11 septembre aaron klein abbas abdallah abdallah II abdelkader merah accords d'oslo adam zertal adenauer affaires Ă©trangĂ¨res afghanistan africom afrique afrique du sud ahmadinejad aipac AKP al qaeda al qaida al-arabiya al-fayed al-qaida algĂ©rie algeria aliyah allemagne amĂ©rique america anavad ANC angela merkel ankara ansar dine antisĂ©mitisme antisemitism antizionism apartheid aqmi arabes arabes israĂ©liens arabie saoudite arabs arafat armĂ©e armĂ©niens army ashkenazy assad assemblĂ©e gĂ©nĂ©rale assyriens atatĂĽrk auschwitz autoritĂ© palestinienne ayrault azawad Ă©conomie Ă©glise Ă©gypte Ă©lections Ă©tat Ă©tats-unis Ă©vangĂ©liques bachman baker balkans balladur bangladesh bankruptcy banlieues barack obama barak barbares bat yeor bayrou begin beheading beilin belgique belgium benoĂ®t xvi berbĂ¨res bernheim bible biden bill clinton blancs blood libel BNVCA bourgine brĂ©sil brexit britain brzezinski burke bush byzantins cahuzac cameron canada carter Castro cfr chaos charlie hebdo Chavez cheney chiisme chiites china chine chirac chosroes ii chrĂ©tiens christianisme christianity christians church chypre circumcision cisjordanie citizenship claude guĂ©ant clĂ©menceau clermont-tonnerre clinton cnn CNRS colin powell cologne columbia commentary communautĂ© communism communisme confrĂ©ries congrĂ¨s conseil de sĂ©curitĂ© conservatism conservative conservatives consistoire constantinople constitution contestation coptes coran corĂ©e du nord corsica crif crime crise crise sociale cuba cuisine cukierman culture daesh daniel johnson daniel pearl david pryce-jones dĂ©mocrates dĂ©mocratie dĂ©mographie de gasperi de gaulle democrats demographics demography desportes dhimmis dhimmitude dieudonnĂ© dinard dollar dreyfus droit international droite droits de l'homme druzes egypte eilat mazar eisenhower election elections emanuel emigration empire ottoman ena enderlin enfants erbakan erdogan espagne etat etats-unis ethnic ethnie EU eurabia eurasia euro europe european parliament european union exode expulsion expulsions fabius far left far right fatah fayĂ§al ferdinand ferhat fethullah gĂĽlen fifth republic fillon finkielkraut flandre flotille fmi FN fondapol food foreign affairs foreign policy france franco frĂ¨res musulmans french french muslims front national frontiĂ¨re internationale fusion antisemitism gates gauche gaza gĂ©nĂ©tique gĂ©nocide gĂ©opolitique genocide geopolitics george soros george w. bush george washington germany ghozlan gingrich giscard d'estaing giuliani globalization golden age goldnadel goldstone grande-bretagne grĂ¨ce greece greens grippe espagnole guĂ©ant guĂ©rilla guerre guerre civile guerre de sĂ©cession gurfinkiel hallal halutz hamas hamon haredim harkabi hĂ©breux hekla herzl herzog hezbollah hillary clinton hillel halkin histoire history hitler hollande holocaust holocauste hungary huntsman hurvah hypercasher ibn saoud icm research idĂ©ologie identitĂ© nationale ifop iforas iiie rĂ©publique ilan halimi immigrants immigration implantations inĂ¶nĂĽ inde ined internet interview irak iran irgoun isabelle ISIS islam islamic state islamism islamisme islamistes islamists israĂ©lites israĂ«l israel israel beiteinu italie ivan de bloch j call j street jabotinsky jĂ©rusalem jĂĽnger jean paul II jean-marie le pen jerusalem jewish revival jews jihad jihadism jihadisme jihadistes jihadists john mccain johnson jordanie jour de colĂ¨re judaĂŻsme judĂ©o-christianisme juifs juifs amĂ©ricains juppĂ© kabylie kadhafi kadima kadimah kassam kemal kennedy kerry kgb khamenei khomeini kippour kissinger knesset kohl korsia kosher kosher supermarket kosovo kotel kouchner l'express l'obs la paix maintenant laĂŻcitĂ© lapid ldj le drian le monde le nouvel observateur le pen le point lebanon left leftwing Levant liban libĂ©raux liberation libertariens libertĂ© libye liebermann ligne verte likoud livni livres london louis xvi LR lyons maccain macron magoudi mahmoud abbas mai 1968 mali mandat mandela mao marcion marcionisme marine le pen marines marion marĂ©chal-le pen maroc marseilles massacres massortis mavi marmara mayflower mĂ©dias mĂ©lanchon mccain media medias mein kampf merah meretz mergui merkel mexique michel gurfinkiel middle east migrants migration missiles mitterrand mnla mohamed merah monarchie monarchy monde arabe monde islamique monod mont du temple montauban montebourg montesquieu morocco morsi mosaic moscovici moubarak moyen-orient munich murder muslims musulmans napolĂ©on napoleon naqba nasser natalitĂ© national assembly national front nations unies nato nazis neo-french netanyahu nethanyahu new emerging powers new york new york review of books new york times nicolas sarkozy nixon noĂ«l nobel noirs north america norvĂ¨ge nouvel observateur november 13 NPA nuclĂ©aire obama occident occupation oliganthropie olmert olp onfray onu opinion orban orient orthodoxes oslo otan ottomans pacifisme pahlavi paix pakistan palestine palestinians palestiniens palin pape paris paritĂ© parlement europĂ©en pĂ©tain pĂ©trole pence peres peripheral france perses peste antonine peste de justinien petraeus peuple juif pew pipes PLO pogrom pogroms poland police politique poll pologne pompidou populism poutine prĂ©sidentielle prĂ©sidentielles premier tour presidential election primaires primaries printemps arabe processus de paix proche-orient prophĂ¨te protestantisme PS pundak putin qaradawi quai d'orsay quartiers quenelle qumran rabbis rabin racism rahm emanuel raid rajoy rasmussen rĂ©formĂ©s rĂ©formes rĂ©fugiĂ©s rĂ©publicains rĂ©volution reagan refugees regional elections religieux religion rempart republican pacts republicans restaurants revolution right riots riyad rogers romains romney ron paul roosevelt roquette rosenfeld rouhani royal royaume-uni russia russie rwanda sadate sahara salafistes salem al-fayed sanctuaire du rocher sandler santorum sarah halimi sarkozy saudi arabia savir sĂ©golĂ¨ne royal sĂ©nat sĂ©pharades scandale SCO SDN selden senate shafik shalit shalom akhshav shamir sharon shas shoah sionisme socialist socialists sociĂ©tĂ© society sondages soral soviet union spcj ss staline state nobility state of emergency statism stratĂ©gie strauss-kahn strikes subworlds succession sunnites sweden sykes-picot synagogue syria syrie tahrir tardieu tariq ramadan taubira tel-aviv terre d'israĂ«l terror terrorism terrorisme thatcher the west time tocqueville torah totalitarisme toulouse tourisme travaillistes trevidic tribus trilatĂ©rale truman trump tsahal tunisie turkey turquie tv ue uk ukraine UMP un unesco union europĂ©enne union pour la mĂ©diterranĂ©e united states unrwa URSS US usa valeurs actuelles valeurs judĂ©o-chrĂ©tiennes valls vatican vĂ©drine ve rĂ©publique versailles vichy vietnam violence walter laqueur war washington washington post wastelands west women wright yemen zacharie zapatero
Jeudi 5 janvier 2017
Trump Must Learn From French Conservatives
A president should always remember that what is expected from him is to implement his platform.
On the face of it, French politics are worlds apart from American politics. Still, president Donald J. Trump can learn a lot from it. He should beware of two French precedents in particular : how François Mitterrand, a defeated French socialist president, destroyed Jacques Chirac, a winning conservative prime minister, in the late 1980’s ; and how Nicolas Sarkozy, a French conservative president, went into self-destruction in the late 2000’s.
Mitterrand had been elected president in France in 1981 for a seven years term (French presidential terms have been shortened to five years in 2000 only). Five years later, in 1986, his socialist party lost the parliamentary election to the conservative right led by gaullist Jacques Chirac, with far reaching consequences. The present constitution of France – a creation of General Charles de Gaulle - is a mix of American-style presidentialism and of Westminster-style parliamentarism. When the president, the prime minister and the parliamentary majority belong to the same party, the president is clearly in charge. However, when the prime minister and the parliamentary majority do not belong to the president’s party, it is the prime minister who emerges as the effective ruler. And the president is just a lame duck.
This is what was supposed to happen in 1986 after Chirac’s victory. The new premier was eager to dismantle the socialist reforms that Mitterrand, as a president, had introduced over the previous years, and to pass his own conservative reforms. Mitterrand could not veto him frontally. But he could something else : use the presidential pulpit as a lethal weapon, on ethical or philosophical grounds, and weaken the prime minister’s authority, with the support and complicity of the liberal mainstream media. In fact, Chirac was intimitated and withdrew many of his policies. Two years later, the political situation had changed dramatically. Mitterrand was reelected president for a second seven years term – against Chirac ; and he recaptured a working majority at the National Assembly.
Mutatis mutandis, the same methods can be wielded by Barack H. Obama, the outgoing president, against Donald J. Trump. Until his very last day as president, Obama can issue an unlimited number of order or initiatives that run against Trump’s stated goals, and may even block their implementation for an extended period of time : last month, it took him just eight days to condone an anti-Israel résolution at at the UN Security Council, pass sweeping conservationist ukases, and start a major crisis with Russia. More surprises may come until January 20th.
The real thing will start, however, when Obama leaves the White House. His personal popularity is currently above the 50 % line. He is just 55 and can be active, as a writer, a lecturer or a NGO icon, for at least twenty years. His wife Michelle is only 52 and can run as a presidential candidate in 2021. In other words, Obama is fully equipped – especially given the unprecedented level of political polarization that plagues America today - to wage a moral war of attrition against Trump, just as Mitterrand did against Chirac.
Of course, such tactics can work only if the conservative winner is a weak and inconsistent man, or looks like one. That was the case, retrospectively, with Chirac. And Trump is a different case altogether. But then, a second French scenario is to be considered : instead of attrition, self-destruction. Here, Nicolas Sarkozy’s sad story comes to mind.
Sarkozy was elected president of France in 2007 by a strong margin (53 % of the popular vote) as a charismatic conservative reformer. Moreover, his party – then known as UMP – won 313 seats out of 577 at the National Assembly in the ensueing parliamentary elections. He thus held all the cards. Alas he squandered all of them.
Instead of concentrating on the comprehensive reform package he had put foward throughout the presidential and parliamentary campaigns, and have it passed at the Assembly during his first hundred days or so in tenure, he embarked on a succession of ill-conceived and unconvincing micro-decisions. Instead of letting his conservative prime minister François Fillon carry the bulk of everyday’s affairs, and thus be spared in case of mistakes, he insisted being the one and only government manager, and thus attracted criticism on himself only. Even more disastrously, he relinquished whole parts of his platform, including on the key issue of national identity ; and he systematically prefered personalities with a liberal or leftwing or immigrant background as senior members of cabinet over bona fide conservatives.
Among the conservative voters – a sociological majority in France since the 1980’s -, the sense of betrayal was intense and lasting. Many National Front supporters who had « repatriated » to the classic Right in 2007 deserted back to the Far Right in 2012, thus depriving Sarkozy of a second term, even against such a ridiculous socialist contender as François Hollande. Four years later, Sarkozy was crushed in the 2016 conservative primaries by François Fillon, the prime minister he had so thoroughly humiliated.
One may surmise that Trump will avoid the Sarkozy trap as well as the Chirac pitfall. He certainly realizes that he was elected by people who believe in him and expect him to keep his promises to them. He certainly understands that if he does not deliver, the disapointment he will face will be as strong as the support he had generated. Indeed, being a president is not the same as being a candidate, and a president must be more inclusive than a candidate. But a president should never forget that what is expected from him as a president, even by the people who did not vote for him, is to actually implement much or most of his platform.
© Michel Gurfinkiel & PJMedia, 2017
Michel Gurfinkiel is the Founder and President of the Jean-Jacques Rousseau Institute, a conservative think-thank in France, and a Shillman/Ginsburg Fellow at Middle East Forum.
Afficher les commentaires en (Vue non groupĂ©e | Vue groupĂ©e)
Pas de commentaires
Pas de rĂ©troliens