MEP Marie Dauchy, from the National Front, has been a pro-Kremlin politician in France since 2022; she was re-elected in 2024. Under the current president Marine Le Pen and following Jordan Bardella, the National Rally (National Front) has a different niche it took in both France and inside the European Parliament relating to Russia as well as to Ukraine.
Dauchy has been noted for her positions that may align with pro-Russian sentiments. She is one of the MEPs who abstained from voting on the EU Parliament’s resolution regarding the establishment of a tribunal for the crime of aggression against Ukraine. Surprisingly, Dauchy also voted against the EU Parliament’s resolution recognizing the Russian Federation as a state sponsor of terrorism.
RN MEPs like Dauchy have often voted against or abstained from condemnation resolutions of Russia or resolutions supporting Ukraine in the past. For example, they abstained from voting that was critical of Russia’s actions, such as military aggression towards Ukraine or human rights violations. This pattern suggests strategic alignment with the EU Parliament’s pro-Russian views.
In 2024, in a written question to the European Council under Rule 138, MEP Marie Dauchy, with others was worried about the situation and ramifications of Ukraine’s accession into the European Union. This comes against the backdrop of the country’s submission of its EU membership application on 28 February 2022, its acceptance into the position of candidate state on 23 June 2022, and the initiation of formal accession talks on 15 December 2023, all at a time that Ukraine remains immersed in war resulting from Russia’s invasion of its territory.
MEPs, including Marie Dauchy, raised three critical questions directed at the European Council in addressing what it means to welcome Ukraine as an EU candidate given current conditions. They asked two questions. First, they asked whether the Council considers a country at war and under partial occupation, such as Ukraine, to satisfy the stability criteria outlined in the conclusions of the 1993 European Council. Second, they questioned whether Ukraine could proceed with joining the European Union even while the war of aggression against it continues, or if achieving peace is a prerequisite for its accession.
Finally, they asked about the legal and practical implications of Ukraine’s accession under Article 42(7) of the Treaty on the European Union, especially with the potential obligation of other Member States to participate in the war in defense of Ukraine. These raised concerns seemingly challenge Ukraine’s accession to the European Union while echoing narratives favorable to Russia’s stance.
