• Українська
  • Русский
  • English
Where there is no law, but every man does what is right in his own eyes, there is the least of real liberty
Henry M. Robert

After Fillon’s victory at France’s primary elections: what is to expect

29 November, 2016 - 13:05
NOVEMBER 27, 2016. FRANCOIS FILLON (R), FORMER FRENCH PRIME MINISTER, AND ALAIN JUPPE, CURRENT MAYOR OF BORDEAUX, SHAKE HANDS AFTER THE RESULTS IN THE SECOND ROUND FOR THE FRENCH CENTER-RIGHT PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY ELECTION IN PARIS, FRANCE. FILLON, A SOCIALLY CONSERVATIVE FREE-MARKETEER, IS TO BE THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE OF THE FRENCH CENTRE-RIGHT IN THE NEXT YEAR’S ELECTION, ACCORDING TO PARTIAL RESULTS OF A PRIMARIES’ SECOND-ROUND VOTE SHOWED ON SUNDAY / REUTERS photo

On November 27 conservative primary elections in France, the victory of former Prime Minister was overwhelming and clear. With  two third of the voters favoring Francois Fillon, the choice was clear and not contestable. Without the 600,000 voters from the left backing him, his contender Alain Juppe would even had a worse score. We must be clear on the meaning of the results: Mr. Fillon truly encapsulates the genuine yearnings and claims of a major part of the conservative electorate. Firstly, we are witnessing, not only in France, a move towards more rightist positions, and Francois Fillon succeeded in giving them a voice. His stances against same-sex marriage, his personal view on abortion – which he didn’t considered as “fundamental,” his praise for family values, that both the moderate conservatives and the left oppose, are enshrined in a significant part of the conservative side of the political spectrum. Even if different, we observe such a new worrying mood in the US, the UK, Poland, Hungary, and many other countries. Secondly, his economic and social program met the expectations of many French people, especially the entrepreneurs and farmers, that wanted to get rid of a high level of taxes, the “burden” of the civil service, and strong labor regulations that, in their views, are impediments that block initiative, investment, and hence employment. Fillon’s program was more radical that Juppe’s, and they think it could lead to a major shift of France’s economy and social policy. Even if the conservatives, when it comes to the “family values,” are not the same that the ones who favor major economic reforms, Francois Fillon was able to create the synthesis of those two potentially divergent priorities. It could then explain that a large part of the electorate was more convinced by Mr. Fillon than by Mr. Juppe or Mr. Sarkozy. Once the latter ousted after the first round, most of the Sarkozy’s voters turn to Fillon who was able more than Juppe to incarnate their willingness of a right-turn in France’s politics. Then, Juppe’s electorate shrank dramatically.

Expectedly, a greater part of the electorate does not paid a real attention to Francois Fillon’s positions over Russia. As in many countries, they do not care about foreign and international policy, and decide according to the candidates’ positions on domestic issues. Of course, some of the conservative voters are traditionally worshiping strongmen, and are also influenced by an ancient anti-US mood that could explain a lot. Many do not see Russia as a threat and because of the pervasive Russian propaganda think that Moscow is a shield against terrorism. They of course don’t know about Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the annexation of Crimea. This is not to say that most of the voters are backing Fillon’s stance on Russia, but they do not know what they concretely mean. Some part of the voters may have been sensible too to the willingness of Mr. Fillon to lift the sanctions on Russia over Ukraine because of the damages to the industry and the agriculture of France. The perception of Russia is obviously not the same in France than it is in the Baltic States, Romania, and Poland.

But as I often expressed in Den/The Day, Fillon’s support to Putin’s Russia and Assad’s regime, if he is elected, could be a true danger for France’s security and Europe’s future, and of course for the capacity of Ukraine to fight back Russia’s invasion, and political and economic pressures. Mr. Putin took the time to praise his friend “Francois” after the first round, and after the results of the second run, Kremlin’s officials celebrated this victory. Mr. Fillon truly embraces indeed Russia’s propaganda and pastes the Kremlin’s narratives on the humiliation of Russia and Syria’s Assad. His re-engagement with Russia would undermine Europe’s cohesiveness on both sanctions and information war against Russia’s propaganda that has been recently reinforced in the EU. It could furthermore endanger the French-German couple which is the traditional core of the European project. Being himself a French Euro-skeptic – he combated the Maastricht Treaty in 1992, he is not praising that much the European values, and also intends to modify the European Convention on Human Rights or even to withdraw France from the European Court of Justice because of its decisions favoring gay rights. So, to say the least Europe’s future would be at high risk, and Europe’s common security truly jeopardized.

Hence, one often wonders if there is any chance to prevent Mr. Fillon to win the presidential election, and to belie the prophecy of a second round opposing Ms. Le Pen to him. Let’s be clear on this: if there is such a second round, there would be a true window of opportunity for Ms. Le Pen, and she could win. Many voters from the left and the center would vote for none of those two candidates. Some very leftist voters, moved by an anti-establishment behavior, could prefer the Front National’s candidate. Some of the electorate of former president Sarkozy could also turn to Marine Le Pen. The issue of the second round would then become unpredictable. Accordingly, the true challenge is for the democratic left and the centrists to unite, and thus to attract some Juppe’s supporters. But would it be possible? If Emmanuel Macron or Manuel Valls are candidates, it’s still not sure that they would be favored by a major part of the socialist voters because they are too much free-markets oriented. On the other side, with talking about Jean-Luc Melenchon the radical left leader who will run at any case, neither Arnaud Montebourg nor Benoit Hamon – left side of the Socialist Party, imitating Corbyn’s position in the UK – could be really attractive to the centrist voters. It would then mean that the centrist leader, Francois Bayrou, could be candidate. He would attract a great part of the Juppe’s backers, but not the socialists. President Francois Hollande seems to be the only one who is able to build a true “synthesis,” but he isn’t very popular according to the opinion polls, and has many contenders within the Socialist Party, which is unprecedented for a President. So, the game is fairly open and the left and the centrists should be aware that they have a historical responsibility and duty to save, protect, and illustrate liberal values, open society, Europe’s future, and the world security. They are at stake now, and if France becomes the sick man of Europe, it would be a tragedy for all.

Nicolas Tenzer is the chairman of the Center for Study and Research on Political Decision (CERAP)

By Nicolas TENZER
Rubric: