The recent elections for the European Parliament have shown the ultra-conservative movement is in the ascendant and its most strident impact has been in France. Tough times are ahead for President Emmanuel Macron, particularly if the gamble of the election fails to pay off. 

President Emmanuel Macron’s announcement to dissolve the National Assembly, as he is entitled to do under the French Constitution, is characteristic of his unconventional place in French politics. It was a swift reaction to the bruising losses his party suffered at the hands of the far right.

There are two rounds to play out. The first will take place on 30 June, the second on 7 July.

The results of this snap election are of great importance to France, but they are also vital to Europe and beyond. While there are precedents, Macron’s move to dissolve the National Assembly represents a new chapter in the turbulent history of the Fifth Republic. Only this time, the stakes are far higher.

 What is the reason?

Macron’s decision came after results in the European election revealed significant gains for the right-wing National Rally (RN), formerly the Front Nationale (FN), headed by Marine Le Pen and Jordan Bardella. RN won with almost 32 percent. Macron’s Renaissance trailed with 15 percent.

Macron hopes to shock the French, many of whom have become disengaged and disenfranchised with politics. He believes, by putting trust in the hands of the people, they will be alarmed into reversing the trend of France drifting to the right. In doing so, he is seeking to reassert his own brand of centrist politics.

It won’t be easy; andit could backfire. There are many complex and divisive issues at play. Immigration is a key reason for this shift to the right. RN has consistently promulgated an anti-immigration, anti-Islam agenda. It has ruthlessly exploited these themes in concert with its Eurosceptic, anti-European Union (EU) position.

In addition, many in France are concerned by the EU’s green regulations. They are viewed as an impediment to French industries such as agriculture. Under these regulations, costs have significantly risen. In addition, concessions made to Ukraine in light of the war with Russia have seen grain imports damage revenues for French farmers.

Moreover, general increases in the cost of living in France, notably food and petrol, have driven dissatisfaction with Macron’s leadership. The optimism with which he took office in 2017 has been replaced with bitterness and resentment.

National Rally has seized on this. In recent years, Marine Le Pen has softened the edges of the RN. Adopting a more nuanced and sophisticated persona, she has steered the party into the mainstream of French politics. Pundits argue this is part of a “charm offensive” before she contests the 2027 presidential election.

The last dissolution of the National Assembly was in 1997 when President Jacques Chirac recognised that he would not be able to roll out his reforms unless he had a stable majority. Macron is taking a similar gamble and, just as in 1997, this is unsettling for France. Furthermore, it comes only weeks before the world turns its gaze on Paris for the Olympic Games.

Why does this matter?

If Macron’s Renaissance party wins more seats than the 245 it had, the dissolution will be deemed a success and a repudiation by the French of right wing populism. By contrast, an RN majority will lead to “cohabitation,” whereby the president must share power with an opposing prime minister leading an opposing majority. Under this scenario it is likely Jordan Bardella, who is fervently critical of Macron, will become the prime minister.

Cohabitation governments were formed 1986 and 1993 under President François Mitterrand and in 1997 under President Chirac. Undoubtedly, however,  this time it will be different. RN is not a traditional center-right or center-left party as in previous cohabitations. It is a deeply nationalist, right wing populist movement that was founded by Marine Le Pen’s father in 1972 as the FN.

Chirac, the centre-right president from 1995-2007 described FN as “a party of hate, racism and discrimination” and vowed to never form any sort of alliance with them. He was adamant that any such party was a danger to French democracy. Macron is facing off against its modern iteration.

Now that RN is on the main stage of French politics, Macron may not have the luxury Chirac had. There is a real possibility he may have to preside over a majority RN Assembly. With the 2027 presidential election looming, and with the electoral winds favoring a Le Pen presidency, it is unlikely RN will be too willing to support Macron’s initiatives.

The real question is, will Macron and the center continue to hold sway or will the RN win a majority forcing him into a fraught cohabitation? Either way, French politics will be recast, and this will have cause a ripple effect beyond its borders. Macron is strongly opposed to Russia’s war against Ukraine. By contrast, RN policy is largely ambivalent with Le Pen avoiding any substantive comment on the Russia or its leader Vladimir Putin.

As things stand, the results of the European elections will make it more difficult for European parliamentarians to find consensus on issues such as climate change, industrial policy, and Europe’s ongoing support for Ukraine. Without a strong and united French parliament committed to policy reforms, Europe will flounder.

Where to from here?

There are many outcomes to consider in the lead up the 30 June first round vote. If Macron wins a majority, he will continue to push for his policy ideals to be implemented. If the RN wins a majority France will be in uncharted political waters. Here are four considerations.

First, Macron’s presidency will almost certainly be further impeded if his party loses seats in the upcoming election. His ability to deliver reforms will be greatly curtailed and he will face three years as a largely lame duck leader.

Second, France’s standing as a beacon for “Liberté, Fraternité and Egalité” will be called into question. Should a far-right party such as RN have the power of a majority in France it will drastically undermine any notion of French exceptionalism. It may greatly complicate French foreign policy and relations with states in the Middle East and Africa.

Third, the effective running of the EU has depended on the Franco-German motor. This was set in train by President Charles De Gaulle and Chancellor Konrad Adenauer some seventy years ago. It has been the bedrock on which post-1945 Europe has been built. For the last few years, however, that engine has been running rough, which means Europe has been too.

Macron has positioned France as the leading nation in Europe, while Germany has struggled with inflation and economic malaise. With both states hampered by domestic problems, Europe’s ability to meet and resolve its problems is much diminished. A Macron win in the National Assembly will be seen positively for Europe.

Fourth, the international consequences of Macron losing may prove costly, particular with respect to Russia. Macron has become more hawkish in his opposition to Russia’s action in Ukraine, and to the strategic threat it presents to Europe more broadly. Le Pen has long had had ties with Putin and has been ambivalent about any threat from Moscow.

These are but four of many important issues on the table with the French legislative elections commencing 30 June. Only time will tell what Macron’s bold move will mean and reveal how much it might cost.

Daniel Steedman is a PhD Candidate in International Relations at Monash University. His research interests include US foreign policy, European politics, nuclear weapons and great power rivalries. He is a former Council Member at AIIA.

This article is published under a Creative Commons License and may be republished with attribution.