E-Notes

The Relevance of France’s Presidential Election

By Jean-Loup Archawski

May 8, 2007

Jean-Loup Archawski is a French citizen who has lived in the United States for thirty-nine years. A retired businessman, he is a member of FPRI’s Study Group on America and the West.

On May 6, 2007, 85 percent of the registered voters in France—the largest percent in 40 years—turned out to vote, and 53.06 percent chose Nicolas Sarkozy. The large turnout could indicate the importance given by today’s French electorate to the significance of the powers of the president. It might also express the voters’ hope that Sarkozy will make the changes needed if the country wishes to resume its growth and continue to inspire respect from the international community without tearing apart its social fabric.

The majority of the electorate seems to have turned to Sarkozy because he promised to restore respect for the law, loosen the tax bite to stimulate investment, abrogate labor laws that stifle growth and employment, resubmit a revised Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe which he would submit to Parliamentary ratification instead of risking a new rejection in a referendum, and seek improved relations with the United States.

In today’s international environment one can wonder how much power remains with the French presidency to enforce any political agenda regardless of the character and political affiliation of the personality holding that office. He must be willing to work within the framework of the 1958 constitution of the Fifth Republic, which was approved by 85.1 percent of the votes in a referendum that year. This binds the president to the parliament.

Barring recourse to Article 16 of the constitution, which grants extraordinary powers to the president if the country faces a major threat to its integrity, the president’s agenda requires ratification by the Parliament. Therefore, we must await the June 10 and 17 legislative elections to find out whether Sarkozy will have a parliamentary majority willing to ratify his government’s proposals. It cannot be assumed that the French voters will elect such a majority at those elections. For both the defeated Socialists and ambitious smaller parties of the center have a stake in containing Sarkozy’s victory.

Should the president find the new parliament uncooperative, Article 12 of the Constitution grants him the power to revoke it. Twelve months must pass following the election of a new legislature before such revocation can be repeated. Thus Sarkozy’s real power has yet to be established.

Moreover, the growing influence of EU laws and regulations governing commerce, trade, industry, finance, and justice diminishes the relevance of the executive branches of the national governments of all the EU member countries. Each country’s parliament is becoming essentially a body for ratifying EU law into their own domestic policies. Very gradually over the past fifty years, national governments’ power has been eroded and replaced by the one originating in the Brussels bureaucracy, changing in the process Europe’s political landscape.

Granted, it will still be a while before the EU manages to harmonize the tax and social benefits policies of its member states, but great steps have been achieved in the harmonization of manufacturing and trade, with not one manufactured or agricultural product spared from conforming to the norms established by the Eurocrats.

In France, Sarkozy’s brief tenure as minister of finance (2004–05, in between his two terms as minister of the interior) made him painfully aware of the limitations of power imposed by compliance with the European Treaties. He had to juggle with the financial difficulties of Alstom as he sought to protect this pride of French industry from foreign predators without bending European rules on free trade beyond the breaking point. It will be interesting to observe how he faces this second question of relevance as he addresses the restricted degrees of freedom imposed by France’s EU membership.

It has been argued that subordination to Brussels has not inhibited serious reforms in Germany. After all, former Chancellor Schroeder was able to press the passage of measures unpopular in Brussels through the German Parliament late in his term, measures that are being credited for pulling Germany out of the economic morass in which it was stuck.

Could such a scenario work for Sarkozy? There are two big differences: first, Schroeder realized that his party would lose the next elections and that his political career had come to an end, and second, the German population has a reputation for discipline. Sarkozy may already be starting to focus on his bid for reelection in 2012, and the French population has a reputation for its lack of discipline. Sarkozy’s opponent, Segolene Royal, warned that if Sarkozy were elected there would be riots all over France. Sure enough, the night of the election several cities witnessed the demonstrations of those who refuse to accept the verdict of the polls.

While Sarkozy claims a great friendship for the United States and received a warm congratulatory telephone call by President Bush, the first matter he raised was American cooperation on pollution control, which the Bush administration has opposed from its first day in office when it refused to submit the Kyoto accords for ratification.

To sum up: Sarkozy’s victory at the polls, while it may be interpreted as a mandate for action, faces a further filtering through the French parliamentary elections, the EU regulatory regime, and an uncertain agenda with the United States. Above all, extra-parliamentary action through strikes and civil disturbances will challenge his reform agenda. These tests will come early, and as they did in Jacques Chirac’s first year, they may very well determine whether Sarkozy becomes just another victim of French resistance to change or a statesman of note.

You may forward this email as you like provided that you send it in its entirety, attribute it to the Foreign Policy Research Institute, and include our web address (www.fpri.org). If you post it on a mailing list, please contact FPRI with the name, location, purpose, and number of recipients of the mailing list.

If you receive this as a forward and would like to be placed directly on our mailing lists, send email to FPRI@fpri.org. Include your name, address, and affiliation. For further information, contact Alan Luxenberg at (215) 732-3774 x105.

Become an FPRI member

E-Notes

The Relevance of France’s Presidential Election

Follow FPRI

FPRI Wishes to Thank its 2011 Partners Who help make all our programs possible.

FPRI Wishes to Thank its 2011 Partners
Who help make all our programs possible.