Despite their differences and the limited timetable imposed by the abrupt electoral call last June, the main parties of the French left managed to find an agreement to go together to the legislative elections, grouped within the electoral alliance of the New Popular Front (NFP). .
Although they obtained the bloc with the largest number of seats in the National Assembly (193), President Emmanuel Macron denied them the possibility of forming a government, saying that the progressive coalition is far from an absolute majority and that, in his own words, “no, we won the elections. In his place, he named conservative Michel Barnier, whose party received less than 5% of the vote, as prime minister. He now leads a government made up of Macronists and right-wing members Gaullist. For the moment, the coalition has presented a first motion of censure against the Executive, but it has very little chance of succeeding, since the far right has declared that it will not vote for it.
The main representatives of the parties that make up the alliance – La France insoumise (LF), the Socialist Party (PS), Europe Ecologie-Les Verts and the Communist Party – have continued to defend the need to preserve the unity of the PFN as a parliamentary party. force, as a possible alternative to the current government and as a vehicle to lead the protests. Despite the differences in substance and form between its members.
Historian Gilles Candar, president of the Society of Jauresian Studies, considers that the strategy of unity is a necessity for progressive parties, which have seen their electorate reduced over the last decade. Specialist in the figure of Jean Jaurès, leader of the Popular Front of the 1930s, Candar is co-author with Jean-Jacques Becker of the work History of the left in France [Historia de la izquierda en Francia] and author of Why the left? From the Commune to the present day [¿Por qué la izquierda? De la Comuna a nuestros días].
How do you analyze the current situation of the Socialist Party? From the beginning, participation in the alliance with Francia Insumisa was a cause of internal division.
There are tensions within the Socialist Party, I don’t know of any period where there was no tension. Furthermore, the PS has experienced more than significant difficulties in recent times, with a serious crisis at the end of the Hollande presidency, members leaving to the right (Valls or those who left with Macron) and also to the left (this is the case of Benoît Hamon and, years earlier, of Mélenchon and several current rebels). And the sections emptied with the departure of many activists.
It is indisputable that the PS has managed to escape the threat of total disappearance. He has regained some of his militant strength and the latest electoral results, without being impressive, are more than honorable. It remains a dominant force within the left when it comes to local elections (cities, departments and regions), far ahead of the communists and ecologists who have already managed to win in several large cities. This was the case of Lyon, Bordeaux or Strasbourg, but Paris, Marseille, Nantes, Lille, Nancy still have socialist mayors. Francia Insumisa is practically absent at this level.
What then is the balance of power within the coalition?
Recently, the Socialists came first in the European elections with 14% of the votes and progressed in the legislative elections, managing to double the number of deputies. But there is no reason to fall into triumphalism, because the sum of the left remains a minority: in the best case, it represents a third of the total votes.
LFI, for its part, continues to be the leading left-wing group in the Assembly (72 deputies, compared to 66 for the PS) and today has a superior militant force. The Communist Party and the environmentalists have their own concerns and I think that for the moment they see with some satisfaction this relative weakening of LFI within the alliance. Even if they have no intention of resurrecting socialist hegemony either.
Macron explored, at least on the surface, the possibility of appointing socialist Bernard Cazeneuve as prime minister. What is your reading?
The PS notes the good results obtained within the alliance, but at the same time they are also demanded by the Macronists – who are going through difficulties – and some of whom come from the socialist ranks. A government led by Bernard Cazeneuve, already Prime Minister between 2016 and 2017, would have been based on such an alliance between socialists and macronists. A very fragile perspective both for Cazeneuve and for the two camps: the socialists are divided and the macronists face an uncertain future and are also in the process of reconstitution.
It is true that the leadership of the first secretary of the Socialist Party, Olivier Faure, is fragile. During the last congress, it did not collect more than 51% of the votes compared to the other two trends. [una respaldada por François Hollande, la otra por Anne Hidalgo]. And these two minority currents would have liked greater openness in favor of a Cazeneuve solution. PS activists are often far from certain positions and the way of acting of the rebels. The alliance with them is divisive and unpopular, and the same can be said among the rebels.
Under these conditions, is it possible to remain united in the months to come?
Even the minority currents of the PS will make alliances in the face of the next municipal and local elections. Because today, it is rare that one party can win alone. In electoral reality, it is easier to form a left-wing bloc than to launch into a center-left alliance, which does not greatly enthuse the electorate likely to vote for the PS. Even former President Hollande or the head of the European PS list Raphaël Glucksmann – both very hostile to the rebels – know this and have not formally spoken out against the NFP. They simply demanded a little more firmness from LFI.
Without an alliance with France Insoumise, the Socialist Party would have obtained between 15 and 30 deputies at most and would have no prospect for the next presidential elections. For the municipal elections, which will be followed by departmental and regional elections, the general framework should continue to be that of left-wing alliances, whether in the first or second round. It’s the French tradition. After all, in Paris, Marseille and elsewhere, this union has not been bad with a generally confirmed rule: the left electorate often electorally sanctions those who seem to be against unity.
Given the differences, some analysts suggest an NFP government would have been impossible. Could the parties have reached an agreement?
Yes of course. Negotiating, maneuvering, balancing a government team: all this is part of the know-how of the left. There are also divisions within the presidential field, such as on the right and even the far right. The question is whether all teamwork can be guided, arbitrated and by whom.
In the long term, there is a battle that is starting to take place in view of the next presidential elections.
The most dangerous moment will come with the presidential elections, since by definition there can only be one name. Especially before the first round, because the left no longer has the base it had before, which will continue to happen as long as a large part of the popular electorate votes for the far right. Will the left succeed in establishing a common process for electing candidates? Or will it happen in another way, implicitly? No one can say yet.
Does the NFP’s solidarity strategy benefit Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the founder of France Insoumise?
Mélenchon’s ambitions are known, as are the reluctance he arouses. He has the stature, the eloquence, the capacity, the militant support, the program… and he also has an incredible capacity to disturb, to offend his partners and to scandalize a large part of the electorate. In this sense, Marine Le Pen, for example, follows a very different strategy: she tries to offer a maternal image, passionate about cats.
On the other hand, doubts remain whether the leader of an alliance’s most radical and advanced faction will effectively represent it in a vote. In reality, Mélenchon’s strength also lies in the weakness of his partners. For the moment, there is no obvious candidate neither from the Socialist Party, nor from the ecologists, nor from the middle party (Glucksmann, Hamon, Autain, Ruffin, etc.). Could Lucie Castets be a possibility? It remains to be seen…
