The French political conundrum is sure to influence the EU political arena. A cohabitation or minority government could slow down French commitments on fiscal issues and other urgent measures. Will the Franco-German axis hold?
These French legislative elections will have an impact on EU policy in the years to come.
The victory of the far right, the electoral defeat of President Emmanuel Macron’s majority and the success of the newly formed New Popular Front after the first round of elections last Sunday have created dilemmas over the composition of the next French government, in particular over its ability to stick to a constructive European policy.
Forced cohabitation between Macron and a Prime Minister of another political colour or a minority government are two solutions which would hardly reassure France’s partners within the European Union, particularly Germany.
However, this would not be the first time that France has experienced a cohabitation between a president and a prime minister from rival parties.
This has already happened three times. Between 1986 and 1988, the president was the socialist François Mitterrand, and the prime minister the neo-Gaullist Jacques Chirac, who was not really a Euro-enthusiast at the time.
Despite the rather conflictual relations regarding the competences of the President and the Prime Minister in matters of international and European policy, France ended up cooperating successfully with its partners in the European Community of the time to create the single market.
Mitterrand defeated his rival Chirac in the 1988 elections.
Mitterrand also presided over the second cohabitation between 1993 and 1995, with the neo-Gaullist Édouard Balladur as Prime Minister.
The president was a socialist and the prime minister a conservative, but they rarely clashed, especially on European political issues. Mitterrand being ill, this second cohabitation came at the end of his last term and his political career.
Then, between 1997 and 2002, France entered a new period of cohabitation when Chirac’s conservative camp lost the legislative elections after a tactical dissolution of Parliament. Chirac remained president and the socialist Lionel Jospin became prime minister after winning a parliamentary majority with the Plural Left, a coalition including the Communists and the Greens.
The two men are often in conflict. They both attend European summits, creating a kind ofFrench exception where a president and a prime minister of the same country sit together at the round table.
There were constitutional obstacles regarding the division of powers between the head of state and the government on foreign and European policy issues and a constant electoral campaign between Chirac and Jospin. Nevertheless, the French cohabitation of 1997-2002 contributed to the launch of the euro, the creation of two important European treaties (Amsterdam in 1997 and Nice in 2000) and the start of negotiations for the largest enlargement in the history of the EU.
Why would cohabitation be different this time?
First of all, there is a deep ideological divide. At present, the role of radical parties is more important than in the past and the political arena is deeply polarized.
In the event of cohabitation, the pro-EU liberal Emmanuel Macron will have to share decisions relating to France’s political orientations either with the extreme right, if the National Rally obtains an absolute majority on Sunday July 7, or with the New Popular Front.
These two political forces are far from being traditional parties. And the room for maneuver for presidential action in the event of cohabitation is politically and technically limited.
“A particularity of this cohabitation, compared to the three previous ones, is that once the government is in place, it knows that Macron will not be able to provoke a new dissolution of the National Assembly before the summer of 2025. This therefore really limits the power of the president over the prime minister, because Macron will not be able to press the nuclear button of dissolution again to block the prime minister, at least for a year.“, explains to Euronews Sébastien Maillard, analyst at the Jacques-Delors Foundation, based in Paris.
Furthermore, the President and the Prime Minister would not necessarily be able to attend European summits together. reserved domain is a French practice that allows the president to manage foreign policy, but it is not a constitutional prerogative. Participation in international summits could therefore be a cause of conflict between the president and the head of government.
“I can’t imagine Macron giving up his place to the Prime Minister. However, he knows that according to the rules of the European Council, there should only be one person in the room to represent each member state. Macron would keep his seat there, and I think he would express himself strongly there“, says Sébastien Maillard.
Other EU countries could demand the same right. In Poland, for example, there is a cohabitation between the EPP Prime Minister Donald Tusk and the president of Law and Justice (ECR), Mr Duda, two rivals both in the Polish political arena and at EU level.
However, will the president’s policies be compatible with the interests of the potential prime minister? All political forces involved in the process will have the 2027 presidential elections as their main objective.
The EU has been a source of much controversy during the Macron years.
The Green Deal, migration legislation and agricultural reforms are all European policies that have not yet been implemented. In the event of cohabitation with a far-right Prime Minister, their adoption could trigger major institutional and political conflicts within French institutions, which would put the European process in a deadlock.
“There could be more than just disagreements with the Commission. It would be a bit of an Orban attitude, especially if the possible far-right government does not respect the primacy of European law over national law.” explains Sébastien Maillard.
The budget issue could be a difficult test for the next government
The European Commission last week opened the way for an excessive deficit procedure against France and six countries including Italy and Belgium.
According to Eurostat, France’s public deficit increased from 4.8% of GDP in 2022 to 5.5% in 2023.
The EU’s executive body said public finance efforts have been adequate so far to contain public debt, but France still needs to make efforts.
This sounds like a warning against possible future governmental instability. Public finance issues could become a source of tension between the weakened presidential majority and a right-wing or left-wing government.
The French political crisis linked to a troubled cohabitation with the left or the right or a minority government seeking random votes in parliament could delay some key reforms and policies regarding the EU’s economic and monetary strategies in the years to come. According to Wouters Wolf, professor of European politics at the Catholic University of Louvain: “A lot of investment will be needed in Europe in the coming years. The question is whether European leaders will have the courage to make these investments and find mechanisms, money to ensure these investments..”
“If you have leaders who are under pressure in their own country, who are also under pressure in terms of budget, financial resources, particularly in France, they will respond to an expectation with a lot of political uncertainty, which will put pressure on French public finances..”
Policies to revive the EU economy will require more public investment in many sectors, from the defence industry to high-tech manufacturing to the environment. To finance such ambitious policies, the EU will need to change its public finance model.
EU Member States, particularly France and Germany, will have to strengthen their traditional cooperation within the EU framework.
Is such a compromise and a common position still possible in a political environment where the German and French governments are under pressure? Will German Chancellor Olaf Scholz make concessions when he feels threatened by other parties in the regional elections?
“A government of technocrats could indeed depoliticize some of these issues, and perhaps take responsibility for some of the reforms that need to be done, and I think that would then be the best scenario. The problem is, of course, that France does not necessarily have such a tradition. The question is to what extent this is possible. It will only be possible after a few months of instability and inability to find a political solution. But ultimately, this could be the best scenario for France and for Europe as a whole.” concludes Wouters Wolf.