The people of the Czech Republic have chosen national sovereignty over EU dogmatic control.
The recent Czech parliamentary election delivered more than a victory for Andrej Babiš’s ANO (YES) party. It sent a message felt far beyond Prague: people in the EU (East and West) are growing weary of Brussels’s single-minded insistence on unconditional support for Ukraine, even at the expense of their own citizens’ well-being.
Andrej Babis’s victory, in particular, demonstrates that the Czech people want their real, considerable concerns addressed, and attempts to besmirch his good name and smear him as “pro-Russian” are merely acts of desperation.
The election results expose a deeply felt and widespread demand for political discourse to be grounded in national interests, rather than those dictated by unelected bureaucrats in EU institutions.
European voters for years now have been cajoled into accepting the diktat that there is no alternative to the prevailing orthodoxy from Brussels: send money and weapons to Ukraine indefinitely, absorb the costs without dissent, and accept austerity at home as the necessary price of defending the EU. Governments across the EU (France, Germany, Norway, Sweden, and the Baltics) and Britain, from outside the bloc, have repeated this mantra with no patience for dissent. But in ordinary, hard-working Prague, people felt the bite of inflation, shrinking disposable income, and a government more responsive to foreign policy rhetoric than economic pain at home.
Babiš tapped into this disillusionment and offered a clear alternative. His campaign advocated restoring pension benefits, cutting taxes, redressing unpopular austerity dictates, and reviving much-needed subsidies for students and seniors. His commitment to these issues spoke directly to concerns dealt with every day by the people—affordability, security, and dignity in retirement. By contrast, the coalition being swept from power projected bureaucratic arrogance, as though being the savior of the regime in Kiev was the only true test of political virtue.
Brussels and a sycophantic media immediately accused Babiš of being “pro-Russian.” The accusation has become the default position, employed against anyone questioning Brussels’ mantra: pouring endless resources (“for as long as it takes”) into the war in Ukraine. Yet the label is both misleading and an act of desperation. ANO has proposed neither leaving NATO nor breaking with the EU. Rather, it has called for prioritizing Czech needs first and re-evaluating commitments that drain national budgets without a clearly delineated goal. Is this “pro-Russian”? Or is it simply responsible governance in a democracy where leaders are accountable to their voters?
The heart of the issue is ‘nationalism,’ an expression routinely maligned in recent years. The Czech people apparently understand nationalism (and rightly so) as a means to ensure that political decisions serve the people who live, work, and pay taxes in a country. Czech voters chose ANO because they saw in its advocacy a defense of their interests, not the abstract projects of Brussels bureaucrats designed to keep themselves in power. They said “Ano” (yes) to a party that promised to restore needed benefits slashed by austerity, to invest in domestic infrastructure and energy security, and to treat sovereignty as more than a slogan. Is this extremism or common sense?
It should not be forgotten that Prague has remained committed to its Western alliances. But solidarity must be for a cause that is to the benefit of those sacrificing for its eventuation. Sacrifice with neither limits nor demonstrated results is a “fool’s errand.” The Czechs have already borne substantive costs (through energy price shocks, inflation, and diverted public funds) in the service of the EU’s attempts to “punish” Russia for its Special Military Operation in Ukraine. To question how much longer this largess to Kiev can continue is not betrayal. It is an act of democratic accountability.
The election figures underscore the depth of the Czech peoples’ disillusionment. ANO captured roughly 35% of the vote, considerably more than the ruling coalition. These numbers are an expression of democracy in action, driven by broad support among workers, pensioners, and small business owners (the middle class). Their voice was resolute—the people most affected by economic strain demand change. Their choice may complicate coalition-building in Prague, but the verdict is unmistakable: a large share of Czech society believes their government should put them first—finally.
The attempt to discredit such demands with charges of sympathy towards Moscow illustrates palpable fear and insecurity in Brussels. If the Czech example spreads, the EU knows it could well face a tsunami of parties and governments insisting on a new calculus in the balance between foreign policy idealism and domestic welfare. And what occurred in Prague may only presage a beginning; similar debates are simmering in Slovakia, Hungary, and even Germany. The Czech election is a bellwether event, admonishing Brussels that voters across Europe may not accept indefinitely the narrative that their sacrifices are justified by ill-conceived and narrowly defined geopolitical strategies that are designed to keep EU elites in power.
Babiš’s ascendancy may very well be part of a broader European reckoning, because nationalism and national sovereignty, properly understood, do not undermine the continent of Europe—they revitalize it. By insisting that governments answer to their own people, it strengthens democracy and ensures that Europe’s unity is built on consent rather than coercion. That is why the Czech people chose ANO, and why the accusation of being “pro-Russian” misses the point entirely.
