More Politics, More Problems? Intra-Party Dynamics and Conflict in a Politicising European Parliament

The increasing politicisation of the European Union has transformed the long-standing image of the Union as a largely technocratic and post-ideological project. In combination with the polycrisis facing the EU, a rightward reorientation of EU politics and the growing presence and influence of far-right parties, this shift has turned the European Parliament (EP) into a crucial arena for the ‘return of politics’ to the Union. However, despite the growth of research on EU politicisation, most work continues to focus on elections and institutional behaviour. This leaves largely unexplored both how EP party groups and their actors navigate this politicised environment and the resulting intra-party dynamics. This paper addresses this puzzle by examining how internal dynamics of EP party groups develop and are transformed in an increasingly politicised EU setting. At the analytical level, attention is directed to EP party groups as meso-level actors and to four policy domains that crystallise core ideological and strategic dilemmas in a politicised Union marked by multiple crises and institutional responsibilities: immigration, trade, gender politics and environmental policy. These domains also expose internal political tensions within party families, arising from trade-offs between ideological and strategic considerations, differing geopolitical orientations and heterogeneous national political trajectories and preferences. To do so, the paper focuses on two interconnected aspects. First, it examines how party groups’ positions, emphases and frames on these contentious issues have changed over time. Second, it explores how these issues emerge and are publicised as intra-party tensions, disagreements and conflicts in EU-focused media. Together, these two steps allow for a systematic analysis of how party groups position themselves within the selected policy domains and how internal disagreements over these issues are articulated and framed publicly. A twofold research strategy is employed. First, a qualitative analysis of policy documents and public declarations issued by EP party groups traces changes in their positions, frames and levels of specificity on the selected issues. Second, a media content analysis of EU-focused outlets such as Euractiv, EUObserver and Euronews maps the coverage of publicised internal disagreements within party groups and examines how these disagreements are framed and by whom they are voiced. Combining these two strands allows mapping how party groups’ positions on the selected issues develop over time and tracing where and how internal divergences and ‘red lines’ over these issues become public and along which lines they are structured, framed, and articulated. Overall, this paper takes an initial step towards exploring how an increasingly politicised EU environment is reflected in the internal life of EP party groups, and in the programmatic and communicative patterns through which ideological and strategic dilemmas emerge from and are navigated.