Will realpolitik sell the EU constitution to the French?
In six weeks, the French will vote on a referendum to ratify the EU constitution. Current polling in France runs about 55% against, and twelve straight polls have had the “no” camp in the lead. In an attempt to combat this trend, last night French President Jacques Chirac held a nationally televised town hall-style meeting ...
In six weeks, the French will vote on a referendum to ratify the EU constitution. Current polling in France runs about 55% against, and twelve straight polls have had the "no" camp in the lead. In an attempt to combat this trend, last night French President Jacques Chirac held a nationally televised town hall-style meeting with 83 "young people." Two things were interesting about the event and its aftermath. The first was Chirac's principal arguments for ratification -- political and economic balancing against the United States. According to the Wadhington Post's Erika Lorentzsen:
In six weeks, the French will vote on a referendum to ratify the EU constitution. Current polling in France runs about 55% against, and twelve straight polls have had the “no” camp in the lead. In an attempt to combat this trend, last night French President Jacques Chirac held a nationally televised town hall-style meeting with 83 “young people.” Two things were interesting about the event and its aftermath. The first was Chirac’s principal arguments for ratification — political and economic balancing against the United States. According to the Wadhington Post‘s Erika Lorentzsen:
“What would be the role of France tomorrow if we block this process?” [Chirac] asked during a question-and-answer session with young people and journalists, broadcast from the Elysee Palace. “We will not be strong, and Europe would not be strong enough against the big powers.” Proponents of the constitution contend that it is crucial to making the European Union, an often internally divided alliance, more influential in world affairs. Among many Europeans, this means standing up to the United States…. In his remarks, Chirac sought to convince voters that irrational worries were standing in the way of the constitution, which he said would protect Europe from an “ultra-liberal” and “Anglo-Saxon” economic model, code words for American-style free-market capitalism. “I’m always surprised to see this expression of fear,” he said. “Europe needs to feel proud of itself and France in its principal role in defending our interests. This fear of young people I don’t understand. I have confidence in France and our future.”
In the Financial Times, John Thornhill and Peggy Hollinger provide an even more explicit quote:
Mr Chirac said the treaty, which established a new set of rules for the expanded European Union of 25 countries, was essential to preserve French values. “What is the interest of the Anglo-Saxon countries and particularly the US? It is naturally to stop Europe’s construction, which risks creating a much stronger Europe tomorrow,” he said.
The second interesting thing was that Chirac’s line of argumentation floundered. Both the BBC and CNN International have recaps of the French media response, and they were not good. From the latter’s round-up:
“In front of an audience in which those favoring the ‘No’ seemed to be in the majority, the head of state often struggled to make heard his pro-European plea during a muddled broadcast,” the conservative Le Figaro wrote on its front page. “Chirac: difficulty reassuring,” LCI television said, while the left-leaning Liberation newspapers said Chirac appeared “strained, almost clenched-up” in the meeting. Laurent Fabius, a former Socialist prime minister and leading “no” campaigner accused Chirac of trying to scare voters into backing the charter. “I found Mr. Chirac, like the constitution, long and not very convincing,” he told RTL radio. “I was very struck to see Mr. Chirac saying on the one hand, ‘don’t be afraid’, but his main argument was to try to create fear.”
The Economist, among others points out that much of the “no” support might have less to do with the EU constitution and more to do with Chirac’s growing unpopularity. However. going back to the FT, it’s possible that the two may actually be linked:
[S]ome of the audience said the constitution was too complex and doubted it would make any difference to their lives. They quizzed Mr Chirac aggressively over France’s high unemployment, the threat to the country’s public services and the possible influx of cheap labour from eastern Europe. Asked by one voter why the unemployment rate was so much lower in the UK than in France, Mr Chirac replied that Britain had social rules that would not be “acceptable to us”. ….Mr Chirac’s greatest political rival, Nicolas Sarkozy, the populist president of the ruling UMP party, on Thursday contradicted the president’s upbeat views by saying that the “French social model” was failing the people. In a speech in southern France, Mr Sarkozy said that with a 10 per cent unemployment rate France should stop saying its system worked better than that of others. “In 20 years both the left and the right have doubled the credits to combat unemployment but we have not produced one fewer unemployed person,” he said.
Even the Economist acknowledges that, “in contrast to the Maastricht vote, which led to the euro, it is hard to say what is at stake in the EU constitution.” It will be very interesting to see how this plays out over the next six weeks. My hunch is that support for the “yes” side will increase as the vote nears — and even if the referendum fails, the French can simply schedule another referendum. On the other hand, if the quixotic combination of realpolitik and social democracy doesn’t generate majority support in France, then I’m not sure where it will work. Developing….
Daniel W. Drezner is a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and co-host of the Space the Nation podcast. Twitter: @dandrezner
More from Foreign Policy

Can Russia Get Used to Being China’s Little Brother?
The power dynamic between Beijing and Moscow has switched dramatically.

Xi and Putin Have the Most Consequential Undeclared Alliance in the World
It’s become more important than Washington’s official alliances today.

It’s a New Great Game. Again.
Across Central Asia, Russia’s brand is tainted by Ukraine, China’s got challenges, and Washington senses another opening.

Iraqi Kurdistan’s House of Cards Is Collapsing
The region once seemed a bright spot in the disorder unleashed by U.S. regime change. Today, things look bleak.