Stuck in the Middle: France, the European Union, and a Case Study for the United States

I. Macron in an Uncertain France

Up until even September of last year, the news was fixated on the concept of U.S.-China great power competition. Every notable international event, including the American withdrawal from Afghanistan, nuclear talks with Iran, and the global pandemic response, passed through a bipolar filter. Other countries were pushed aside from the international spotlight. Then, in short order, Ukraine sounded the alarm of an imminent Russian invasion, UK prime minister Boris Johnson was exposed in a humiliating public health scandal, and Germany elected a new Chancellor after Angela Merkel’s astounding 16 years in office. Europe has become the new focus of attention.

One country, however, has received hardly any attention from American onlookers despite the sprawling influence and global admiration it once enjoyed: France. While the United States unceasingly observes China, Russia, and Germany while keeping an eye out for its close English ally, France always comes second in the eyes of American policymakers. 

And yet, the country can take on a boisterous voice when it chooses to. After the United States, Australia, and the UK forged a joint security pact to defend the South Pacific from Chinese encroachment without consulting Paris, the French vehemently responded by recalling their ambassadors from Washington and Canberra. This prompted the United States to commit to a series of consultations with the French to repair bilateral ties and reimagine the future of trans-Atlantic cooperation. When France speaks, the world listens. But when it is silent, it drifts into oblivion. The country carries the weight of its extensive, multidimensional history while seeking to bring a new approach to the contemporary international stage.

This is the backdrop behind the upcoming French elections in April. The incumbent French president, Emmanuel Macron, delayed making an official declaration of his candidacy for months on end despite already launching his campaign. This drew suspicion from his opponents on the right, who accused him of taking advantage of donations and funds to begin campaigning far before he technically made it on the ballot. However, Macron had the liberty of doing so as France’s favored candidate in preliminary surveys. His popularity has changed negligibly between March of 2021 and the Russian invasion, according to Politico Research.

Although Macron’s consistency in the polls may appear to indicate that the French population generally approves of his domestic agenda, this may in fact be an incomplete assessment. Rather, Macron has turned his attention principally toward foreign policy, contending for a spot as one of the European Union’s (EU) figureheads. Recently, Macron has benefited from his position as one of the presidents of the Council of the EU alongside Czechia and Sweden, a role which lasts six months. “The international dimension of the presidency is extremely important in the eyes of the French,” Bruno Cautrès, a Research Fellow at the Center for Political Research at Sciences Po, told The Politic.

To that end, in February, Macron met with Russian president Vladimir Putin in Moscow to discuss diplomatic negotiations regarding the crisis in Ukraine. For the past two months, he has continued to publicly relay his communications with Putin. Macron’s insistence on France’s international relations, however, comes with a heavy downside. “He may give the impression to French voters that he is not addressing domestic issues that feel particularly relevant to the people,” said Cautrès. These include persistent unemployment, anti-government sentiments, and a problematic pension system for retirees. “He cannot continue saying to French voters that he is more interested in big international questions than France itself,” Cautrès added.

Indeed, Macron’s presidency has not been smooth sailing, to say the least. In November of 2018, protesters took to the streets in a movement that became known as the gilets jaunes (yellow vests) to contest the chief executive’s diesel and petrol tax hike. While the resistance was initially focused on the financial burden that French citizens would have to incur to facilitate France’s green energy transition, they eventually came to represent a widespread anti-government sentiment targeted at Macron’s far-reaching legislation. The Covid-19 pandemic also presented several roadblocks for the president, who failed to rapidly distribute vaccines and sent the country into lockdown multiple times. His popularity plummeted as a result of his shaky handling of the crisis.

Macron has been “deeply unpopular for the lasting part of his presidency,” said Ian Shields, a lecturer at Cambridge University. As a result, he is “pushing himself forward as the spokesperson of the EU itself.” This strategy, as indicated by the aforementioned polls, seems mostly successful, but the divide between French citizens and European politicians goes much deeper than quantitative measurements. 

II. France in the EU

With geopolitical animosity running high between great powers, it is logical for Macron to set his sights on the EU, a body that seeks to unify Europe’s diverse voices and interests. Realistically, France is currently incapable of asserting global supremacy on its own. “French nationalists who live in the myth of a fantastical France, capable of defending herself on her own, live in an illusion,” said Jérémie Gallon, Managing Director and Head of McLarty Europe and Adjunct Professor at Sciences Po. The most conspicuous example of a candidate upholding French nationalism for the 2022 election is Eric Zeimmour, whose slogan declares that France was “better before.” He believes that France is still capable of global superiority as one of history’s greatest powers and that its influence has been sapped by globalist forces. Unfortunately, the reality of the current world order seems to suggest otherwise. “To defend our citizens on the ground, we will have to work through Europe as a whole,” said Gallon.

France’s dwindling influence on the international stage is indisputably tied to the shock brought about by World War II. A quick Nazi occupation following a disorganized defence left France operating at 40% of its industrial and agricultural capacity after the war. The country was hit by disease and a lack of internal cooperation as one part of the country was run by the Vichy government. France’s domestic strength suffered an alarming blow, but its colonial possessions abroad continued to supply a steady flow of resources. These did not last long, though. The bloody Algerian War of Independence, which disgusted French citizens after the government resorted to brutal measures to maintain control over the North African state, was one of many examples of France’s declining influence abroad. At the same time, the United States swelled in power and left France in its shadow, along with many other European countries.

To avoid future international conflicts and atrocities, France signed the 1948 Brussels Treaty, leading the effort to create a united European front with Western Germany. The UK was hesitant to accept the supranational norms imposed by the EU and only joined in 1973 (though it had to overcome two French vetoes since it proposed a competitive alternative to France’s control over the EU). Since then, France has fallen to third place in terms of European GDP behind Germany’s heavy industry and the UK, which recently made it clear that it did not see a future in the EU.

The rise of the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War initiated a bipolar moment with Europe on the sidelines. China then replaced the Russian bloc, pitting itself against a struggling American economy. France has been largely excluded from this framework because she brings little to the table. She does not have the economic clout of the United States or China, lacks desirable natural resources like those Russia has, and has not seen consistent leadership like Germany’s Merkel for the past few decades.

Consequently, Macron is working to spearhead a new form of unity between European countries to revive the days of worldwide influence. “I think Macron is trying to reestablish the place of France, and perhaps of Europe, in international diplomacy and avert conflict in Europe’s neighborhood,” said Dr. Marta Lorimer, a London School of Economics Fellow in European Politics.

This initiative comes during a contentious geopolitical moment. “The nature of international relations right now is increasingly based on competition instead of collaboration,” explained Célia Belin, a visiting fellow in the Center on the United States and Europe at the Brookings Institution. “France’s ambitious European political objectives are the only guarantee that she will remain significant.”

Was Macron’s sally to the Kremlin during the Ukrainian crisis, then, like a lone knight in shining armor, the best way to reassert supremacy? Unfortunately, this choice may have actually further exposed the rift between key European powers before they united on the same front after the Russian invasion. Boris Johnson, Macron, and Olaf Scholz, the newly elected German chancellor, all took their turn at negotiating with the Kremlin independently of one another instead of devising a synchronized response to Russian aggression near the beginning of the crisis. Scholz refused to explicitly mention the Nord Stream 2 pipeline while Johnson quickly pulled English embassy staff from Ukraine. Macron, on the other hand, proposed an entirely new system of framing European alliances which would bring Russia closer to current EU members to avoid rancorous relations with the Kremlin. This is in line with his 2019 remark saying that NATO is close to experiencing a “brain death” and is in need of vigilant reform. 

According to Belin, Macron’s excursion to Russia “was personal diplomacy. It’s the symbol of his foreign policy doctrine… one of his typical diplomatic moves.” The Kremlin’s stance budged very little despite the length of their negotiations, but Macron nonetheless brought France back to the table of affairs. In doing so, he was also able to monitor domestic popularity in the months leading up to the election. His independent approach may be partly explained by his desire to “further [test] the ground of French public opinion to see whether or not he would stand the chance of a second term,” explained Shields.

III. Citizens: Gravitating Away

When American foreign policy experts consider the urgent question of how the EU should best respond to a crisis like the one developing in Ukraine, it is necessary to examine the direction France is taking. In fact, the country may prove to be a valuable case study for American onlookers. Essentially, both France and the United States struggle with the idea of internal divisions within an overarching alliance. For France, this refers to the disconnect between citizens and the EU. In the U.S., states are increasingly polarized despite identifying with the same federal system.

“New political dynamics from countries across the world are traversing French society as in the United States,” said Gallon, who elaborated on a variety of examples to draw the connection between both countries. First, the people are more polarized as the divide between both ends of the political spectrum has widened. Hit with the wave of populism that elected U.S. President Donald Trump, France has also witnessed more defiance against political institutions and the elite. And finally, both countries have come to the conclusion that meritocracy is failing since it has become increasingly difficult to ascend the social ladder, according to Gallon.

Gallon highlighted the striking dichotomy between ordinary citizens and extensive multinational organizations, particularly in France. He has spoken with many French citizens in small communities to discover how to “create more democracy at the local level.” Many voters are “very attached to their land” and want to become further involved in local initiatives, but don’t feel as if their concerns are represented at the national level, explained Gallon. A devastating January poll which showed that roughly 27% of French citizens support the EU reinforced this idea. 

Indeed, France’s 2021 regional elections represented one of the highest levels of voter abstention of all time. The 2017 French election which brought Macron to power saw low turnout as well, following a similar trend in the United States’ 2016 election. One solution proposed by certain experts to the voter abstention problem is revamping France’s majoritarian, two-round, semi-presidential system.

The candidates who lose in the first round back up those who make it to the second round, or runoff. The majoritarian nature of the electoral cycle means that the winner takes all with no proportional distribution of legislative seats. In addition, the president shares executive power with the prime minister. These three facets of the French electoral system, however, don’t seem to be encouraging voter participation. “In France, there is the feeling that democracy does not work well,” Cautrès said, citing the gilets jaunes protests as an example of popular outcry against a perceived lack of representation. Cautrès explained that since the national election dictates such a large part of French society, citizens are increasingly only casting their vote for the president.

The reason for this drop in regional participation last summer could also be because “people felt there wasn’t much at stake for them,” said Dr. Françoise Boucek, a Visiting Research Fellow at Queen Mary University of London. “They are also confused about the responsibilities of the different tiers of government.” It is absolutely essential for European and American politicians to observe the electoral trends in countries across the world and reinforce regional governments since many citizens feel closely attached to these institutions. With multiple layers of state identity in a country such as France, politicians can address political disconnect by providing outlets for citizens to express their grievances at the local level.

“There is a lot of demand in France for a more direct democracy with the use of the referendum for socioeconomic problems” explained Cautrès. The referendum asks citizens to vote either yes or no on one specific political issue. The UK used this tool to decide whether to break away from the EU. Shields described the referendum “as a sort of legitimization of representative democracy.” 

Electoral reform, however, may not target the root of France’s electoral trends. As in many other developed democracies, social media is a ubiquitous part of French politics and has had a monumental effect on the political behavior of young voters. Adolescents and young adults now have access to a plethora of digital platforms where they can express their viewpoints without necessarily going to the polls. Digitization has thus created its share of benefits and disadvantages. 

Young French voters regularly remain skeptical of French politicians who run for office, choosing to support influencers instead of participating in local elections. This leaves them disillusioned with today’s institutions. Gallon dubbed this the “illusion of horizontality.” He explained that on social media, “everyone has a voice where they can express themself on every subject. If you create this illusion… there will never be a feeling of expertise.” Cautrès expressed concern that there is not enough civil instruction in France. Solving this problem would partly enable users to sort out the unquantifiable amount of information circulating on social media.

On the other hand, social media also encourages the youth to discuss political subjects with people across the world. Shields explained that social media can be used as “an alternative source of discourse [and] as a [way] to re-engage people with politics.” This was especially true during the pandemic, when online platforms were the only way for French citizens to engage with civic initiatives.

“There is a crisis of traditional left-right political parties in France,” said Belin. She explained that Macron replaced the straightforward two-party system with La Republique en Marche! in the 2017 election in a way that left an “ideological void” for young voters. France’s center-right party got caught up in a scandal before the election while parties further to the left and right failed to garner citizens’ votes because of their occasionally extreme stances on certain issues. Starting as a movement, Macron’s party assembled voters from across the ideological spectrum who were not sure where to cast their ballot. This triumphant path to the presidency, however, has left the French wondering what exactly they are supporting by voting for Macron a second time.

If he wins the 2022 election, it will not be because of any new widely respected ideological reforms introduced during his first term, but rather as a result of his personal competence, Belin believes. As a result, far-right parties have stepped in as an alternative option for young French voters since they offer a concrete ideology. “Whatever we think of their ideas, far-right parties bring radical ideas that propose to change the world as we know it,” Belin said. The expansion of the president’s powers has not helped. Young voters feel disempowered and generally have the impression that the state will continue along its present trajectory, which is not cultivating a thriving civil democratic society, according to Belin. However, due to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, it is highly unlikely that the general French electorate will choose a new president during a turbulent international crisis. Maintaining consistent leadership will most likely supersede domestic concerns, especially when opposing candidates have been marred in controversy following their past support of Putin.

IV. Why France Matters

For readers who have grown used to the great power dialogue that has been repeated in the news for the past few years, France may initially seem like an obscure country on the international stage. However, a supportive middle power can turn the tables of international relations in unforeseen ways. France is the U.S.’s third largest trading partner, making it crucial for Washington to uphold strong diplomatic ties with the country. In addition, France is one of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, which makes her a key player in the fight to combat terrorism and guarantee human rights. As a central member of NATO, France contributes troops and resources to a multilateral organization that has supported democratic ideals and resisted authoritarian pressure along the Eastern European front.

Alongside these economic and political considerations, it is important for the United States to observe the trends in one of its closest allies. France and the United States have undergone similar transformations and have been faced with almost identical obstacles: protests, voter disillusionment, and social disparities, among others. With a 1-2 year delay between their elections, the United States can learn from France and vice-versa. 

As France seeks to balance its domestic concerns with its international responsibilities as a critical member of vast multinational organizations like NATO and the EU, the United States can apply the lessons that its European ally learns to its own federal system. If voters in France, especially those in younger demographic groups, are not present in their local elections, there is a chance that this trend will carry over to the United States. For Americans to regain confidence in democratic institutions, policy makers must address the detachment that is already being felt in countries across the Atlantic, and France may prove to be a crucial example.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *