The boxes had to be packed in a matter of hours. Goodbye to the bright offices of the most modern wing of the European Parliament, the Macronists had to move to the main, older building. In Brussels, the political groups with the most elected representatives choose their base before the others. However, after the European elections, the centrists of Renew have tumbled from third to fifth place, overtaken by two far-right groups. The atmosphere is all the more gloomy as the 13 survivors of the French delegation will have to part with some of their administrative staff. Ten fewer elected representatives compared to 2019 means fewer human and financial resources… but also less political weight – in the Chamber as well as in the backroom negotiations.
Valérie Hayer knows this well. Since her election as president of the group on June 25, the MEP has been struggling to save face and prevent her political rivals from taking over the positions sought by her members. The battle is tough. On Wednesday, July 10, in the evening, the former head of Emmanuel Macron’s list, who had invited the press for a drink, arrived more than an hour late. The reason? A very tense meeting with Manfred Weber, her counterpart from the European People’s Party (EPP).
In theory an ally of the centrists, the powerful Bavarian did not hesitate to do business, behind their backs, with the nationalists of the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) party. As a result, the powerful Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, the one that, in the previous term, produced the ten texts of the Asylum and Migration Pact, will escape the Macronists. And it will probably not be the only one. “The EPP and the Social Democrats treat us like juniors”, fulminated a representative of Renew, this July 15, between two interviews.
From the Sorbonne to the rout
The contrast with 2019 is cruel. Five years ago, MEPs Renaissance, Horizon and Modem triumphed in the European Parliament, with an arrogance that did not earn them many friends. But they were then carried by the aura of a Europhile president admired throughout the continent. This allowed France, for several years, to set the tone in Brussels. Just a few weeks ago, the French were leading two parliamentary committees, including the environment committee, as well as the defense subcommittee. From common debt to finance the post-Covid recovery to the definition of a common industrial policy, French impulses have strongly colored European orientations. Who, today, is questioning the concept of strategic autonomy developed by Emmanuel Macron in 2017, during his speech at the Sorbonne?
Except that since then, there have been European and legislative defeats. And the Brussels jungle does not like losers. “Macron, how many divisions?” ask his political opponents. “Here, everyone knows that the French president no longer has a majority. He has lost three elections in a row and, in Europe, his political family is in crisis. This weakens him enormously,” snaps the Dutch conservative MEP Dirk Gotink. While it is still early to assess the extent of the damage – the battle for key functions continues until the end of July in the European Parliament – there are fears in Paris of a loss of French influence in the institutions and with the 26 other European capitals. The fault, of course, lies with this dissolution which has “put France’s partners on the brink of the abyss”, according to one of them. And while the decline of the National Rally in the second round has caused general relief, the uncertainties raised by the political chaos remain great.
Of course, this is not the first time in France that a French president has had to share his power in Brussels with an opposition prime minister. But beware, any comparison with previous cohabitations is risky, stresses Pierre Vimont, permanent representative in Brussels during the Chirac-Jospin “coupling” (1997-2002). “At the time, the government had an absolute majority in the National Assembly, and therefore a certain stability,” he says. “This is no longer the case. Our European partners can therefore fear that the two actors in the executive – president and government – are so taken up with domestic politics that they can no longer act effectively in Brussels.”
Macron inaudible
Will France’s voice become hoarse? In any case, it risks losing its strength: in addition to political instability, there is a major budgetary crisis. Placed in excessive deficit procedure by the Commission, France must present a credible recovery plan by October. Will it manage to get back below the 3% deficit mark, as the Attal government had promised to do? Nothing is less certain. How could Paris, under these conditions, continue to play its role as an incubator of ideas? What will become, for example, of the 100 billion loan project for European defense, supported by Emmanuel Macron? What about his desire to double the community budget? “The French president is becoming inaudible on the ideas of a European loan, because France is not repaying its own debt,” asserts the former French ambassador to Brussels, Pierre Sellal. How can you be credible when you don’t control your public accounts?” “In Paris as in Brussels, no one knows whether there will be a government next October, that is to say when Paris presents its budget to the Commission, adds Dirk Gotink. France could then find itself in conflict with Europe…”
A bad scenario for the Twenty-Seven, who could find themselves deprived of the driving force of France, while the geopolitical context demands a strong Europe, capable of making rapid decisions, and Germany is struggling with its coalition problems. Since the German government has had three partners, its inability to position itself in Brussels on strategic texts has become chronic. “This abstention is a sign of weakness, which weakens Germany and Europe”, criticizes the German Christian Democrat Norbert Röttgen. “At the same time, the political impasse in which France finds itself risks reducing the potential of its contributions”, continues the former president of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Bundestag.
Playing cards
Too bad, because for the French, there was a card to play. “Neither Germany nor Italy are the driving forces; Spain is concentrating on defending its interests and Poland is struggling in its complicated cohabitation,” laments a European diplomat. This abysmal void explains why eyes have never stopped – until now – turning towards France when a sensitive subject was discussed in the Council rooms. “France annoys, but the others are counting on it,” sums up a French source.
Is Paris now doomed to disappoint? Everything will depend on the outcome of the political transfer window. But also on the ability of the French camp to adapt to this new situation. How? First, by displaying a united front towards other Europeans. Emmanuel Macron will have to coordinate with the government to remain credible towards his counterparts. “There would be nothing worse than a president who would make decisions that were then disavowed during the meetings of the Ministers of the Twenty-Seven. He would lose all credibility in the Council”, warns Pierre Sellal, who headed Hubert Védrine’s cabinet at Foreign Affairs during the 1997-2002 cohabitation. The risk of dissonance is real, but fortunately, France has safeguards. And, in particular, a strong administration. Today, the transmission belts between Paris and those who defend French interests in Brussels work very well. Arbitrations between ministries are made in advance, which allows for clear positions and speaking with one voice.
To avoid cacophony in the future, our decision-makers could look to our neighbours, many of whom are experienced in these balancing acts. Accustomed to complex coalitions, Belgium has thus set in stone the process that allows the country’s positions on community issues to be established. Ahead of European meetings, civil servants, ministers and diplomats meet in “loyalty jirga”, from the name of this Afghan assembly where crucial decisions are made. They discuss until they reach an agreement. It is then up to the Belgian ambassador to the EU to ensure that the ministers do not deviate from the chosen line. “This Belgian-Belgian debate serves as a trial run for European negotiations. We are then well trained to defend our points of view!” says François Roux, former Belgian representative to the EU.
Luckily, the French air pocket occurs during the European interregnum. The institutions are in the process of being renewed. The machine for producing legislation will not be running at full speed for a few months, perhaps the time to remove some of the uncertainties in Paris. In recent months, France has, in any case, laid the groundwork in advance. “Our diplomacy has weighed on the choices of the holders of key European positions. We know the teams of Antonio Costa, Kaja Kallas and Ursula von der Leyen very well. This will allow for smooth working relations,” they emphasize in Paris. Moreover, if the second term of the President of the Commission is validated by the European Parliament on July 18, a former European advisor to the Elysée should become her deputy chief of staff. “Everything suggests that the priorities for the next five years will correspond to what we have been pushing for months,” believes a French source. And Thierry Breton was pre-positioned by Emmanuel Macron for a vice-presidency of the Commission in charge of strategic economic issues.
“Europe knows what we owe you, we need France and all the French people,” pleaded the President of the European Parliament, Roberta Metsola, guest of honour at the reception on 14 July at the Palais des Beaux-Arts in Brussels. “We know that we can count on you to move forward. This is your role, singular and unique,” concluded the Maltese in the language of Molière in front of an audience that was necessarily understood. A compliment that strongly resembles a plea. But will France, which sees itself as an indispensable nation in Europe, be there?
.