The Tangwall Campagin. According to the latest Eurobarometer survey, 29% of French people have a negative opinion of the European Union (EU). What does this figure inspire you?
Jacques Sapir. This figure, even increasing, could change or even increase in another context, which is why these polls are not really revealing. With the positions of Trump on Greenland or Canada, UNITED STATES exert strong pressure on European countries, which feel threatened: it is a geopolitical context which still contains and favors pro-EU positions. However, if we had a real political debate in France on the way in whichEuropean Union prevents a policy of reindustrialization or immigration management, we would probably exceed 50% negative opinions.
Paradoxically, would this context not push France to assert its sovereignty in matters of defense and security?
Of course, and it is entirely logical: defense has never been part of the remit of the European Union. It is not because today a Commission President takes up this issue that this modifies the Treaty: defense does not fall within her competence.
In reality, no country wanted to give up its sovereignty in the EU, and France less than any other, where this feeling remains deeply rooted, even if it does not yet appear in this poll. The few countries that would be ready to abandon it on this issue are those that do not have the means to ensure their own defense.
In this survey, France displays the highest rate. Why are the French the most skeptical of the EU?
Despite a similar geopolitical context in Europe, the French are those who express the most hostility towards the EU. This highlights an old reality: for more than twenty years, the French have been wary of the European Union, as proven by the result shown in the 2005 referendum, where the French majority rejected the draft European Constitution. France has been a special case since at least 1956, when Guy Mollet allowed France to acquire nuclear weapons.
Nuclear deterrence cannot be shared: whatever the European Union decides, France is able to defend its sovereignty, which is a very different position than that of a country like Germany. THE Mercosur also has its place in this hostility towards the EU, even if it is not the most determining element, since it mainly raises awareness among farmers, who now represent only 3 or 4% of the French population.
What is France’s place within the European Union?
France has an influence that is sometimes well seen, sometimes badly seen. It is firstly linked to the French deterrence system, over which there can be no European federal direction. On this point, it is clear that French interests will come before those of European countries.
“French deterrence will remain the main deterrent force in Europe”
The nuclear question arises and will continue to arise: with the British deterrent in a state of advanced decline, the French deterrent will undoubtedly remain the main deterrent force in Europe. Then, it is also based on interventions in Africa. These are the two reasons why France is a specific case within the EU.
European economic and budgetary choices are sometimes perceived as unfavorable to certain French sectors. How do you think this influences the French’s judgment of the EU?
On economic and monetary issues, a large part of the progress towards federalism was driven by France. From this point of view, pro-European sentiment appears above all as a means of escaping national constraints, dictated by pressure from unions and reactions from the population. This is, for example, what led us to the euro: the main motivation remains above all Franco-French rather than European. For major macroeconomic or industrial policy issues, it is more questionable, and most European policies in this area have not really worked.
France has never been against some European cooperation: what it has always refused is this form of integration within a union. This cooperation remains necessary: a country like France, representing 2.7% of world GDP, cannot compete alone with powers like the United States. It is possible to legislate through agreements between a few states without involving the other 26 members of the EU. This is the case of Airbus, which was not a European project strictly speaking, but a Franco-German project subsequently joined by Italy and Spain.
The subject of Frexit is barely present in the media, and the politicians who defend it have had little success (Philippot, Asselineau, etc.). How do you explain it?
This is a phenomenon that can be explained very well. All political leaders, from the right to the left, have understood that each time France asserts specific positions, particularly in matters of defense, the specter of Napoleon is thrown back at it. He is accused of wanting to hegemonize Europe, as Napoleon had attempted.
“The European Commission must recognize that it is not the manager of Europe, but the simple agent of the countries”
Thus, many political figures have understood the fact that going into a somewhat brutal confrontation on this issue could cause the breakup of the European Union, due to the specific weight of France. This is why no one dares to defend their ideas clearly. I will add that if France decides to leave the EU, the main issues and difficulties will mainly relate to other countries. France, for its part, would get out of this by reconsidering many of its choices, particularly budgetary ones.
How could the EU restore the confidence of the French or European countries on economic, security and defense levels?
First of all, the European Union must stop intervening in these areas and push countries to be responsible, and make the alliances that they deem necessary. Then, the European Commission should recognize that it is not the manager of Europe, but the simple agent of the countries.
* Economist and researcher, Jacques Sapir taught at EHESS and Paris Nanterre University. He is the author of The euro against France, the euro against Europe (2016, Editions du Cerf).
