Saruhan Hatipoglu (sshatipoglu@beri.com)

DEATH OF A SALESMAN:

Jacques Chirac Meets Reality in Paris

It may be your Constitution, but it is not mine.   On 29 May 2005, French voters delivered a clear message to President Jacques Chirac with a vengeance: "We do not want your constitution."  The repercussions of this historic vote (55% of those voting against the constitution) was not only a blow to European integration (which was subsequently confirmed overwhelmingly in the Netherlands), but it also marked the end of Chirac's effective rule in France.   BERI had forecast this scenario nine months earlier and raised concern in a 4 August 2004 article titled, "Cognitive Dissonance in Europe: An Ever Closer Union Has Intimacy Problems."  In that piece, the possibility of an anti-Chirac vote in France was emphasized.  Failure is certainly in life’s menu, but Mr. Chirac seemed not to miss any of the courses during the past year.  All indications in France pointed to rejection by voters even as the draft was discussed by EU leaders.  Mr. Chirac should have anticipated the coming train wreck, but instead he opted for backing the doomed Constitution.

The overwhelming rejection of the treaty is not an end to the hopes of further European integration, but it will certainly halt any more discussions of a constitution at least for several years when wounds and, particularly, pride are healed.  France is not likely to vote for a revised document again until after the general elections in the country, which will take place in 2007.  Until then, there is much convincing to do in the country and rest of Europe that the 25-member union stands side-by-side for further integration.  This is an incredibly difficult task, one that will fall hostage to incessant domestic political fighting.

Was it the Turkish Connection?   One argument was that President Chirac's pro-Turkish policies played a key role in French rejection of the EU Constitution.  This is partially true because Mr. Chirac was too vocal for the French regarding the eventual admission of Turkey into the Union.  However, it is not fair to characterize this link as the key reason behind the adverse outcome.  The economy was the primary issue in voter minds once again.  Reform measures recently undertaken by the government were effectively criticized by labor unions.   Furthermore, growing unemployment and social problems in France focused minds more on the domestic economy than furthering European integration.  Europe has significant social problems, and any leader who demands to tear down fences will need to know why those fences were erected in the first place.  It is the romanticism of political leaders in France (and the Netherlands as well as many other EU countries) that tried to sweep real problems of Europe under the carpet and inspire citizens with their dream of E Pluribus Unum.  It was this detachment from reality that prepared the tragic outcome on the EU Constitution.  The result was a bitter reminder to Mr. Chirac that he had neglected the needs of his population.

The New Political Landscape:   The referendum outcome came as a shock to both major political parties in France.  The governing UMP and the Socialist opposition will both need to reformulate policies to prepare for the coming general elections in two years.  President Chirac acted swiftly and replaced the unpopular Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin with Dominique de Villepin, who is certain to pursue populist social policies to secure votes.   Mr. de Villepin had in the past underlined the importance of domestic polices to reduce unemployment in France.  His new government's immediate objective will be to accomplish this rather challenging goal in the middle of structural reform in France. 

Mr. Chirac's choice of new prime minister will certainly further strain his relations with the popular former finance minister, Nicolas Sarkozy, whom some had predicted to be nominated the new prime minister (Mr. Sarkozy is in the new cabinet).  More reform-oriented Sarkozy and President Chirac are not allies and border on becoming true enemies as the general elections approach.  Mr. Chirac is most likely to nominate Mr. de Villepin as the UMP presidential candidate.   French politics has certainly changed following the rejection of the Constitution referendum.  Only time will tell whether the UMP will be able to retain power.  If the past is any indicator, however, domestic politics will get more fierce in France during the next two years, and voters will opt for change.

Conclusion:  The timing of ratifying the European Constitution was off by a long margin. There was a substantial gap between what European leaders were preaching in the name of further integration and what the actual "man on the street" was thinking at the time of the voting, a fatal flaw.  European leaders failed to communicate to and receive feedback from their voters.  The European Constitution was dead on arrival because of the different frequencies on which politicians and European citizens were operating.   It is a pity that the symbol of utmost integration, which was supposed to be introduced at the end of a long journey, was hurried and given a major blow at the beginning.  But, there is always a winner in Europe under even the most dire circumstances.  And, once again that winner is the United Kingdom, which immediately canceled a referendum that would have been a definite “No.”  Now, Prime Minister Tony Blair can cite France and the Netherlands as the failed states who could not sell integration to Europe.  

DIRECTOR'S PERSPECTIVE Last Updated 12 June 2005