EU Faces a Bumpy Path in Electing Leaders

WSJ: Politicians in Brussels are hoping U.S.-style elections will give EU institutions more democratic legitimacy.

Political leaders in Brussels are hoping that personality-driven, U.S.-style elections will giveEuropean Union institutions more democratic legitimacy.

Yet it took one question at the first major campaign event for next May's vote to highlight how difficult that will be.

Martin Schulz, the Socialist candidate for president of the European Commission, was asked the question in German; he answered in German. Irritation flickered over the faces of Spanish and Portuguese journalists, after realizing that no interpreter was around to translate. When Mr. Schulz responded to another question in German, one shouted, "In English please!"

They, along with reporters from across the 28 states that make up the EU, had come to witness what Mr. Schulz branded "a new dimension in European democracy." And already some felt left out.

For the first time since the creation of theEuropean Union in 1958, European parties—coalitions of national parties with similar political leanings—are appointing one or several lead candidates to be president of the commission, the bloc's executive arm. That should in theory allow citizens to elect both their representatives in the Parliament for the next five-year term and the commission's next president.

The hope is that the move will forge much-needed links between European citizens and Brussels, erasing the long-held image of faceless "Eurocrats" imposing decisions without a democratic mandate.

The problem has only grown worse during the financial crisis, as the commission took on a bigger role in enforcing unpopular economic policies, driving confidence in EU institutions to a low.

"I want to fight to regain trust," Mr. Schulz said at his Wednesday news conference, just minutes after the Party of European Socialists anointed him their candidate for the presidency. "Trust in one thing—that the richest part of the world is able to distribute wealth in a more fair and just way between countries and between people."

The parties' push for pan-European democracy faces obstacles. Will Mr. Schulz, a German who speaks fluent French and English, connect with Greek or Polish voters?

Mr. Schulz, who is 57 years old, has been a member of the European Parliament for almost two decades. But even though he is currently president of the Parliament, a largely ceremonial role, European voters in Spain and elsewhere would struggle to pick him out of a crowd.

The Socialists had initially pledged to hold primaries among its members to select a candidate. Yet when the nomination period ended last week, the only contender was Mr. Schulz, a bearded, bespectacled former bookshop owner from western Germany.

The center-right European People's Party, which dominated the last European elections in 2009, is having similar difficulties finding a high-profile candidate. Some EPP leaders are still hoping that a sitting prime minister, say Ireland's Enda Kenny or Finland's Jyrki Katainen, will put up his hand.

Anyone already in a senior political office at home would be taking a big bet. Besides the risk of losing the elections there is the danger that the lead candidate of the winning party may not even end up being commission president.

"I can't see any automaticity between lead candidates and the allocation of posts," German Chancellor Angela Merkel said after a summit with her EU counterparts last month.

Until now, the commission president has been appointed by EU national leaders, often following a complex game of personality chess that can include swapping among countries for unrelated posts such as the heads of the International Monetary Fund or the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The European Parliament merely got to confirm him (and it has always been a him), along with the other commissioners, in a yes-or-no vote.

European parties say those days are over, pointing to a rewrite of the EU treaty that came into effect in 2010. The new treaty still leaves the power to nominate the commission president in the hands of EU leaders, but they have to do so "taking into account the elections to the European Parliament."

For the parties, that means that after the vote, the lead candidate of the winning party would go on to build a coalition, securing a majority in the legislature.

If EU leaders simply refuse to affirm this candidate as president, party officials in Brussels say privately, the EU could quickly have an institutional crisis on its hands.

Those opposed to giving voters a say in electing a commission president point to the public's growing support for euro-skeptic and far-right parties in some countries. Marie Le Pen, the leader of France's anti-immigration National Front, and Dutch politician Geert Wilders are meeting next week to see whether they can agree on a common line for the European vote.

Many observers fear that such factions, along with groups such as the U.K. Independence Party, could secure a third of the seats in the Parliament.

For supporters, like Kostas Sasmatzoglou, chief spokesman and campaign manager for the EPP, not using elections to determine the EU leadership would be counterproductive.

"If the EU as an entity doesn't do something and become more transparent and accountable there's a real risk that the whole system will go down the tubes," he says.

Write to Gabriele Steinhauser