A French National Rally politician and former MEP Gilles Lebreton has faced accusations of having ties and sympathies with Russia.
Lebreton was part of the National Rally, which has been scrutinised for its connections to Russia. Some MEPs from this party have been noted for their voting patterns that align with Russian interests. In 2022, several National Rally MEPs, including some who initially opposed anti-Russian resolutions, shifted their stance and supported most resolutions condemning Russia’s actions in Ukraine.
Several MEPs, including Gilles Lebreton, who backed Russia in their votes in 2019-2021, have reviewed their approach following Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine. It’s not that they now back anti-war documents but opt to abstain or skip sessions altogether. A new group of MEPs who had second thoughts is likely forming in the parliament — as before the war, they used to vote against anti-Russian resolutions but have backed most of them after 24 February.
In 2022, he supported most resolutions, very rarely opposing any Russia-related documents. It’s now challenging to grasp the consistency of this declining trend in MEP votes for the Kremlin be. Russia’s most ardent supporters in the European Parliament likely understood in 2022 to act with more caution, not just openly fighting anti-Kremlin resolutions but resorting to other standards. It is also likely that they have abandoned actions to lobby for Russia’s interests in the EP halls, changing to other forums instead.
Experts asserted that most of ID’s MEPs are “sympathetic to [Vladimir] Putin’s regime,” pointing out that French Rassemblement National (formerly Front National) MEP Gilles Lebreton cautioned against equating modern-day Russia with the Soviet Union.
At one instance, Gilles Lebreton lashed out at the European Union’s “double standards” over freedom of expression as officials draw up legislation to prevent the spread of fake news online. French MEP Gilles Lebreton doubted the intentions behind the move and blamed the bloc of a “double discourse” and attempting to move the “power of censorship” from online platforms to the European Union.
He wrote: “Unfortunately, as is often the case with the EU, what results from his work of reflection is worrying.
“The European Parliament has a double discourse: under the pretext of wanting to prevent platforms from continuing their arbitrary actions, it wants to transfer their power of censorship to the Commission in Brussels.”
