro-European integration. However, in the 2001 referendum, the majority of French-speakers voted against EU membership. According to a 2016 survey conducted by M.I.S Trend and published in L'Hebdo, 69 percent of the Swiss population supports systematic border controls, and 53 percent want restrictions on the EU accord of the free movements of peoples and 14 percent want it completely abolished. However, 54% of the Swiss population said that if necessary, they would ultimately keep the freedom of movement of people's accord.

Turkey

The two main Eurosceptic parties are the far-right ultranationalist, Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), which secured 16.29% of votes, and 40 seats in the Parliament at the last election, and the Felicity Party (Saadet Partisi), a far-right Sunni Islamist party, which has no seats in the Parliament, as it only secured 0.68% of the votes in the last election, far below the 10% threshold necessary to be represented in the Parliament.

Many left-wing nationalist and far-left parties hold no seats at parliament but they control many activist and student movements in Turkey. The Patriotic Party (formerly called Workers' Party) consider the European Union as a frontrunner of global imperialism.

Ukraine

Dmytro Yarosh, leader of the Ukrainian hard Eurosceptic party Right Sector.

Parties with mainly Eurosceptic views are Party of Regions, Communist Party of Ukraine and Right Sector.

The far-right Ukrainian group Right Sector opposes joining the European Union. It regards the EU as an "oppressor" of European nations.