April 25, 2008
Sarkozy at bay
You will be glad to know that the weather is beautiful in Paris. But the outlook is cloudy with showers for Nicolas Sarkozy.
I was here this time last year, on the eve of Sarko’s election. Almost a year later, all that hope and expectation has all but evaporated. A poll last week showed that 72 per cent of French people now have an unfavourable view of Sarkozy’s presidency. This is an astonishing achievement. It took Chirac more than a decade in office to achieve similar levels of unpopularity.
Sarkozy gave a long interview on television last night to try and repair some of the damage. He argued that reforming the French economy was always going to be difficult - and would inevitably piss off important interest groups. (A loose translation, obviously). This seems plausible enough to me. But I think that some of the problems of his presidency are more personal than that. The furore over his personal life has obviously hurt him - and he tried to draw a line under it last night. But in a broader sense, Sarko seems a bit unpresidential. While Chirac spoke slowly in a deep voice and sat very still, Sarko gets visibly agitated and seems fidgety and angry when put under pressure.
There are also broader social and economic reasons for French anxiety. The economy is not doing very well. Food and energy prices are rising, which is a problem in a country where “purchasing power” has long been an issue. And I think the French have been quite shaken by the ferocity of China’s reaction to the furore surrounding the Olympic torch in Paris.
Sarko’s line on this last night seemed both brave and slightly delusional. He said bluntly and clearly that he is concerned about human-rights in Tibet. But asked why France had been singled out by the Chinese when there have been similar demos elsewhere, he suggested that this is because of France’s enormous prestige. (The real reason - I would guess - is that the Paris demonstrations were unusually effective and Sarkozy himself has been more outspoken than other western leaders about possible Olympic boycotts) When he was asked if he will go the opening ceremony in Beijing, Sarko replied that this would partly depend on whether the Chinese leadership heeds his call for China to hold direct talks with the Dalai Lama. This seems to me to rather over-rate Sarko’s own ability to influence China; and China’s flexibility on Tibet. If talking to the Dalai Lama really is the test, I would guess Sarko will be spending August at home.
I don’t agree with much of your comments in the above article. I am a foreigner living in France for over 6 years. I have seen how the politics have changed all these years.
First, why the media in France is so focused on the proviate life of Mr Sarkozy rather than reporting the reality of the reforms the french really really need(just because he is so dynamic than all the lift wing actors in the politics and even many in the right wing). To be honest, it really feels that the media would do anything to sell their stuff.
Anyway, as it was made clear by the president (and we have the last 30 years of bad economic policies to blame) it would take just more than few months to clean the mess (On the top which is the tough economic environment for many minths now). If anyone is sensible enough then it is clear enough.
In fact, the french themselves need to learn to be more bold and work more to help France (as JFK said, “Don’t ask what the country can do for you, But what can you do for your country)!!
The situation in Tibet is far from any human rights standards. China is a big exporter to the world but it does not mean that it has right to violate the basic freedom of a territory which was never it’s part (until before the annexion of Tibet by China). So it’s better to put some international pressure on China so atleast to open a dialogue between Dalai Lama and the Chinese authorities (just for an autonomous region)..!!
Posted by: Kamal GAKHAR | April 25th, 2008 at 12:16 pm | Report this commentChirac was more stately and presidential. He was also nasty.
He was quintessentially French.
If I were French I would not have voted for Sarko.
Ségolène had chic. And France is about chic.
Posted by: RCS | April 25th, 2008 at 12:55 pm | Report this commentI agree with Sarkozy’s stance on China and Kamal’s comments on this. This is a good time to make China listen to a united voice against its violation of human rights in Tibet. The Western world should show a more united front on this issue.
Posted by: lauren | April 25th, 2008 at 1:02 pm | Report this commentI would say Sarkozy is the only western leader that seems to be “wearing his trousers” (loosely translated French expression) when it comes to China. Direct talks between the Dalai and the Chinese authorities to settle the problem is, I think, quite reasonable to ask for. Furthermore, a boycott of the opening ceremony of an event which is more and more associated with sponsors and corporatism isn’t really that big of a deal for the French president and certainly has the advantage of providing enough embarrassment to the image sensitive Chinese authorities.
My two-cent,
Posted by: Christian G. | April 25th, 2008 at 1:07 pm | Report this commentC.
See this news on the BBC, today -
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7366500.stm
so it looks like China will hold talk with the Dalai Lama.
Posted by: Anon | April 25th, 2008 at 1:07 pm | Report this commentNot that Sarko’s “own ability to influence China” is the reason for this. Still, he can claim credit for a principled position and actually achieving changes.
Yet again he might just have understood better than others how China feels about the olympics and took a calculated rather low-risk gamble. Interesting to compare with Gordon Brown’s position on the issue.
Compared to Brown, Sarko is a small man with big balls on this one.
Posted by: anon | April 25th, 2008 at 1:12 pm | Report this commentThanks Kamal GAKHAR, that is very pertinent. I presume that if you were american you would have elected a cow boy ?
Posted by: romain | April 25th, 2008 at 1:45 pm | Report this commentI don’t think Segolene Royal would have done anything better. How do you influence a totalitarian behemoth like China? Let the chinese have their olimpic games. It will be the punishment their deserve, if the sad olimpic torch parade through the world is a sample of what they will get. I am sure the games will be sensational, but it is the “sorroundings” of the games that will make the damage.
Posted by: Ivan | April 25th, 2008 at 2:29 pm | Report this commentAnd, yes, Sarkozy has dissapointed many. Too much showmanship. Come on Sarko. You are smart. Get focus and put your ego on vacation.
His temperment is a great concern, especially as he moves into leading and being the voice of the EU this summer…he could be as silly and arrogant as he seems and possibly get away with it if the economy were good…but it is not nor will it improve ..it will get worse. It’s unfortunate, I had high hopes for him…my guess is neither his presidency, policies, or new marriage has any real long lasting staying power…
Posted by: Lisa-Helene Lawson | April 25th, 2008 at 3:12 pm | Report this commentSarkozy only visted Beijing in November. Maybe his anger at China is because he didn’t get enough juicy contracts out of them? After all, he was quite spoiled when he visited the statelets in the Persian Gulf.
Alternative Theory: Sarkozy is only boycotting the opening ceremony because there was no place for him at the front row and he is too short to see anything if anybody sits in front of him!
P
Posted by: Pacifist | April 25th, 2008 at 3:13 pm | Report this commentI saw Sarkozy last night on TF1.
It didn’t help him that his ex-wife (who waited till he was confirmed as president then finally left him for good) called him a “sauteur”, and his very public appearances with Carla Bruni (as well as trips on planes & yachts owned by friends who are French bizz tycoons)before they married did not help either.
The more Sarko sinks in the polls, the higher the French prime minister Fillon goes up - he is far more popular than Sarko.
A French president needs to cultivate restraint, and a certain amount of distance, imo, and is also expected to be discreet as regards his private life. De Villepin (ex-foreign minister)always looked more likely to be President after Chirac (whose choice he was) but unfortunately was caught up in a scandal (bank transactions in Luxembourg).
As far as Tibet is concerned, the French have a foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner, who founded
Medecins Sans Frontieres.
Sarkozy should focus on the twin pillars of French foreign affairs which will always be, imo:
Posted by: J.J. | April 25th, 2008 at 3:37 pm | Report this comment- la Francophonie (the 400m people worldwide who use the French language, many in former French colonies) and
- the Franco-German relationship, which is the core of the EU.
RCS is right.
Chirac, Mitterrand, DeGaulle, Pompidou, Giscard dÉstaign…all came from the same pattern, hehe.
A kind of french aristocratic nasty pose alla Louis XVI or Bonaparte way like saying “hey, I am here…and you are there (down the floor)”
Posted by: Enrique | April 25th, 2008 at 3:57 pm | Report this commentI watched the interview last night.
Posted by: papillon | April 25th, 2008 at 4:31 pm | Report this commentTo me, he appeared quite humble throughout and he admitted his mistakes (private life, poor communications on his reforms).
He has been in office less than a year so give the man a break!
After 30 disastrous years of mismanagement, France has to find its way in this new world order.
The French have been waiting for reforms for too long now so he must push forward.
It takes courage.
Sarkozy has plenty.
couldn’t agree more, papillon.
Posted by: AYC | April 25th, 2008 at 4:56 pm | Report this commentApparently the reason why the anti-French protests have been significant in China is not because the protests there were particularly effective - most of the protests were not broadcast in China - but images were shown of a protester trying to disrupt the flame in Paris when carried by a disabled athlete… The Chinese demonstrators think that the problem happened only in France and that the French allowed a disabled torch-bearer to be victimised.
Posted by: mark h | April 25th, 2008 at 5:06 pm | Report this commentTo RCS: Segolene is chic.
On the other hand Marie Antoinete was also chic and look what happened.
GR’s column is good as far as it goes.
I will come back with some
observations.
The French are angry. Start from there.
Posted by: Cassandra | April 25th, 2008 at 5:27 pm | Report this commentBeing chic is unfortunately not enough to solve a country’s problem. Popular support does help a lot to undertake strong reforms, but what if the reforms are not what the country needs?
Posted by: Julien M. | April 25th, 2008 at 5:40 pm | Report this commentSarkozy’s unpopularity is largely related to his personal political communication. I believe Francois Fillon’s popularity is much more representative of what the people think about the actual government, with a few premium points because he stays in the shadow, unlike his boss.
Royal’s might have the chic and she probably wouldn’t be so unpopular at that point if she had been elected, but her wait and see (or negotiate) solutions sounded like the exact opposit of what France needs: brutal and radical change.
Marie Antoinete was not French. She was from the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
Posted by: Pacifist | April 25th, 2008 at 5:41 pm | Report this commentA bit like M Sarkozy who is of Jewish Hungarian extraction and whose actions appear not to be much to the liking of the French.
It is funny to see people talk about human rights in China (including Tibet) when they have little knowledge of China or the Dalai Lama.
Here are some facts (can be verified with historical documents and books written by western expert historians) that you may not be aware:
a) Since 1990s, Dalai Lama and his government-in-exile systematically suppress and brutally crackdown the believers of another branch of Tibetan Budhism (Dorjes Shugden).
b) Dalai Lama was the head of a theocratic dictatorship/serfdom/slavery society prior to his exile in 1950s.
c) Tibet has been part of China for ages and no nation never ever acknowledges an “independent” Tibet prior to Dalai’s exile in 1959. The US congress even has explicitly stated Tibet is part of China.
So why do you think Dalai would be an ideal representative of 6 million Tibetans in China? Is he elected by popular votes? No, he was choosen as the “GOD” when he was a toddler, and he decided to follow CIA’s order and ditched the Tibetans in 1959.
Posted by: freedom of speech | April 25th, 2008 at 6:26 pm | Report this commentDo you really think Tibetans in China would have a democracy under Dalai’s rule? If so, you must be drinking Absolut.
P,
There you go again with your insinuations…
Most of the royal houses of the time were interlinked in a network of marriages. They were not ‘French’ or ‘English’ or ‘Spanish’, but part of a blue-blooded pan-European elite. Remember the ‘Winsdors’ were originally Guelphs…
Sarkozy is not of Hungarian-Jewish extraction (Jews who originated from Budapest form a vast array of talent. To name just a few: the mathematicians von Neumann, Halmos, Erdős, the physicists Edward Teller and Eugene Wigner, the economist Harsanyi, the philosopher Lakatos, the historian Géza Vermes, the violinists Remenyi and Szigeti, the writer Arthur Koestler, Theodor Herzl, George Soros, Andrew Grove co-founder of Intel, the chess grandmasters the sisters Polgár and partly also my girlfriend). Sarkozy’s Jewish line runs through the Sephardi community of Salonika.
Posted by: RCS | April 25th, 2008 at 7:14 pm | Report this commentSegolene may be chic but what about her fat friend? He (Francois Hollande) was imo a real handicap in her campaign as he was imo clearly
annoyed that she was the candidate and not he.
Anyway, Sego and Hollande have split up, and the new Madame Sarkozy is outstandingly chic by any standard.
Posted by: J.J. | April 25th, 2008 at 7:52 pm | Report this commentRight, RCS, Sarko´s Jewish family is originally Sephardic like Spinoza, David Ricardo or Benjamin Disraeli…and a great part of British and Balkan Jews.
Posted by: Enrique | April 25th, 2008 at 8:38 pm | Report this commentSarkozy is a disgrace and done nothing good for France. Segolene would have been a better president for France. All Hungarian has a thinge of Asiatic blood from the Mongol.
Posted by: Will | April 25th, 2008 at 8:50 pm | Report this commentPresident Sarkozy was elected only 12 months ago on a unapologetically reformist agenda. Not only was this agenda not in the traditional French vogue, but - as Gideon points out - it was put across in an uncommonly “agitated” manner. Sarkozy’s fundamental message, as proved last night, remains the same.
Posted by: OSV | April 25th, 2008 at 9:06 pm | Report this commentThe difference as ever is context - he has undermined the gravitas of the French Presidency with his personal affairs and has been unfortunate in that the world economy has tumbled from its benign peak of 2006/07. As any politician of economically liberal conviction will tell you, its hard enough to be free-trade at the best of times, let alone times like these, note the current protectionist stances of the two Democratic candidates in the US and Congresses apparent veto of South American ally Columbia’s free trade deal.
The French public is as fickle as the British - a good month for Sarkozy - positive economic news or a foreign affairs coup could boost his popularity once more. The importance is that he pushes forward with the freeing of the constrained French economy without ceeding ground to the unions. It was this he was elected on a four year mandate to fulfill.
On the topic of China and the Olympics, although I disagree with him, Sarkozy should solidify his current stance and stick to it until China relents on Tibet (even if this easing has nothing to do with Mr. Sarkozy). As Gordon Brown has splendily shown, wish-washing - however nuanced - gets a politician nowhere.
RCS,
NS was mainly elected to solve the economic malaise of France. France has one of the highest unemployment figures
of the big European Countries.
It is a country which, structurally speaking is between Germany and England. At the present moment Germany is booming because of its industrial base, Britain is imploding because of too much financialization of its economy and France cannot move forward because Sarko’s recipes are totally out phase of what is needed:
The main two problems are loss of purchasing power of the population in general and high unemployment. So his program ought to have a short term job creation component and a long term structural component.
In other words he ought to take measures in favour of small and medium
enterprises in the fiscal field. (It is known that enterprise creation in this area in France is much weaker than in Germany. He has not done this.
In addition his measures initially involved fiscal measures that made the position of finance more lucrative.
Less taxes for Bollore, Lagarde etc,
attempts to dismantle aspects of the welfare state (in Health, education, pensions etc). This does not create jobs. In addition no measures were taken to train the millions of unemployed in the banlieus of Paris.
Combined with the rise of Petrol and Food NS will now have to face a perfect
storm politically. (Incidentally Brown is going to face similar things in England. Why the teachers strike? The BP refinery strike?)
NS was a creation of the Media: Paris Match, Le Point, Le Figaro which are owned by finaciers and bankers: Liberation by the Rothchilds, Figaro by Dassault, Le Monde by Lagarde.
The main economic comment in LeMonde is
written by Eric le Boucher a neoliberal who makes Friedman sound like a Fabian. As J Ackerman of D Bank has said ” The markets cannot heal themselves; I have lost confidence in them.” Brown who just forked 50B$ of taxpayer’s funds would agree.
Segolene did not really propose something coherently different. (She had her stuff written by the present head of the IMF and others of similar ideology.
The clock must be turned back. The state must become again an economic actor willing to step in where financiers do not. This is the meaning of the call by the CEO of Rolls Royce in the FT a couple of days ago.
Ref: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ed561ea2-10c0-11dd-b8d6-0000779fd2ac.html
Posted by: Cassandra | April 25th, 2008 at 9:13 pm | Report this commentGideon,
I hate to say this, but you seem to have perfected the art of saying something without saying anything at all.
This is in strange contrast to the rest of FT.
I know this post will be removed, but I do hope it makes you think.
Posted by: Noir | April 25th, 2008 at 10:46 pm | Report this commentThe Chinese never respond well to shouting in public. Ask Mrs Thatcher who lost Hong Hong over it (all the signs were that they would renew the lease till she started shouting at them in public). In the strange world we occupy it’s OK to hand over HongKong citizens to China, but not Tibetan ones!
Posted by: BP | April 25th, 2008 at 11:00 pm | Report this commentSarkozy appears to be picking needless fights with Germany, the economic powerhouse of Europe and he can be as obnoxious as he wants to wives and women silly enough to be his girlfriends, but I don’t like his treatment of Merkel one bit. She is a very dignified and sound leader and has a much more impressive record on pushing a human rights agenda in the world.
Further, Sarkozy appears to also be bending over backwards to back up US foreign policy in Middle East, which I do not think helpful either to the region or to the world as a whole (e.g. by aping US war mongering rhetoric on Iran …and he has voiced little concern about Gaza blockade for someone who claims to be driven by a strong human rights agenda!). It appears he wants desperately to be a powerhouse in the Mediterranean, as he realizes Germany leads EU, hence his MU proposal, and siding with US foreign policy on Middle East, however, he has the leader of France with all its ” prestige” cannot get it passed! Even if he does get it passed this summer, it will not look anything like his original proposal. Again, his temperament is such, that who knows how he will lead and represent the EU …especially in its relationship with Russia…Brown is useless, so when push comes to shove and Sarkozy should need to be contained…It will be up to Merkel…she will have her hands full because he seems to have a petty insecure side to him, especially with women. In any event, what can you say…France has serious problems…. and he does not appear to be a serious man…what a disappointment!
Everyone …have a good weekend!
Posted by: Lisa-Helene Lawson | April 26th, 2008 at 12:09 am | Report this commentBut it is evident France under Sarkozy has left to be a Sovereign nation. The economy has not improved until now and France is becoming everyday more another U.S. Protectorate….perhaps they never left to be one and all was a game, and when Chirac went too far saying NO to the U.S. and Israel in the Iraq War the Big Brothers just ordered a change. Better having a waiter in the Protectorate than a nationalist.
Posted by: Enrique | April 26th, 2008 at 12:31 am | Report this commentI agree with the comment by “freedom of speech”. People should indeed read up on the Dalai Llama before taking strong positions for him. Rather than demanding talks with the Dalai Llama, the right position is to argue that the human rights of all in Tibet should be respected.
Mr Sarkozy does not strike one as someone who reads up on things or tries to understand different perspectives on an issue. He is trying to copy Tony Blair, and the associated image-focused intuitive politics. I believe he has himself said that he looks up to Blair. This does not bode well for the rest of his presidency.
Posted by: Oscar D | April 26th, 2008 at 10:06 am | Report this commentSarko is a lovely guy, if this adjective is allowed to be used in politics, but just like Lisa said above, he can’t be taken serious. He’s more like a comedian brought onto stage at a highly tension time, trying to easing the situation thru his comic performance. And his appearance is a sign that the cunning French financiers are waiting to see what’s the result of this global turmoil.
Posted by: al | April 26th, 2008 at 11:10 am | Report this commenti just do not get it. why is the author using Sarko instead of Sarkozy? is is somekind of joke or …..or it is desperate socilistic outcry
Posted by: Georgi | April 26th, 2008 at 3:49 pm | Report this commentI abosultely agree with almost everything you said in this article.
and i believe almost every other chinese would agree with you on this as well.
Posted by: tracyhong | April 27th, 2008 at 6:27 am | Report this commentPlease people when are you going to wake up and smell the coffe. Sarko is just a poster boy for the European right who do not give a damn about Human rights. If he is so caring about the Han right why does nt he say a word about Saudi Arabia? UAE? Qatar? Bahrain?
What about the mess that the French have left behind in Africa that after so many years still no one can create peace in those countries. Stop being hypocrites the only reason he is putting pressure on China is becasue he know he and his European allies cannot stop the Chinese industrial engine. This is how they are making themsleves look good. If he is honest and his European friends are honest as well why are they outsoursinn all compnaies and industires to China. These interviews are just good for those who do not understand politics and believe in these kind of corrupted leaders.
Posted by: babak | April 27th, 2008 at 2:29 pm | Report this commentWe will see the result in six years. If he undertakes the “thatcherite” reforms in the French economy (Thatcher needed the Fakland´s War for that) and France is more respected than now…he will have succeeded.
But if by then Spain´s income per head is over France´s and French Foreign Policy is less repected than when he arrived, then he will have failed…
Right now France looks like a nation without route which just has buried its international agenda adopting the American one…
Posted by: Enrique | April 28th, 2008 at 12:37 am | Report this commentThere is too much focus on style rather than substance. ‘chic’ - so being well dressed for the crises besetting the world matters then - what an idiot!
Posted by: Gundi | April 28th, 2008 at 5:51 am | Report this commentIt looks like western people care more about Chinese people’s interest than the Chinese government. But history didn’t show any evidence of this. What I believed is that Sarkozy embarrassed Chinese people other than just the Chinese government. It reminds me of the old tricks played by the colonial France back in the 19 century when Sarkozy sent three people to China to please the Chinese.
Posted by: Ben | April 28th, 2008 at 9:23 am | Report this commentSarkozy’s next trip is to Tunisia; he is pressing on with his aim of closer economic links with North African countries, which as a group are part of la Francophonie. French companies who have already set up operations in Tunisia report high rates of growth in their business there (up to 40% p.a., with wages around €150-200/month). It is claimed that this low-cost option is making it possible to keep other plants and research, located in France, financially viable. The main problem in the French economy itself is the 35-hour week dating from the socialist Mitterand era. However, Sarkozy has already said that in future for every 3 civil servants who retire, only 2 will take their place.
After his TV appearance last week, Sarkozy got a positive reaction from the French media.
Posted by: J.J. | April 28th, 2008 at 9:45 am | Report this comment