For Frédéric Sawicki, professor of political science at the University of Paris 1, the appointment of Michel Barnier as prime minister on 6 September signals the materialisation of an alliance between Emmanuel Macron and Les Républicains, but also the strong position of the far-right National Rally party. This article was originally published in French
Following two months of prolonged negotiations, Emmanuel Macron appointed Michel Barnier as prime minister. What do you make of this choice?
Frédéric Sawicki: The first thing to point out is that Michel Barnier comes from the right and that he has therefore necessarily received the support of the conservative Les Républicains (LR) party – even though he is not necessarily on the same line. So it’s not just one person who is being appointed, but the representative of a party that has always refused to take part in a government with Macronists. So the question is: will other LR members join the government? Is this the prelude to a lasting alliance between LR and Macron’s party, something that has always failed so far?
In fact, this impossible alliance was one of the reasons for Macron’s having decided to dissolve the French National Assembly on June 10. This alliance now seems to be coming about in a paradoxical way, at a time when both parties are weakened and can no longer govern as they might have done between 2022 and 2024. So Barnier’s appointment first shows a rapprochement between the Macronist camp and the Republican right. While this rapprochement began during the parliamentary elections with the sharing of certain constituencies in some departments, it did not lead to any common policy agenda or, of course, any commitment to govern together. Macron has therefore finally achieved what he has wanted for a long time, but on a vague basis, with an LR party that has been waiting since 2017 to take its revenge on the Macronists. Is this a lasting rapprochement? That remains to be seen.
There was a point when it was thought Xavier Bertrand, the centre-right president of the regional council of the Hauts de France, might be appointed. Again, why Barnier rather than him?
SF: It could be that the head of Les Républicains, Laurent Wauquiez, twisted Macron’s arm because Michel Barnier did not represent a threat to him in the same way as Xavier Bertrand. As a reminder for your international readers, Bertrand had expressed an interest in challenging Macron in 2020 and was subsequently defeated by Éric Ciotti, Valérie Pécresse and Barnier himself.
Marine Le Pen had vetoed the appointment of Bertrand, but appears to have greenlit Barnier’s appointment. On Thursday, she said that he “seems to meet at least the first criterion we asked for, i.e., a man who is respectful of the different political forces and capable of addressing the National Rally, which is the largest group in the National Assembly, in the same way as the other groups”. What do you think?
FS: We had to convince LR not only to take part in the alliance, but also obtain the neutrality of the National Rally and ensure that it would not immediately censure the new prime minister. Barnier appeared to be less hostile to the RN than Xavier Bertrand, who was elected against the National Rally in Marine Le Pen’s home region of Hauts-de-France. Michel Barnier surprised everyone during the Republican primary in 2021, by criticising European policy and the Schengen agreements, and calling for tighter border controls and a tougher national policy on deporting foreigners. The RN relied on this to say that he had changed positively. By supporting Barnier, Le Pen avoids taking the blame for institutional deadlock or potential disorder and can try to assume the role of “responsible” leader.
All in all, isn’t Marine Le Pen in a position of strength vis-à-vis Emmanuel Macron?
FS: We don’t know what commitments the president made to Marine Le Pen, and we still don’t know what Barnier’s political orientations are. But all this will only hold if major concessions are made to the RN. How far is Barnier prepared to go in tightening immigration laws? On the RN’s economic and social demands? The big issue for the RN will be proportional representation, but it will probably not be enough to buy its support, even if only in the form of abstention.
Do you think this government can last?
FS: Will the National Rally eventually censure the government? It could demand a referendum on immigration. It is in a position to decide when and how the government should fall or what it should do. In the end, all this amounts to handing over the keys of the truck to the RN. The big question is: will the base of Macron’s MPs agree to swallow such a pill? How far will Barnier and Macron go in espousing the policy sought by the National Rally? Another hypothesis, which is highly unlikely given the conditions of his appointment, but which cannot be totally ruled out at this stage: Michel Barnier, with his negotiating skills, manages to avoid censure from the Socialist Party and the ecologists with strong commitments on public services, purchasing power and the ecological transition.
A little like what happened in Sweden?
FS: Absolutely. After the 2022 elections, the far-right Sweden Democrats, the Swedish equivalent of the National Rally, came out on top. They agree not to govern but to support the liberal-conservative government by imposing their agenda. Here, for the first time in France, the National Rally is potentially in a position to support a government and negotiate its support for the government. We are not at all in the context of a technical government: this is clearly the outline of a new alliance between the National Rally, the liberal right and the conservative right. This is obviously contrary to what the voters wanted. One wonders how the voters of the National Rally will take this, when for years Emmanuel Macron has been presented as their main enemy.
How do you see the next six months?
FS: Placing the survival of the government in the hands of the National Rally gives it the opportunity to bring the institutions to a standstill. Marine Le Pen will be able to bring down the government at the most opportune moment for her, once she has scored a few successes. Since there is no possibility of dissolution for a year, she could create a situation in which power is blocked for several months, prompting political forces to demand the resignation of the president of the Republic. In these circumstances, the RN could be in a position to win this election, against opponents who are divided, discredited or unprepared.
Interview by David Bornstein.
