French Election Briefing: Part 2
France makes its conclusive choice on their next leader
On 24 April, the French electorate will finish the job they started two weeks ago and complete the process of electing their president, who will serve for the next five years. While the two candidates in the second round, Emmanuel Macron and Marine Le Pen, are the same ones from the second round in 2017, polling suggests that the wide margin that occurred last time is unlikely to repeat itself. Given the importance of this Sunday’s election, this article will dissect the results from the first round, discuss the key updates in the race from both camps since the 10th of April, and the possible ramifications of either candidate winning. For a more detailed explanation of what Emmanuel Macron and Marine Le Pen stand for, please check out the article linked below.
First Round Results
The results from the first round of voting were both expected and also surprising. At the top, the two finalists received roughly the vote share most pollsters thought they would. Emmanuel Macron, the centrist liberal incumbent, received around 28% of the vote, and his right-wing opponent, Marine Le Pen, ended up bagging 23% of the electorate. What did come as a large shock to pollsters is where the third and fourth place vote-share ended up. In third place, left-wing Jean Luc-Melenchon netted 22% of the vote, far exceeding expectations that had placed him in the 15-19% range. On the other hand, the far-right Eric Zemmour only received 7% of the vote; a lackluster performance considering what polling had indicated. The numerous other parties (mostly center-left but some center-right and far-left ones) ended up receiving a combined vote share of around 20%
Zemmour’s underperformance and Melenchon’s overperformance complicates the second round for Le Pen’s camp. Most Zemmour supporters are expected to transfer to Le Pen for the second round by default; it is, therefore, disappointing for Le Pen that there are not as many of them as were previously thought. While Melenchon voters are not exactly as averse to Le Pen as many might expect (as both Melenchon and Le Pen are populists), it would obviously be a much more difficult task for Le Pen to capture the vote of someone who voted for a leftist than a far-right candidate.
The relationship between Le Pen and Melenchon is further strained by the fact that, at his concession rally, Melenchon urged his voters to not vote for Le Pen, who he categorized as a fascist. While he did not make a recommendation on whether his voters should vote for Macron or simply stay home, the anti-endorsement of Le Pen will seriously dent Le Pen’s efforts to appeal to Melenchon voters, who have a respect for Melenchon very akin to the respect Bernie Sanders supporters within the Democratic Party have for the US senator from Vermont.
The only two candidates to have endorsed Le Pen for the second round are Eric Zemmour and Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, the leader of a minor French nationalist and pro-sovereignty party. The leaders of the center-right, center-left, and green parties have all endorsed Emmanuel Macron, while the Communist Party and most other far-left forces have issued Melenchon-like anti-endorsements urging their voters not to vote for Le Pen.
Considering the totality of the endorsements, the second round is best understood as a battle between Macron and Le Pen for Melenchon’s voters. Opinion polls from mid-April show that a third of Melenchon voters currently plan to vote for Macron, while 16% will vote for Le Pen, and the rest are undecided or are not planning to vote. Le Pen has attempted to flex her populist and anti-globalist credentials, two items that both Le Pen’s and Melenchon’s supporters can agree on, to appeal to these voters. Macron has decided to appeal to the relative ideological proximity between himself and Melenchon, in contrast to Le Pen, and vocalize a shared concern over green issues and fossil fuel usage to pull these voters onboard. Macron is also trying to capitalize on his endorsements from centrist parties to urge the more moderate sections of the electorate to turn out and vote for him.
Marine Le Pen
Marine Le Pen has attempted to steer the election toward foreign policy, a field that she knows where Melenchon voters have a greater affinity for her outlook than Macron’s. In the last few weeks, she has reverted to harder Euroscepticism and has especially taken aim at Germany. Using language that could both appeal to people who think Germany is currently too pro-Russia or too pro-US, she has called for France and Germany to end their military ties, stating that, unlike the Bundeswehr, the French Army’s philosophy is based on “independence, deterrence, and a complete world-class army and industrial model.” She has also called for France to stop backing Germany’s request for a permanent seat on the UN security council.
Clarifying her views on Russia, her new position is best slotted into three points. First, the normalization of ties between France and Russia should happen only once Russia and Ukraine sign a peace agreement-- until then, Russia cannot be a real ally to a western country. Secondly, once Russia and Ukraine sign a peace agreement, France should actively seek out an alliance with Russia in order to weaken Russia-China ties. Le Pen believes that the alliance between Russia and China is the main threat facing Europe, and therefore, it is imperative that France seeks good relations with Russia to keep it closer to Europe than China. Thirdly, while Le Pen doesn’t believe that NATO inherently poses a threat to Russia, she believes that NATO must re-evaluate some measures that make the organization seem imposing from the Russian perspective. To back this up, she is calling for France to re-enter its old phase (from 1966 to 2009) where it remained a NATO member (and would remain subject to Article 5) but not inside its unified command structure. Le Pen hopes this serves as a key symbol that France is not an American lackey and can pursue its own foreign and military policy. Furthermore, it would serve as a message to Russia that France is not involved in any provocative NATO moves that Russia feels threaten its sovereignty. The responses to this have been predictable-- Le Pen supporters say that this position helps enshrine French sovereignty, Macron supporters believe that this gives too easy of a pass to Russia, which is currently facing accusations of war crimes and, more controversially, genocide by Ukrainian, European, and American officials.
An interesting foreign policy remark that Le Pen made recently is “France pleads for the creation of a Palestinian State” and clarified that this state would exist within the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital. A relatively pro-Palestine remark for a French politician to make, many have perceived it as an attempt by Le Pen to bring pro-Palestine Melenchon voters inside her party’s tent. However, this remark has not gone over well with many French Jews, who believe that the timing of the remark (Israel is currently undergoing a wave of Islamist and Palestinian terror attacks) does not help ensure their safety. Le Pen has also run into a controversy over her main second-round campaign poster design (see the cover image of this article) where one of her hands seemingly makes the “OK-sign” (three fingers raised and the thumb and index finger curled together). While innocuous at first, the “OK sign” has been perceived by many to be a dog-whistle to white supremacists. The Jewish supporters’ bloc of Le Pen’s National Rally party have threatened that, if the poster is not pulled out of circulation and redesigned, they will urge right-wing French Jews to vote for Macron.
In addition, French prosecutors have announced that they are investigating a report from the EU’s European Anti-Fraud Office that accuses Ms. Le Pen, and her party associates, of having embezzled hundreds of thousands of euros during her tenure as a Member of the European Parliament (MEP). She is specifically accused of misusing funds allotted for MEP duties by using them to benefit companies close to her own national party-- something that is illegal to do. While the reports state that they do not believe that Le Pen used any of the funds to directly enrich herself, the investigation is still a blemish on the Le Pen campaign. Ms. Le Pen denies any wrongdoing and has accused the French prosecutors of being politically motivated based on the timing of the investigation.
While opposition to immigration and muti-culturalism have traditionally been the bread and butter of Le Pen’s appeal, they almost feel like an after-thought in the last two weeks of the race. One of the only times Le Pen focused on these issues are some of her recent comments for her continued support of the ban on women wearing headscarves in public. She has defended it on feminist grounds and has pointed to previous moves by the leaders of Tunisia and Turkey to show that even secularists in Islamic countries recognize the importance of banning headscarves.
However, Le Pen, in a considerable faux pas at a recent rally, seemed to have confused Algeria and Tunisia around their respective presidential policies on women’s headscarves leading many to ridicule her knowledge of North Africa. Many voters believe that it is an important thing for a French president to have detailed knowledge of North Africa considering the close and tenuous relationships between France and the area.
Between the first and second rounds, Le Pen’s strategy has been tailored to bring Melenchon voters to her side. However, Melenchon’s anti-endorsement, as well as questions surrounding party unity, corruption, ties to Russia, and her seeming lack of detailed knowledge of some key core issues have threatened to impede that mission.
Emmanuel Macron
Macron’s strategy has been three-fold: attempting to dispel his previous narrative of wanting to be a ‘Jupiterian” president, trying to present himself as the leader of a broad front against fascism, and appealing to his left by bringing a strong focus on the environment and green issues. On the first count, Macron’s campaign has adopted the slogans “Avec Vous” (with you) and “Nous Tous” (all of us) in an attempt to place Macron firmly with the masses, not above them. These slogans have made their way onto recognizable posters that are plastered all over the country. On the second issue, Macron has touted his diverse set of endorsements to show that he is a uniting figure who can rally the country against the fascist-adjacent Le Pen (as many in Macron’s party view Zemmour as a fascist).
In terms of substantive policy, Macron’s biggest claim has probably been his environmental plan, which he has called “green planning” in what is a clear attempt to harken back to “central planning.” In order to make France more environmentally conscious, Macron has announced his intention to make France the first major nation to stop using coal, oil, and gas entirely as energy sources. To replace these sources, Macron hopes to
Build six proposed new nuclear sites (adding to the currently 56 operational plants in the country)
Open exploratory committees to investigate where a further eight new sites could be built safely
Increase France’s solar energy capacity by ten-fold
Commission 50 new wind farms in the seas around France
Insulate 700,000 more homes
Macron has argued that this policy will be a win-win, as not only would it dramatically reduce France’s carbon footprint, but it would also reduce dependence on Russian oil-- albeit an energy source that France currently is not really dependent on (70.6% of French energy comes from domestic nuclear production), unlike some of its other European neighbors. However, today, France does use some Russian oil to heat homes and help run its transportation sector. Many on the left remain tentative about this, as they are wary of nuclear energy and the outsized role it already currently plays. However, when compared to Le Pen’s insistence that French usage of fossil fuels is nothing to be concerned about, many on the left also do appreciate Macron’s willingness to think big on this issue.
The Debate
Earlier this week, both candidates went head to head in a two-and-a-half hour marathon debate. With a strong focus on the economy by both candidates, Le Pen sought to present her economic plans as being fresh and innovative, while Macron sought to skewer her ideas by painting her as having little practical economic knowledge as compared to himself. However, Macron needed to ensure that he didn’t come off as too patronizing-- many in France had accused Macron of acting like a “headmaster” and over-complicating explanations of everyday issues. To quote an exchange between the two candidates in the debate,
“Stop confusing everything, Madame Le Pen!” - Emmanuel Macron
“Stop giving lessons Mr. Macron!” - Marine Le Pen
Le Pen’s public headscarf ban also came up, as Macron questioned how it would help stop terrorism. When Le Pen retorted that the headscarf “is a uniform imposed by Islamic extremists,” Macron responded that Le Pen’s heavyhanded yet illogical views around minority issues would cause civil war in the cities of France.
Polling suggests that most people thought Macron outperformed Le Pen in the debate, by a 59%-38% margin, with 3% undecided. Many of Macron’s zingers did land-- one example being when he said that any meeting between Le Pen and Vladimir Putin would not be a meeting between world leaders, but rather between the French President and her banker. Le Pen’s flustered response was not perceived well by many; many similar moments in the debate helped tip the scales toward Macron.
Final Prediction + Ramifications
Based on the polling data, I would give Macron a 70% chance of victory and would guess that he ends up getting around 10-14% of a victory margin. If he wins, the EU’s opposition to Russia would be strengthened and France’s role in world affairs would remain consistent with current policy. Given that the shackles of campaigning for re-election would be removed, many expect Macron to take an even stronger line against Russia and possibly step up security assistance to Ukraine. The nationalist right would endure a bit of a setback, as both Germany and France would continue to be run by those opposed to their aims.
This leaves Le Pen with a 30% chance of winning. If she does, this would be a major victory for the European right, especially the nationalist right, as it would put them in charge of one of the major pillars holding up the European project. Le Pen’s win would lead the France-Germany relationship to deteriorate significantly, as it is hard to imagine the nationalist Le Pen working well with her German social-democratic counterpart Olaf Scholz. A Le Pen victory could also revitalize a new strident form of Euroscepticism that, while not pushing for an exit from the European Union, calls for it to be based on a focus of preserving “Western civilization” and seeks to limit its interference in the sovereignty of its constituents. Le Pen could also add a Trump-esque unpredictability to French foreign policy, which would broaden the list of France’s international partners, while also jeopardizing key traditional relationships the country has held. Specifically, Le Pen will probably dial back France’s role in Africa and seek to make it more involved in Europe and Asia, albeit without ceding power to the EU. Finally, at a time when the more moderate Conservatives in the UK have recently announced a new policy to send asylum seekers to Rwanda, one can expect Le Pen to attempt to implement a similar or more radical policy if elected president. At the very least, the limited state acceptance of parallel cultures and multiculturalism in France under Macron will be probably eliminated by Le Pen, for better or for worse.