Macron continues the “President-Jupiter” line, strangling the country’s Parliament with ordonnances and unwinding Darmanin

Read Time:11 Minute, 0 Second

The “Fifth Republic” in France has always been considered ultra-presidential and, in general, was intended by its creator Charles de Gaulle. However, for the majority of presidents, their enormous legal capabilities were rather a lifeline, which they used very rarely and wisely, caring a lot about their legitimacy. And here Emmanuel Macron became a unique phenomenon, who, in the image and likeness of Michael Schumacher, who discovered the abilities of the Ferrari car, did the same with the magic power of presidential ordinances. In many ways, he was helped by a second-term situation that allowed him to disregard legitimacy and ratings, whose potential decline had had a sobering effect on his predecessors. Macron was able to focus entirely on implementing his reforms, especially in the economy, labor laws and taxes, and ignored parliament in his will almost always limited only by the annual limit of ordonnances. On December 16, 2023, the consolidation of his “soft dictatorship” reached a climax when the government used Article 49.3 of the French Constitution for the 22nd time last year, and the social security budget was passed without a vote of deputies. In one year, the article that allows the government to pass laws and approve acts without passing them in parliament has been used by Macron’s government for more than 20% of all uses of the article since its introduction in 1958.

There is no doubt that this behavior of Emmanuel Macron is a manifestation of his latent dictatorial power. And yet, there is a clear and practical logic to this strategy. France, trapped in recession and long-term economic decline, really needs a serious adjustment of its economic model, and from the position of liberal social Darwinism, the current president is trying to lead the country out of the crisis as he sees and considers it necessary. As we have written above, ordinances are not “spent” on random populist cultural or ideological changes, but on laws directly or indirectly tied to fiscal austerity. With the coming global economic downturn and the collapse of the Françafrique crypto-colonial system that regularly fueled its former metropolis with financial “injections”, France can no longer maintain the bloated social sphere to which most French people have become so accustomed. In this light, Macron is trying to free up funds, and channel them in the form of direct investments or stimulus allocations into the industrial sphere, which has been degraded for the last 35-40 years, but in a future “cruel world” will be able to somehow stabilize the country’s economy. Simply put, his reforms should create a new reality in which French workers and employees will have to work a little more and earn a little less in order to maintain at least roughly the same standard of living they currently enjoy. In the overall body of laws that are being enacted. Three main groups can be distinguished in the overall array of laws passed bypassing the parliament. First, these are projects that directly cut social spending, which include the already mentioned social security budget and the scandalous pension reform. Second, they are actions aimed at adjusting labor laws and reducing the power of trade unions, which are an obstacle to the government’s transformation. Finally, it is a tax cut for business and the wealthy French to encourage them to be more active and invest private funds in the country’s economy. And the fidelity of this logic was well confirmed by the adoption of the new immigration law, which was tellingly without a presidential ordinance, but which caused a strong political scandal and revealed the subtlety of Macron’s political techniques, which he is willing to use where necessary and possible.

Thus, on December 11, the National Assembly refused to consider the text of the new immigration law. But Macron did not resort to an ordinance, and instead played out a political drama with useful dividends for him, and in the end managed to pass a tedious for him bill. The revolt was put up simultaneously by the Greens, the leftists of Mélenchon’s group NUPES, the National Rally and even the right-wing opposition wing of the Republicans, and at first glance it appeared to be a purposeful alliance of parties that hated each other in order to strike a blow against Macron. It is noteworthy that the draft was presented by Interior Minister and Macron’s likely “heir” Gérald Darmanin earlier this year and positioned as the second most important act for the French authorities after the pension reform adopted in the spring of 2023, immediately causing heated discussion and rejection of both the right and the left, barely overcoming consideration by the Senate. The initial draft of the immigration law envisioned a number of changes to existing legislation. For example, legalization of workers in areas where there is an acute shortage of workers: construction, medicine and hospitality business. As a restrictive measure, it was supposed to introduce annual quotas for the issuance of citizenship and residence permits, as well as return illegal migrants to the status of criminals and reduce social payments to lawbreakers. Initially, this project was equally opposed by both the left and the right and for example, the left spoke of the de facto recognition of all migrants as criminals and violation of human rights. On the contrary, the right, such as the head of the Republicans Éric Ciotti in Parliament, pointed out that the law gave freedom to mass illegal immigration, and the quotas were overly democratic and only stimulated migration. After the first setback, Gérald Darmanin declared the incident a personal defeat and even resigned, rejected by the president, and many thought that this put an end to his prospects of running for president in 2027.

But the truth is the opposite, and by playing up the drama of his “failed” exit, which was obviously Macron’s political plan, Darmanin accused the opponents that their opposition was not the essence of the law, and was only a political demarche. Therefore gained rather than lost points for his candidature in the presidential race. And among the opposition it did not really create an alliance, but only deepened the split. First, it was between the National Union and the Republicans. The leader of the former in Parliament, Jordan Bardella, said he was ready to lead the government and enter into a “symbiosis” with Macron, but Éric Ciotti, who claims the Nationalist vote, showed great irreconcilability with the president, with whom the RN suddenly decided to compromise. In this light, the closer the 2027 “presidential” year gets, the stronger the competition between these forces will be: no less “jealousy” and on the left flank, where everyone fears a situation of total division, which was in 2022. Thus, the head of the French Communists Fabien Roussel also called for a dialog with the authorities, and was immediately subjected to a harsh attack by his comrades in the leftist movement. Jean-Luc Mélenchon criticized his rival, and it was a step to prevent a potential rivalry within NUPES, which should consolidate Mélenchon’s nomination as a single presidential candidate in 2027. Mélenchon’s fellow party members have even begun publicly equating Roussel with World War II collaborators, although Mélenchon has consistently made various concessions to Macron, presenting himself as a respectable establishment candidate with a socialist outlook. However, despite localized inter-party squabbles, the law once again showed the deep political crisis in which the French state is at the moment and the fact that Macron will need to work hard on the image of his heir if he does not want to give power to the right or the left.

This issue is the problem, and not migration at all, that has become the main point of discussion of this law. Minister Darmanin, with presidential ambitions, is concerned about creating his own political image, and therefore adapts his rhetoric to various audiences, including moderately nationalistic ones. Thus, he explained his resignation by saying that he is a “man of honor” for whom the opinion of the parliament matters. Shortly before the vote in the National Assembly, the minister visited the south of France, whose population is mostly conservative right-wing. In talks with local media, he promised to take the toughest stance on illegal migrants. He also reassured police and gendarmes, saying he would create all the conditions for them to do their jobs. However, in conversations with left-wing media, he was much more moderate and talked about the need to respect the constitution. In particular, he supported granting French citizenship regardless of ethnic origin and called on the right and supporters of the president to compromise. Darmanin’s intensified outreach to the electorate comes at a time when incumbent President Emmanuel Macron has been accused of being unable to keep his word, to realize his plans, and of contempt for the popular and democratic authorities. But this is probably a plan to take all the negativity and present Darmanin in a better light, because Macron, in general, already has nothing to lose in his second term. It is indicative that Macron actively promoted Darmanin’s law and wanted to pass it before the end of the year, and even proposed to create a special commission of deputies and senators to finalize the bill. And initially, the opposition was that the text could not be adopted in such a short time without the use of a special procedure provided for in Article 49.3 of the French Constitution and allowing bypassing the decision of Parliament, and at that time the limit of such ordinances was exhausted. In such a situation, many thought that Macron was in a deadlock and would even negotiate with the opposition to re-form the government, but they were deeply mistaken.

The alliance of the left and right into an “anti-Macronist” league turned out to be a sham, and on December 21, without any dissolution for the sake of passing the immigration law, the Macron’s Renaissance party was forced to enter into a temporary alliance with Marine Le Pen’s National Rally (RN) on the condition that a number of its provisions would be toughened to infringe on the rights of migrants. It is hard to say what consequences this move will have for the RN, and they will probably not be positive in the long term. However, even though the leftist media wrote that the Macronists felt “shame and pain” from this ad hoc alliance, it is a big win for Macron, Darmanin and their combined team. Even if the law had not been passed, the event was probably seen by President Macron and his entourage as a tactical setback that could have no fundamental impact on the sustainability of state power. Probably, for some time, the main unpleasant surprise for the Élysée Palace was the almost complete solidarity of the right and left opposition in parliament when voting on the proposed bill. Nevertheless, it was obvious to everyone that this solidarity vote was only a situational alliance of different “poles” of the opposition. After all, the left-wing and right-wing opponents of the current government have such divergent ideological attitudes and such a different electoral base that their further hypothetical cooperation in parliament in order to impede the work of the government by blocking its legislative initiatives seems highly unlikely, and Macron remains the “arbiter” of their contradictions. In the case of the new migration law, there was an isolated coincidence of interests of all opposition groups. But against this background, a beautiful political play was played out with the “resignation” of Darmanin, which only strengthened his authority among the moderate right. He now has the image of an “irreconcilable fighter” against the migration problem, ready to sacrifice his own political ambitions “for the sake of principles”. The reality is that the resignation of the current head of the Interior Ministry, who is one of the “support” ministers for the president in the current government, would be a much bigger shock to the Élysée Palace than a failed parliamentary vote on the migrant bill, and this option was a fantasy beforehand. It was also a fantasy to advance the law by ordonnance, which was a foolish waste of resources on Macron’s part. The migration issue will remain purely instrumental, and Macron’s centrist measures in this direction will consolidate the moderate electorate around him and his team members against the backdrop of the radically anti-migrant right and pro-migrant left. The main objective is 2027 and the “soft” succession of Macron by his proxy, such as Darmanin, Le Maire or Attal. And the president will be ready to sacrifice his image for the sake of this victory, just as he, not caring about his reputation, for the sake of important economic reforms, passes one law after another, ignoring the opinion of Parliament. Probably closer to 2026 we will see people from Macron’s entourage directly criticize his policies. But it should be clearly understood that all this will be done not against him, but for the sake of preserving his real power even after 2027. And whether French society will allow such manipulation, we will find out in the future.