POLITICS
France's political crisis has reached such depths that it took Emmanuel Macron nearly two months after parliamentary elections just to choose a prime minister. Now, 73-year-old center-right veteran Michel Barnier faces the challenge of forming a government and securing the backing of a parliament almost evenly split between the left, right, and center. The left refuses to support a government with the right, and the right won't work with the left. While the left holds a slight majority, it was expected that the centrists would strike a deal with them, leaving Marine Le Pen’s right-wing National Rally without enough votes to mount a successful no-confidence motion. However, the left insisted on having their own candidate for prime minister, even putting forward the moderate economist Lucie Caste, who would have been acceptable to the centrists. But Macron, seeking to avoid a power-sharing deal, rejected Caste, and instead proposed Barnier. However, without left-wing support, the president may find himself relying on the selfsame right-wing factions he had hoped to contain by calling snap elections in the first place.
France has been without a government for 51 days — an unprecedented situation. The political landscape following this summer’s early parliamentary elections has proven too tangled. After considering nearly a dozen candidates, president Emmanuel Macron ultimately gave up on allying with the left and settled on Michel Barnier from the center-right Republicans party. Barnier’s key task is to steer France out of its deep political crisis.
How France ended up without a government
After the far-right's victory in the European Parliament elections on June 9, 2024, Emmanuel Macron announced the dissolution of the French Parliament and called for snap elections, scheduled for June 30 and July 7. The president may have calculated that, in national elections — far more consequential for the everyday lives of French voters than the European variety — the citizenry would rally and prevent the far-right from winning again.
Macron’s strategy largely worked, but in the process, the pro-presidential centrist coalition lost its relative majority in Parliament, ceding first place to the left-wing party alliance.
On July 16, Gabriel Attal's Macronist government, following tradition, resigned. The president was supposed to name a new prime minister, who would then form a cabinet. That’s how French politics operates by tradition — but not by law. Instead, Macron allowed the outgoing government to continue “acting” in a caretaker role — first for the duration of the Paris Olympic Games, and then during the search for a new prime minister.
How the left and Macron failed to reach an agreement
The appointment of a prime minister was initially delayed due to the ambiguous results of the parliamentary elections. The head of government is typically a representative of the political force that secures the majority of seats in Parliament. For the past 20 years, this has been straightforward, as presidential parties consistently held a majority. But not this time.
In July, after the second round of elections, the left-wing coalition New Popular Front secured a plurality of seats in the National Assembly — 193 out of 577. While this was a significant number, it wasn't enough to form a government on its own. No political faction achieved an absolute majority, which allowed Macron to immediately declare that “no one won” the election.
The left asserted their claim to nominate the prime minister, and the gambit might have succeeded had they been able to reach an internal consensus. In the two weeks following the announcement of the election results, however, the “New People's Front” — a broad coalition of diverse political forces — was repeatedly on the brink of collapse. In the end, the left settled on a single candidate for prime minister: the “moderate” Lucie Caste, a 37-year-old economist who had previously served as the financial director of the Paris mayor's office.
Caste was proposed as prime minister by a delegation of the left during a meeting with Macron on August 23, and according to Caste, the discussion was productive — Macron acknowledged that the election results reflected a demand for change. However, the president soon rejected her candidacy and continued consultations with other parties represented in parliament.
The reason for denying the left the opportunity to form a government was that the far-right, the more moderate right-wing, and the centrists all stated that they would not accept ministers from Jean-Luc Mélenchon's Unsubmissive France, the largest and most radical faction within the New Popular Front. This group advocates positions such as supporting Palestine and opposing aid to Ukraine. As a result, Mélenchon, who had originally sought the role of prime minister, announced after Lucie Caste's nomination that Unsubmissive France was ready to completely withdraw from the government. However, this was on the condition that the centrist and right-wing leaders guaranteed they would not support a vote of no confidence against a “leftist” government.
Even that didn't help. Macron acted as though he had no interest in a compromise with the left.
How the far right gained so much power despite finishing third
Bringing a vote of no confidence to the floor only requires the support of 58 deputies. However, for the government to be forced to resign, an absolute majority is required — at least 289 out of 577 deputies in the National Assembly must vote to dissolve the cabinet.
From the start, representatives of Marine Le Pen’s far-right National Rally made it clear that they would call for a vote of no confidence against any government that included members of Unsubmissive France or the so-called ecologists (the Greens). Together, these two parties hold just over 100 seats in parliament — more than half of the entire left-wing faction.
The far right and its allies have 144 seats in parliament, enough to initiate a vote of no confidence, but not enough to force the government's resignation. This means that a left-wing government could have been stable so long as it enjoyed the backing of Macron's supporters. However, the French president chose a different path.
During consultations with representatives from various political factions — including two former presidents, François Hollande and Nicolas Sarkozy — Macron demonstrated that he was more concerned with continuing his own policies than with the stability of the government. A key aspect of these policies is the pension reform passed in 2023 amid protests — a reform the left had planned to repeal.
Macron’s reluctance to hand power to a cabinet that would seek to reverse his reforms and change the country’s overall direction forced him to seek support from the far right. Thus the principle of “divide and conquer” came into play.
For Macron, the main goal was to avoid a situational coalition in parliament between the left (193 seats) and the far right (144 seats), which could have ousted any of Macron's appointees. Preventing such an alliance was crucial. This made Marine Le Pen the key judge in Macron’s “prime minister casting.”
Despite finishing third in the election, the far right gained nearly as much influence as if they had finished first and tried to form a government without an absolute majority.
“Nothing can be done without us,” declared Jordan Bardella, the successor to Le Pen and current leader of the National Rally. While Marine Le Pen later remarked that she “did not choose the prime minister” and was “not Emmanuel Macron's HR,” the president ultimately selected a candidate who was clearly acceptable to her. Unsurprisingly, the far right promised not to vote for a motion of no confidence immediately or automatically, pledging to first observe the actions of the new prime minister.
The National Rally had a long list of requirements for a potential prime minister, and Barnier met these criteria. Firstly, Le Pen and her allies aim to be seen as a more “acceptable” political force — they need the prime minister to treat them as legitimate rather than as “untouchables.” Barnier is willing to engage with them on this front. Secondly, it is important to the far right that the budget reflects their proposals to boost the purchasing power of the French, which partially aligns with the new prime minister’s program. Thirdly, the position on immigration is crucial for Marine Le Pen's party, as the far right seeks to impose restrictions, and Barnier has also previously supported such limits.
Finally, in the past Barnier has not ruled out changes to France's electoral system. The National Rally would eagerly support a government willing to introduce a proportional representation system for the next parliamentary elections. The complex two-round electoral process, which hindered Le Pen's party from achieving a decisive victory last time around, would be replaced, potentially paving the way for a far-right triumph.
Michel Barnier, Macron’s secret weapon
Qui est-ce Michel Barnier?
Michel Barnier was first elected at the age of 22 — in 1973, before the current French president was born — as a regional councilor for Savoie. Five years later, he entered the National Assembly. A staunch Gaullist, Barnier has always been a member of center-right parties, with the Republicans being the current successor to De Gaulle’s movement.
Barnier has served in government four times. In the early 1990s, under President François Mitterrand (1981-1995), he became Minister of the Environment. Under Jacques Chirac (1995-2007), he served as Secretary of State for European Affairs and later as Foreign Minister. In the 2000s, under Nicolas Sarkozy (2007-2012), he was Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries.
Between his ministerial terms, Barnier served twice as a European Commissioner — first for Regional Policy (1999-2004) and then for the Internal Market (2010-2014).
Barnier played a crucial role on the European scene starting from 2016, when he became the chief negotiator for Brexit and the future relationship between the UK and the EU. The media dubbed him “Monsieur Brexit” for this role, and his skills in finding common ground between conflicting parties are seen as an asset for his new position.
However, Barnier's long political career has provided plenty of material for those intent on ruining his reputation. Left-wing organizations have accused him of voting against the decriminalization of homosexuality in the 1980s while serving as a National Assembly deputy. In 1999, during the debate over the civil partnership law, he opposed extending the right of marriage to same-sex couples.
On the other hand, the far right recalls with approval Barnier’s campaign promises from his unsuccessful 2022 presidential bid. Although he did not win the party primaries, Barnier promised to cut social benefits, raise the retirement age to 65, reduce taxes, and impose a 3- to 5-year moratorium on immigration.
In 2024, the image of the seasoned politician, akin to a “French Biden,” may not seem appealing to all that many many. Far-right deputy Jean-Philippe Tangi, shortly before Macron’s announcement and the discussions about Marine Le Pen’s role in it, described Barnier as a “relic of French political life.”
Michel Barnier indeed became the oldest prime minister in the history of the Fifth Republic. The record is all the more notable given the fact that his predecessor in office, Gabriel Attal, is only 35 years old.
Le Pen: power to sway, but not to rule
French President Emmanuel Macron has tasked Michel Barnier with restoring national unity following the ambiguous election results. However, the primary objective of this government, at least for now, is simply to maintain its grip on power.
Two days after Barnier’s appointment, left-wing parties and groups organized demonstrations across France calling for his resignation. The president faced even harsher criticism. The left accuses Macron of a “power grab” after the elections. Protesters argue that he “stole the election,” betrayed democracy, and should resign — along with the new prime minister.
Jean-Luc Mélenchon, speaking at a rally, stated that “democracy is not only the art of accepting victory but also the humility to recognize defeat.” Estimates suggest that between 110,000 and 300,000 people participated in protests nationwide.
Not all French people share the left's discontent. According to Ifop, 52% of respondents are satisfied with Barnier’s appointment (53% approved of previous prime minister Attal, and 37% supported his predecessor, Élisabeth Borne). About 60% view Barnier as competent, open to dialogue, and friendly. However, 74% believe that Barnier will not remain in power for long, expecting him to be ousted by a vote of no confidence.
The far right still has reservations and has thus not given Barnier its full support. The vice-president of the National Rally, Sébastien Chenu, stated that the far right is giving Barnier a “chance to change course” and prove he can radically transform Macron's policies. According to Chenu, the reluctance to vote for the government's resignation immediately does not mean the far right will not make such a decision in the coming weeks or months.
In response, Barnier is working to show that he listens to the right-wing opposition and is open to change, which could stir discontent within Macron’s own party, Renaissance. The new prime minister must walk a narrow political tightrope if he is to defy the population’s expectation that his time in office will be short.
For now, he is projecting optimism. In his first interview after assuming office, Barnier assured the French public that he plans to “negotiate, unite, respect, and listen to” all political forces. To the far right, Barnier even responded with a brisk comment, noting he is “under observation” not just by them, but by “all French people.” However, Barnier knows that to sustain his cabinet, he will need to stay in Marine Le Pen’s good graces.
Emmanuel Macron may have succeeded in thwarting the hopes of Marine Le Pen and Jordan Bardella's National Rally to win last summer’s early parliamentary elections. The president has even managed to retain formal control over the political situation. And yet, this success comes at the cost of future concessions to the far right, which, even after failing to secure the prime minister's seat, will undoubtedly influence government policy despite not bearing any formal responsibility — influencing crucial decisions while remaining in the background.