France within the European Union

Europe during the last 60 years became a brand that stands for unity and cooperation. Without the true determination of Jean Monnet and Robert Schuman, who after the devastating world wars laid down the first serious proposal, the Schuman Plan (1950), concerning the future cooperation between the European countries, the European Union would not exist at all or not the way as it is now today. France is a proud founder of the European Union. Being aware of its importance in the creation of the first sophisticated political and economic intergovernmental cooperation in the world, one might think that the presence of France within the institutes of the European Union reflects this greatness. Therefore, it is highly surprising to see the relatively minor presence of France in Brussels, compared to other founding fathers, especially Germany.

France is the largest Member State of the European Union and, following Germany, has the second largest population (66.4 million). Although, within the EU, France has been a net payer country, it receives a substantial amount of European funds. According to the 2015 budget France contributed EUR 19 billion to the common budget, while receiving EUR 14.5 billion from the EU, which is a 0.85% GNI to 0.65% GNI ratio. France is member of the Eurozone, as well as the Schengen Zone, and it has already held the EU presidency for 12 times.

After the unification of Germany and the 2004 enlargement, the economic and political map of the European Union significantly changed. Previous power relations disintegrated and new structures emerged. During the course of this change, France lost some of its previous positions. Charles de Marcilly, the head of the Brussels’ Office of the Robert Schuman Foundation (Paris/Brussels), pointed out that since the new member states were more closely connected to Berlin, Germany evidently became the biggest winner of the 2004 enlargement process. One of the blatant differences between the German and the French presence in Brussels, however, is undeniably rooted in the mentality. The French political leadership simply does not understand how important it is to be present and presented in Brussels, de Marcilly added.

As Yann-Sven Rittelmeyer, Policy Analyst of European Policy Centre (Brussels) added, Brussels has been for a long time considered by French politicians as a second choice, contrary to the Germans, who invest enormously into European issues. For example, German members of the European Parliament stay much longer in the European Parliament, whereas rotation among French members is much more frequent.

Speaking of the institutions, it is the European Council where the strongest French presence can be precieved. The French permanent representation is led by Pierre Sellal, who is a highly respected middle-aged diplomat. The reason behind his nomination for a second term was that France really needed an experienced diplomat who can lead France wisely through the migration crisis, the complex labyrinth of the Brexit talks, and the unknown future of the transatlantic relations. Sellal, the last Sun King of French diplomacy, as Politico named him, has to find the fine line that is needed to represent France in a time when the advocacy power of the country is declining. The Berlin–Paris axis is not the obvious decisive voice of Brussels anymore. Therefore, some advisors think that it is time to open up and make better ties with some of the new member states and put more emphasis on security, defence and foreign policy issues where France can definitely have a leading voice. Let’s not forget that, within the EU, it is France that has the highest numbers of embassies around the world which means that it has the means to be very well connected and informed, reminded us de Marcilly.

In the European Parliament, as well in the hierarchy of the European Commission, France is rather underrepresented. In the European Parliament, France has 74 members who are divided between almost all of the political parties. It is important to note that the National Front has the highest number of representatives within the French delegation (23 MEPs) closely followed by the EU sceptics, while the conservative The Republicans (20 MEPs), the Social Party and the Radical Party of the Left (13 MEPs) only come in third and fourth respectively; these numbers do not reflect the national stance of political parties as both in the Senate and in the National Assembly the Left outnumbers all the other parties. In the European Parliament, the real power is concentrated in the hands of a small number of politicians who sit in the Bureau of the EP. Out of the 22 Committees of the EP, Germany dominates the political decision-making, as it has 5 Chairs while France has only 3 (Fisheries, Budgets, Transport), said de Marcilly.

There is an obvious strategical difference between the Germans and the French concerning parliamentary mandates. While France does not have a long term strategy concerning its representatives, Germany follows a much conscious HR policy. One can really witness the long term effect of its MEPs work when these are finally elected as committee chairs or party leaders after completing nearly three mandates on average. Furthermore, let’s not forget that there are several German MEPs who can become future leaders of Germany, while this would be highly impossible in France, pointed out de Marcilly. Besides the committee chairs, a very important role is played by the coordinators who are the political party representatives in the Committees. Overall, France delegates 1 vice president of the EP, 3 chairs of committees, 8 vice chairs within the committees, 5 coordinators in the committees and there is one party chair (Le Pen is the co-chair of ENF Party of the EP) and 4 vice party chairs which add to 24 leading MEPs, compared to Germany which has 43 MEPs in leading positions.

In the European Commission, France is represented by Pierre Moscovici, a talented graduate of the best schools of France, who, after the university, quickly became a member of the political elite of the socialist circles of Paris. At age of 37, he was already representing France in the European Parliament. Moscovici is one of those few politicians who successfully served at national as well as European levels. In 2014, he received the important Economic and Financial Affairs, Taxation and Customs portfolio within the Juncker Cabinet. Recently, another French politician, Michel Barnier was appointed as chief negotiator in charge of Brexit negotiations by President Juncker. Barnier and Juncker have been long-time friends, coming from the same political family, the EPP. For Juncker, it was important to name an experienced, respected politician to this position. After the appointment of the young Belgian carrier diplomat, Didier Seeuws as the representant of the Council and the former prime minister of Belgium, Guy Verhofstadt as the representant of the European Parliament in the Brexit talks. According to the BBC, Barnier will defend the European vision to the end, and the British government would do well not to underestimate him. After all, this is one of the most important reasons why President Juncker appointed him.

The migration crisis, the Brexit, as well as the security challenges of the continent require forward-looking, strategic thinking and effective solutions. France definitely wants to be back in the forefront of European policy-making again. The faded reputation caused by its economic weakness shall be replaced by new policies, new messages and a new strategy. France wants to be at least an equal partner with Germany, said Rittelmayer, but even if France thinks of itself in its greatness and has great ambitions, for the moment, it does not have the strong voice it would like to have. Firstly, it has to improve its economic situation by doing some structural reforms, in order to have a more competitive economy. Jean Marc Schaub, the senior advisor of Synopia (Paris) thinks that for France it is crucial to establish a strong relationship with Germany. He points out that if “this couple” does not work together, Europe might be at risk, with even bigger problems in the future which could endanger both countries, and the rest of the EU as well. We have to restore reciprocal respect, and agree on common points that will help to improve this relation, he added.

On the other hand, France’s influence could be increased if the perception of the EU finally changes in Paris. Since 2005, after the failed referendum on the constitutional treaty, there has been a sort of disarray related to European affairs in France, said Rittelmayer. Being critical about the EU became a way to win votes. Almost all presidential candidates were defending Eurosceptic or Euro-critic positions—with the noteworthy exception of Emmanuel Macron, who precisely made a case for deeper European integration, which helped him to set himself apart from the mainstream.

After the elections, we will propose organizing a general meeting with all concerned stakeholders in France to rethink the role of the State in the 21st century within the European Union, and to rebuild our democratic processes, said Schaub. If a consensus can be reached with this process, if a clear agreement is shared on these points, and if the necessary trust between elected representatives and citizens is recreated, then we can be confident that changes will occur in the following years concerning the role of France in the European Union.

Similarly, to the early 50s, Europe needs passionate and dedicated leaders who wisely lead the people of Europe through crisis and challenges, securing peace and prosperity for the continent and the EU—which today has become more than a cooperation or a brand but a value in itself.

Fanni Mercs, project manager at AJKC’s Brussels Office contributed to this article.

Opening pic by Shutterstock