Bastille Day in Paris is an opportunity for the powers-that-be in France to strut their stuff, and 2014 is no exception. The French president reviews the armed forces detailed to the ceremony, who are lined up from the Arc de Triomphe to the Place de la Concorde. He does so standing up in an open car, with the French equivalent of the Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff standing next to him. When he reaches the reviewing stand at the Place de la Concorde he joins the other dignitaries and listens to an elite armed force choir, which does a neat bit of choreography visible from the air, and broadcast on millions of French TV screens. The ceremony ends with a designated singer (Florian Marconi, this year) belting out "La Marseillaise" as the French air patrol (La Patrouille de France) flies over Paris, red, white and blue streamers of smoke decorating the skyline.
After that, traditionally, the president gives an interview from the Elysée, although during the campaign last year, Hollande said another place might be more conducive to a freer exchange between the president and journalists. A year later, Hollande arranged to be interviewed by Claire Chazal of Telefrance 1 and Laurent Delahousse of France 2 in the Elysée Palace gardens, a decision said to have been taken by Hollande to turn media attention away from Nicolas Sarkozy, whose speech to UMP leaders last Monday, has created a firestorm of press attention.
If Hollande thought that the prospect of interviewing the French head of state on live television from the Elysée would intimidate his inquisitors, he was very much mistaken. The economy was the first and only topic aside from a few detours about Delphine Batho, Minister for Ecology, bounced a few days ago; and Manuel Valls, the visibly ambitious Minister of the Interior. Laurent Delahousse wanted to know whether taxes on the middle class would increase next year, a question Hollande tried to parry by saying that the government would continue to cut expenses to the greatest extent possible. Delahousse persisted, and Hollande again tried to parry by talking about the increases in the "wealth tax", a tax on incomes over 1M Euros that at the highest end, taxes at 75%.
Hadn't he taxed the wealthiest, whose capital, a magazine recently reported, had increased in value 25% last year? He wasn't trying to spoliate these fortunes, but he wanted the very wealthy to show solidarity with the rest of France.
What about the reforms of the government's role in the economy Hollande said he would make if elected?
The system has to be reformed, Hollande pursued. The job market, particularly the system of retirement benefits, has to be made over: as people are living longer, they will have to contribute longer to have the same benefits.
Turning to a more sensitive question, did Hollande fear the return of Nicolas Sarkozy to public life?
"I have so much to think about from day-to-day, that I do not have time to think about him" came the rejoinder.
What about the lack of confidence a majority of French feel about the country's future?
"We are the most pessimistic country in the world" came the answer.
Finally, the president was asked whether, were an Islamic party to be founded in France, would it be compatible with democracy. "No religion is incompatible with democracy", Hollande asserted.
The interview lasted thirty-six minutes. Hollande, dressed in a navy blue suit and tie, no doubt tailored very well, is nonetheless unprepossessing. Balding and bespectacled, he resembles a middle-aged insurance salesman for whom the business lunches hold no small part of the appeal of the job. Indeed, the former député (representative) from Corrèze in central France is known to enjoy a good meal in the French tradition. He is said to be steady, affable and witty, perhaps too content to lead a country that wants to continue to be thought of as a great power (Hollande repeatedly said in the interview that France was a "great" country), but needs major structural reforms bring down a 10.4% unemployment rate, and to stanch a 450 billion Euro deficit.
***
François Hollande may be too busy solving France's problems to be concerned, let alone afraid of Nicolas Sakozy's return to politics, but for François Fillon, his former boss is proving a major thorn in Fillon's side. Fillon is said to have smarted at pointed public rebukes contained in Sarkozy's speech to UMP leaders last Monday, although he is a man too emotionally disciplined to let it show. Rather, close allies have begun to poke holes in Sarkozy's remarks, pointing out that the former president talked about "big picture" issues, while making no mention of the UMP's enormous campaign debt, a debt created by Sarkozy's losing race for a second quinquennat.
In fact, Fillon is said to have commented that Sarkozy introduced no new ideas, just warmed-over ones. Fillon was indispensable to Sarkozy, softening, with his dignified and ever-so-polite manner, Sarkozy's "Energizer Bunny" persona. French Presidents often sacrifice their Prime Ministers, making them the fall guys for policies that failed. Jacques Chirac fired Dominique de Villepin when the latter's plan for lowering unemployment by creating more jobs for youth was pilloried. Sarkozy reshuffled his cabinet more than once, but he kept Fillon, who was his partner in power.
It is easy to understand why Fillon is rattled by Sarkozy's reappearance. First of all, Sarkozy lost the election. True, had Marine le Pen of the Front Nationale not run, enough of her voters would have voted for Sarkozy to put him over the top. However, ex-Presidents of France are supposed to make a dignified exit, with honors easing their retirement, along with elder statesman status.
Nicolas Sarkozy wants neither, but what he really wants is anyone's guess. To pull the strings, probably, to be a kingmaker, to make his former vassals pledge allegiance once more, even if he knows deep inside he can't be the candidate again. Fillon, who definitely knows what he wants --to be the candidate of the center-right in 2017, has created an organization, Force Republicain, to raise money and structure his eventual campaign.
Fillon finds himself in the position of a man who should be the logical choice of his party, but finds the way littered with obstacles. A distinguished public servant whose public remarks and demeanor are always appropriate to the occasion, Fillon is fighting off challenges, on the one side from Sarkozy, and the other Jean-François Copé, the first secretary of the UMP. Copé is a provocateur, who has taken positions not so far removed from those of Marine Le Pen and the Front National, in an effort to siphon off votes. Copé is no shrinking violet: his father once told a reporter that he thanked God that France had been given his son. Copé is ardent, where Fillon is unruffled.
Fillon is perhaps temperamentally ill-suited to what will be a rough-and-tumble campaign for the nomination of France's center-right voters. He is said to dislike networking via the telephone, which means that sometimes allies find out things they ought to have been told directly through intermediaries like the press. Laurent Wauquiez, a telegenic junior minister in Fillon's cabinet, is one who has distanced himself from Fillon out of frustration with Fillon's mandarin style, and complaints about it are not limited to him.
Copé is a frontal politician who likes confrontation. In response to the gay marriage bill enacted by the French legislature, Copé led a demonstration in opposition. Perhaps to Fillon's credit, rather than march in the demonstration, Fillon went to a road rally.
***
This week the French legislature voted an end to the cumul des mandats. Rather than try to explain it, I will quote Art Goldhammer, a distinguished French translator and student of French politics. Goldhammer's blog, French Politics, is an opinionated, but informed and detailed review of French political life. In his January 16, 2013 post Goldhammer said this about the cumuli des mandate:
As long as I have been involved in the study of French politics, I have been hearing about the reform to end all reforms: the banning of the cumul des mandats. It is telling indeed that French has a phrase for the holding of multiple offices that rolls so trippingly off the tongue, whereas any English circumlocution gives the reader pause. Is le cumul des mandats simply illegal in, say, the United States? I doubt that any law exists that would prevent someone from serving simultaneously as, for instance, Mayor of Indianapolis and representative in Congress. It's just that it's-well, not the done thing.
In France, however, it is not only the done thing; it is practically a necessity of political life. If a man or woman wants to be a player at the national level, it's essential to have a local power base with patronage powers that can be used to groom a loyal staff, a cadre of backers, and bridges to important resources in civil society. Banning le cumul would indeed constitute a major reform, just because it would disrupt so many vested interests. Whether it would achieve any useful goal beyond altering the status quo has never been so clear to me as to the idea's many staunch supporters. Would the quality of representation be increased? If so, why? Might reform not widen the distance between the national and local levels and therefore have the opposite of the desired effect?
That day has now come, with the double mandate (as it is known in English-speaking countries) now threatened. Of course the cumul des mandats (which is as old as the French revolution) violates a concept dear to Americans: the tripartite division of government functions, with a separate legislature, executive and judiciary. That concept of separation of powers was the brainchild of a Frenchman, Montesquieu, who said, famously:
"If we only wanted to be happy, it would be easy; but we want to be happier than other people, which is almost always difficult, since we think them happier than they are." (Auden and Kronenberger 1966)
and,
"Success generally depends upon knowing how long it takes to succeed." (Auden and Kronenberger 1966)
The end of the cumul des mandats, and the success envisioned for the reform may take longer than François Hollande and the reform's backers think. Perhaps in part because the reformers envision the repudiation of the system leading to a new class of elected officials happy to line up for places the former holders of more than one office enjoyed. In practice, the reality may prove quite different.
No comments:
Post a Comment