Sarkozy is elected. What kind of president is he going to be for Europe and the world? Get to know his personality and program from a well informed Frenchman. Dubious is the belief, however, that he will improve the wobbly French democracy.

Without any surprises, considering his cosy advantage in the first round, Nicolas Sarkozy was elected president of the French republic Sunday May 6^th with a clear-cut victory. This will give him the authority to pass the reforms he promised during the campaign. Of course, he still has to win the parliamentary election in June, but this should be a formality.

What kind of president will Sarkozy be? A few clues may be gathered from his personality, network, and programme. But can he change a democracy that does not resemble any northern European standard?

Sarkozy’s personality

Journalists who followed Sarkozy often used the Freudian mechanism of “infantile psychic trauma” to describe Sarkozy. His father abandoned his family at an early age, and Sarkozy, who studied law, had to sue him for subsidies later on. It is reported that he endured “humiliations”, which formed his mentality and character, and sense of retaliation towards them.

He has jewish roots from his mother, which are not relevant, as he is a practicing catholic. He has Hungarian roots from his father, which are not relevant either as he is a practicing nationalist.

In high school, the director had to tell him: “for politics you will have to wait a little”, as he wanted to skip school and demonstrate for de Gaulle against the leftist demonstrators in May 1968. He joined politics in his early twenties and ambition never departed him. Asked by a journalist a few years ago if he was sometimes thinking about becoming president while shaving, he answered “not only when I shave”. He was elected mayor of Neuilly, a conservative and rich town of the Parisian suburb, at the age of 28. For him politics is a profession. A profession he practiced with a scientific approach to the study of power. “No one gets there [at the top of power] by chance” he often repeats (1). He worked with an ascetic discipline, day after day, for the past 25 years to become president.

Sarkozy has no complex towards money. His personal patrimony has been evaluated at €2.5 million. Sarkozy is rich and does not hide it. During the campaign he took every time he was in the country side a private plane to go back to his home around Paris in order to “sleep with his family”. The first thing he did after his election was to dine at the luxurious Parisian restaurant “Fouquet’s”, with the old rock star Johnny Haliday. He made the nation wait until later in the evening to address her on the Concord plaza.

He does not hide his relations with rich industrials or businessmen either. The third thing he did after winning the election was to accept the invitation to paid holydays by his friend, billionaire investor Vincent Bolloré. He took a private jet owned by Bolloré’s company to go spend some time with his family on a huge yacht also owned by the Bolloré’s company.

His style was surely for a great deal in his victory. One could compare the difference between Royal and Sarkozy’s style with the Bush/Gore campaign. Unlike Royal and Gore, Sarkozy and Bush used short sentences, without too many adjectives between the verb and the object. Hence delivering catchy messages. They simplify the complexities of our world, which deserve more nuances and depth, into populist slogans: “Love France or leave it!” “You’re tired of those punks? Well, we’ll get you rid of them” [addressing someone who disapproved of young people with ethnic background shouting at Sarkozy in visit in a ghetto-suburb]. Immigration is put in a semantic relation to national identity, Turkey to Islamism, France with turmoil and chaos, Sarkozy to order, authority, work, family and moral. Issues are uncomplicated and so is the solution: a man of action who is going to change things.

Sarkozy truly mastered an American approach to political communication. As in the “anglo-saxon” countries, he addresses journalists by their first name and the familiar “tu” instead of the formal “vous”. Surrounded by professionals in marketing and spin, he gave the image of a man of action by appearing running or riding a horse. A man of action who can change things, who carries reforms and makes “everything possible”, as his campaign slogan has it.

As Royal, he enjoyed gathering huge crowds of fans in stadiums or gigantic concert hall. In this election, the two main opponents seemed to be football stars or rock stars, and voters where more football supporters, sometimes hooligans, or teenage girls at their first rock concert. In any case, no rational citizen.

Berlusconi could also be a subject for comparison because of his relations with the media and his populism. Unlike Berlusconi, Sarkozy does not own the major media, but he does have numerous friends who own the major media companies. Puzzling incidents have happened. A director of a magazine getting fired shortly after publishing pictures of Sarkozy’s wife with another man The director of a radio channel asking Sarkozy’s advice for hiring a new political journalist. Sarkozy announcing before anyone else who the new TV host for the 8 o’clock news of the main private channel was.

Sarkozy has been in the news almost constantly for the past two years. In the media he made his political marketing, manipulating statistics, personalising the debate on his person, and suggesting demagogic solutions, when a sober debate about a thorough criminal policy should take place. These accusations came from Serge Portelli, a judge, president of the criminal court of Paris, author of numerous studies on criminality and criminal law, and member of the magistrates’ union, which is considered left wing (2). Again, a little scandal occurred when this judge wanted to publish his book during the election by a publishing house owned by a friend of Sarkozy. Portelli denounced pressures to drop the book, and published it on the net, before another publisher took the book. The publishing house in its defence argued that the manuscript was poorly written, and Portelli was victimising himself for getting attention.

Perhaps related to his “infantile psychic trauma”, he wants to get everyone to like him. He gathers “friends” into networks that he can put into use for his political goals. He enjoys appearing with stars, using them like etiquettes for their image potential. A very well oiled procedure enables him to win celebrities to his cause. He is physical and warm; like Chirac he likes to touch people, and enjoys direct contact. Not a cold and distant intellectual like Royal appeared to be. He does not even talk like one, and uses instead a very popular level of French.

Sarkozy also has a short temper. Many people have described him as easily getting irascible. A former minister under the same government (Azouz Begag) recalled in a book a 5 minutes non-stop monologue of insults by Sarkozy over the phone: “You bastard! I’ll break your face!” Sarkozy also displays a vindictive will to settle his differences, particularly with May 1968 and leftism in France, and the suburbs.

Paradoxically, Sarkozy was elected for this image of a hot, direct, physical politician, who speaks his mind without make up – even populist – an image at odds with the traditional one the president of the French republic shall represent.

Fitting the emperor’s new clothes

It is a well known truism in France to compare the president with a monarch. The president has an official suit – although only Charles de Gaulle and Georges Pompidou wore it for the official portrait of the president, in a pose worthy of an emperor or king (3).

Inherited from de Gaulle and his will to put an end to endless political quarrels, the president is supposed to be above them, and must appear “neutral.” He is the “highest judge” in the country.

Already during the campaign, the candidates also fought for the image of a personality above cleavages, capable of unifying the country. This exercise was more difficult for Sarkozy who had to represent a man of rupture, direct, who “speaks his mind”, and polarises the society.

Sarkozy will have to fit this function, which is going to be very hard for someone elected for his populist plain speaking. Chances are great that he will deceive his electorate who elected him for great reforms, by fear of alienating those who would oppose them (university, 35 hours).

New Right?

Is Sarkozy representing a new right in France? He surely managed to unite all of them into his one catch-all party. The French political scientist René Rémond defined three traditional tendencies in the right that Sarkozy managed to embody: the legitimist, which votes for the right extremist Le Pen; the bonapartist, with the personalisation of power, a pathos in the discourse and patriotism; the orleanist with the liberal ideas (4)

He made an inventory with gaullism. It is difficult to clearly see his position as he did not display much sympathy for this tradition in right-wing policies. He certainly has a Gaullist vision of the presidential function: a republican monarch. Gaullist, he expressed clearly economic interventionism when national interest is at stake. On the other hand, he wants to apply some kind of Thatcherism/Reaganism in domestic economy, with a minimal state, minimal interventionism, confiding in the market’s self-regulation. Gaullist, he wants to see France as a great country in the world, which speaks on the same level with others. However, he expressed a stronger partnership with the USA.

Perhaps this new Thatcher for France will finally trigger a “third way” debate among socialists, who refused the Blair/Schröder call of 1999. It is to hope for the left that a good right punch in the face will wake them up.

EU policy

Although he speaks bad English, Sarkozy always proclaimed to be a “convinced European”, and he will do what he can to “launch again the European construction process” (5).

Sarkozy campaigned for a diet-treaty reduced to institutional matters and adopted by the French Parliament, not by referendum. It will be based on the Constitutional treaty already adopted by some other countries. However, studies show that the functioning at 27 is actually even more efficient than at 15, making this yet another Euromyth (6).

On his declaration after his victory at the Concord plaza, he declared that “France is back in Europe”. A puzzling statement that will frown some eyebrows among EU diplomats in the coming weeks and months. Does this mean that France will be back for pushing forward a French vision of Europe? He immediately added that Europe should listen to those who see Europe not as a “protection” but “Trojan horse” for all the menaces of the world. In any case, Sarkozy wants to put France back in her role of engine for the European construction.

Sarkozy wants to promote a European protectionism against “unbalance competition” from products “not respecting environmental and social rules”, an oft used Janus faced arguments against developing countries.

Sarkozy campaigned on a clear and sound “no” to Turkey inside the EU, because “it is not in Europe but Asia minor”. Sarkozy has thus a “geographical” perception of Europe, albeit politically ideological. Instead he suggests a “Mediterranean Union” based on the model of what has been done “for unifying Europe sixty years ago”.

Foreign policy

There will be some changes in Sarkozy’s foreign policy, but no sea-change from Chirac’s (7).

USA

To the USA, Sarkozy will operate a rupture in tone, but not in the policy. The USA “can count of France’s friendship” he declared on the night of his election. France has always been cooperating on many issues with the USA, although Chirac irritated the Bush administration with his arrogant tone, especially at the UN, and his original opposition to invade Irak, Sarkozy will put an end to this arrogance, even if he also considered the invasion of Irak as a “historical mistake” at that time. Disagreement should persist however on the Kyoto agreement, multilateralism as well as “cultural diversity”.

Human Rights

Against China and Russia, Sarkozy wants to oppose to them, like German chancellor Angela Merkel, a discourse on the respect of human rights.

Africa

One of the priorities expressed by Sarkozy during his triumphal speech on the night of the election May 6^th was Africa. He expressed his wish to “decide together of a controlled immigration policy and an ambitious development policy”. He sent a “call for fraternal aid against diseases, poverty, hunger” so that we “live in peace”. Darfour is at the heart of his agenda, as he considered the situation there as “scandalous”. He declared during the campaign his favours for a more acute sanction regime towards Sudan. Sarkozy is however not if favour of “repentance” and assuming the country’s colonial past and responsibility, as Chirac. Africans are not seeing Sarkozy’s election as good tiding. Charter planes taking illegal immigrants back to the country. Being treated like cattle in long lines in front of the French consulate for a visa. Students signing an oath to leave the country immediately after receiving a university degree. These are the images associated with Sarkozy in Africa.

Middle-East

Arabic countries expressed some concerned to see young French muslims pushed to extremism by Sarkozy’s radical slogans and amalgamations. They are afraid that Sarkozy is good news for Al Qaeda. In this sense Sarkozy will have to prove them wrong and have an effective policy towards the 10% Muslism population in France. Sarkozy’s policy for the Middle East should be in rupture with Chirac’s because the former does not have the personal ties of the later with Arab leaders. Lebanon shall loose priority and support from France. Sarkozy wants to be tougher on Iran, instead of Chirac’s dialogue approach. On the Israelian-Palestinian conflict, Sarkozy is traditional: attached to “Israel’s security”, which can only be secured by the creation of an independent Palestinian state. The EU shall play a role in the peace process.

Globalisation

Globalisation has not been on the agenda for the campaign. No wonder: the country is notoriously having a negative opinion on globalisation. It is also too complex a problem, too structural to fit the personal marketing of this campaign. During the debate Royal/Sarkozy, the latter did mention the WTO, but only to affirm his position that the country presiding the EU should represent it at the WTO, in place of the actual EU commission. Not a word on the problem of the WTO being bypassed by the multiplication of bilateral protectionist exchanges, betraying its Keynesian original ideal for a sound global economy. Sarkozy is also himself in favour of national and European protectionism in the global economy.

Chirac and the aftermath

I have looked very carefully in the French newspapers: nothing about Chirac’s immediate future with justice. Throughout his political life, Chirac’s name has been associated with cases of corruption, scandals or lawsuits. But it is only with his years as mayor of Paris that the investigations got very close to him. On September 22^nd 2000, the daily Le Monde put Chirac at the heart of the polemic, on the basis of revelations by a former financier of his party. It revealed, principally, a whole system of racketeering companies for the hidden finances of Chirac’s party, and of hiring fictional employees sympathetic to the party in Paris town hall (8). Several personalities of the party have been condemned, and notably Chirac’s right hand and former Prime Minister Alain Juppé.

Chirac himself was untouchable because the constitution gives immunity to the president. The public prosecutor and the examining magistrate had to declare themselves incompetent, even though the later revealed “serious and concordant evidences” leading to the former mayor of Paris.

Normally, stepping down as the president should remove his immunity from prosecution. As a common citizen, Chirac should now be available to be heard by justice and, if required, prosecuted.

As the “highest judge” of the country, what will Sarkozy’s position be?

This silence around Chirac is deafening in a democracy. Unfortunately, abuses of power, corruptions, nepotism have become so common place – both from the right and the left – that they do not seem to scandalise anyone anymore.

Do you know what is the name to describe a country where politicians organise systems of hidden political financing, old school ties, nepotism and favouritism, where political leaders are elected on the basis of their personal glory, and masses are going to listen to them in huge stadiums with a mystical faith in them? No, you guessed wrong. It’s France.

(2) Serge Portelli, Ruptures, Paris : L’Harmattan, 2007. http://www.betapolitique.fr/spip.php?rubrique0043

(3) http://www.elysee.fr/elysee/elysee.fr/francais/la_presidence/la_galerie_des_presidents/
v_eme_republique/veme_republique.20934.html

(4) Debate with Xavier Jardin, assistant professor at Sciences-Po Paris, and editor of Dictionaire de la droite  (Larousse), May 11^th 2007

http://www.lemonde.fr/web/chat/0,46-0@2-823448,55-908352@51-823374@45-1,0.html

(5) “Nicolas Sarkozy s'engage à relancer la construction européenne”, Le Monde, May 8^th 2007.

(6) “The non-functioning myth”, The Economist, April 12^th 2007.

(7) “Diplomatie : des "changements", mais pas de "table rase"”, Le Monde, May 8^th 2007.

(8) Jean Garrigues, “La dérive des affaires”, L’histoire, numéro spécial « l’énigme Chirac », October 2006.