In the wake of the French legislative elections held on July 8, 2024, France has found itself in an unprecedented political impasse. For nearly fifty days, the country has been operating without an official government that holds the confidence of both President Emmanuel Macron and the National Assembly (parliament).

The political deadlock began in mid-July when Macron was compelled to accept the resignation of Prime Minister Gabriel Attal's government. In an interim measure, Macron requested Attal's administration to continue as a caretaker government until a new one could be formed.

On August 23, in an effort to break the stalemate, President Macron initiated consultations with leaders from various political parties. These discussions aimed to end the government formation crisis that had gripped the nation. However, as of August 26, these high-level talks have yet to yield any substantial results.

Macron's Vision

In his speech to the French nation last July, following the legislative election results, President Emmanuel Macron outlined his vision for forming a new government and appointing a prime minister. He emphasized that no government could be formed without a majority in the National Assembly, as no political force had secured a sufficient majority. Macron referred to all resulting blocs and alliances as "minorities" and called upon political forces and their representatives to form a "strong, diverse majority for the country."

It is important to note that the recent elections resulted in a National Assembly composed of opposing factions: the left (193 deputies), the presidential camp and the Republican Right (166), and the far right (142). This composition makes it challenging to secure the necessary majority of 289 seats.

Macron's stance clearly indicates his refusal to appoint a prime minister from either the "New Popular Front" or his own political current aligned with the Republican Liberal Right, as neither possesses a majority. Instead, he advocates for the formation of a coalition comprising at least 289 deputies in the National Assembly who would support the next government.

While not specifying which parties should form this coalition, Macron outlined criteria for its composition. These include recognition of republican institutions, the rule of law, parliamentary life, European orientation, and the defense of France's independence. He did not set a specific deadline for the coalition's formation, stating that the current government would continue to manage affairs in the interim.

The French president commended voters for excluding the far right and explained that forming a government from a single movement that succeeded with help from political rivals' voters was not feasible. Macron interpreted the legislative election results as indicative of the need for change and power-sharing, emphasizing the necessity for consensus as no political force can fully implement its program.

Positioning himself as the guarantor of national interest, Macron asserted that his powers include preserving republican institutions. He called on political forces to take the necessary time to build consensus and form coalitions, prioritizing republican values, voter aspirations, and national interests over partisan concerns. Macron stressed the need for a new political culture of coalition and alliance, noting that many European countries have already embraced this approach.

Macron's statements convey several key messages to French political forces:

1- The president's role in the Fifth Republic remains unchanged as the guarantor of institutional function, guardian of national interest, and arbiter between authorities. This position is unaffected by his camp's loss of an absolute majority.

2- By emphasizing the need for a stable and diverse majority, Macron underscores the necessity for compromise. This implies his desire to preserve what he considers major achievements of his second term, such as maintaining the retirement law and current tax rates. This message is particularly directed at the "France Insoumise" party leading the "New Popular Front," whose program includes reversing these policies.

3- Despite the French president's central role and power to appoint the prime minister, Macron has made this a shared responsibility with parliamentary and political forces. While he stands ready to appoint the prime minister, the onus of forming an absolute majority falls on the forces represented in the National Assembly.

Criticizing the Delay

The period following the legislative elections in France included what was dubbed the "Olympic Games truce" - a postponement of the prime minister selection until after the Olympic Games concluded. However, voters and political forces were surprised by the continued delay in naming the prime minister, despite the nomination of Lucie Castet by the "New Popular Front" (which won the largest number of seats in the National Assembly). Castet had the agreement of the political forces under the Front's banner (the Socialist Party, the Greens, France Insoumise, and the Communist Party). Nevertheless, the French president demanded that the "New Popular Front" change their candidate.

Macron's position faced significant criticism, particularly from the radical leftist "France Insoumise" party. Its leader, Jean-Luc Mélenchon, argued that the "New Popular Front" had the right to choose its prime ministerial candidate due to its strong election performance. Mélenchon even threatened to initiate the process of dismissing President Macron under Article 68 of the French Constitution, which outlines procedures for removing a president who neglects constitutional duties and disrupts institutional functioning. However, this proposal was not supported by "France Insoumise" allies such as the Socialists and the Greens, who rejected it and refused to join the call, considering that such talk might harm their own candidate's position.

The threat to dismiss Macron lacks realism for several reasons. Firstly, it lacks approval from partners in the "New Popular Front." Secondly, such a measure requires the approval of two-thirds of Parliament members (both the National Assembly and the Senate). Moreover, from a constitutional and legal standpoint, the president is not obligated to appoint a specific person nominated by other political forces; his power to appoint the Prime Minister is based on his assessment of the public interest, even if the majority that won the elections agreed on a specific nominee.

On the other hand, an opinion poll conducted on August 21, 2024, on a diverse sample of voters revealed that 54% supported Macron appointing a Prime Minister without waiting for the formation of the required majority, while 39% supported Macron waiting for this majority to form before naming the Prime Minister. Additionally, some members of the Republican Right criticized Macron for not naming a prime minister under the pretext of providing an absolute majority for the government. In their view, delaying the government's formation does not necessarily guarantee a majority. They hinted that Macron could simply dissolve the National Assembly suddenly, negating the need to delay government formation and endure further surprises.

Members of the National Assembly also recognize the potential necessity for a minority government and may be willing to give it a chance, given the approaching deadline for approving the new budget on October 1 and fulfilling France's promises to the European Union to reduce the deficit. These are obligations that cannot be bypassed or delayed.

Government Scenarios

President Macron has linked the appointment of the Prime Minister to negotiations and consultations he has scheduled with various parliamentary blocs starting August 23. The decision to appoint the government is expected to follow these consultations, though no specific date or time has been set. Given the complexities, consultations, and political balances revealed by the crisis of forming the next French government, the following scenarios can be envisioned:

A New Situation

The French political landscape is currently characterized by complexity and contradiction, making it difficult to confirm any single interpretation. This situation is unprecedented in the context of the Fifth Republic, whose constitution was designed based on a clear division between right and left, with the assumption that either side could secure an absolute majority to govern. However, recent developments have significantly altered this dynamic, necessitating new approaches and procedures that may involve changes to the electoral system or the president's role in political life. These issues, while crucial, are currently overshadowed by the immediate concern of government formation, which dominates both elite and public attention.

The current crisis has exposed what political scientist Maurice Duverger termed a "balance of weakness." This concept describes the coexistence and alternation of power between right and left since the mid-1980s. Certainly! I'll combine the given points into a single paragraph for you:

Several factors contribute to this state of affairs: the weakening and diminishing relevance of traditional French political parties, a decline in trade union influence, the implementation of neoliberal reform policies, and the emergence of a "soft ideology" that blurs the distinctions between right and left. These interconnected elements have collectively shaped the current political landscape, leading to a complex and evolving situation in France.

This soft ideology prioritizes efficient resource management, human rights, and the supremacy of the liberal model over traditional ideological differences.

Furthermore, the constitution of the Fifth Republic positions the government as a focal point between the National Assembly and the President. The government is accountable to both entities and must maintain their confidence to function effectively. However, in the absence of a clear majority, sustaining this delicate balance becomes increasingly challenging, impeding the government's stability and ability to govern effectively.