Macron: why we shouldn't look not at him and his decisions today, but at what can come out of it tomorrow

To begin with, we hope you don't believe that Macron, when he saw the exit polls (the results were not yet available, even at that time), made the decision to dismiss the parliament on emotion? In other words, such an important decision for the country was made in 2-3 hours without consulting his partners and colleagues? We believe that this step was planned, and Macron's team was perfectly familiar with sociology even before the actual election. Proper sociology gives an idea of the “rating”.  The dismissal of parliament is an element of Macron's strategy. Then why did Macron do it?

There are two levels of reasons: micro (national) and macro (European).

Let's start from the bottom — the micro level.

Everyone is looking at Macron, but we ought to be looking at those around him. The famous French 39-year-old politician Séjourne. Everyone associates Macron's “Renaissance” party with the personality of Macron himself, but the party was created (as a rebranding in 2022) not “for Macron” but “because of Macron” and his inevitable replacement after the end of the second presidential term.

“‘Renaissance’ was created, or rather reformatted, on June 5, 2022, after the first tour of the presidential election during the competition for Macron's second term. At that time, it was already mathematically more or less clear that Macron was likely to remain in office for a second term. At the origins of the “Renaissance” party was Séjourne, who tried to create a broad association on the basis of the former coalition of pro-presidential parties “La République en marche!”.

To begin with, who is Séjourne?

Since the founding/reformatting of Macron's “Renaissance” party, he has been the official and permanent secretary general of this party. From 2021 until January 11, 2024, Séjourne was also the chairman of the “Renew” group. Remember this moment with “Renew” clearly for the future macro-level cause and effect. But in January, Macron recalls Séjourne from Brussels to Versailles and assigns him to a politically important position — the head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of France.

Well, creating a new platform “for Macron” when he already has a second term in office is, in some sense, not logical. Then why? Because the “Renaissance” party itself did not really hide the purpose of all the reformations.

This party was created in order to prepare Macron's successor and provide this successor with a more or less decent, and most importantly, stable parliamentary basis in 2027. Having the largest representation is desirable, but it is not a critical need. The main goal for the “Renaissance” is to remain at the center of French politics.

The author of this idea is actually the head of the “Renew” group (at that time) Séjourne, aka the initiator, aka Macron's supposed successor. Séjourne's position as the Minister of Foreign Affairs is his media preparation as a successor, and the role of this politician will only grow thanks to Macron, further confirming the “successor” thesis.

How will early elections help Macron and Séjourne?

It should be mentioned once again: such decisions are not spontaneous. Macron's team understood, saw, and had sociological data showing the approximate percentage of the gap between the “Renaissance” and Le Pen's “Rassemblement National” (RN) party.

Thus, the decision to call early elections was made before the results of the European Parliament elections. There are several reasons for this decision:

1. Personal motives. Macron has already reached the political peak (2 presidential terms), and in his second term, he wants history to remember Macron as the one who restored the greatness of La France, not as a leader who systematically plunged into internal crises and lost French influence in Niger, Burkina Faso and other geopolitically important attributes of France.

   But all the powerful historical decisions, such as sending instructors to Ukraine, increasing aid to Ukraine, escalating with Putin and, probably, with China, are extremely unpopular in France and are the tools of the opposition (Melenchon, Le Pen, and others) that attack the positions of the Renaissance through Macron's personal positions.

   Of course, Macron's entourage is not happy about these consequences, as they plan to have a political life after the Macron presidency.

   Therefore, Macron had to continue his “historical path” and accept that by 2027, the “Renaissance” party would be worthless. However, the other option arose: if the “Renaissance” party wants to have NORMAL representation in parliament after 2027, holding early elections now is an opportunity to fulfill the main goal of “Renaissance ” creation — to provide Macron's successor with parliamentary representation.

   And the predicted failure in the European Parliament elections is a good media basis and a reason to dismiss the parliament. This is also based on the claims of the same opposition that called for this after the exit polls had been released. This doubled Macron's points as a leader who hears the French citizens, who hears the French nation.

2. Party motives. These are closely connected to personal motives. Macron will be free from his “ La Cour de Versailles” to do “what he wants and how he wants.” This includes foreign policy. After the election, as a politician, Emmanuel Macron will have less need to take into account his party's rating. He will not harm his party by his actions, because the party representation of the “Renaissance” party will be “extended for a time longer than Macron's time remaining as a President”

   Many who perceived this election as an “ay-ay-ay” Macron will lose their majority in parliament. Le Pen is guaranteed to win. But some people forget a few important details: Macron has not had a majority in parliament recently.

   France has a two-chamber parliament. In the upper house, Macron's party had 17 seats out of 348. In the lower house of the National Assembly, Macron's party had 170 seats out of 577. Macron's coalition had 250 seats. The opposition had 278 seats. In total, 289 seats are needed for a majority in parliament, which Macron did not have but which he used to draw from the opposition from time to time as he needed.

   In other words, Macron did not have a majority in the French parliament, but this did not prevent the executive and legislative branches from working together under Macron's presidency.

   Why? Because France is a presidential-parliamentary republic, where the president has broad powers and, although not the direct head of the executive branch, is crucial in the formation and functioning of this branch of government.

   Therefore, by holding early elections, Macron does not lose his “majority” in parliament but guarantees representation to his successors, and freedom of action for himself right now if his plan is successful. Therefore, in fact, Macron wants to ensure that his position and responsibilities to others do not constrain him in his actions or statements, besides internal barriers

3. Electoral appropriateness. The appropriateness of Macron's decision is based on the peculiarities of the French electoral system. French parliamentarians are elected in two rounds: first, two or more candidates are chosen from among all those who have got the most votes, depending on the quota. Then, in the second round, the finalists of the first round are chosen to take a seat in the parliament. One round of elections is possible if someone from the list of all parliamentary candidates immediately receives a 50%+1 vote, but this does not happen so often out of the total number.

   That is, the candidates from the presidential party “Renaissance” need to get into the “two”/“three” after the first round, and then there will be an “anti-rating” voting. And the anti-rating of Le Pen's party members is higher than that of the pro-presidential candidates in the districts. Therefore, the cumulative effect, which we will call the “anti-Le Pen” vote, can additionally provide the “Renaissance” with deputies because of the very specifics of the two-round election. The main thing is that the candidates from the “Renaissance” party enter this “second round”, and for this, it is necessary that the main rating of the party does not go critically low, but would be such that its members get into the “two”/“three”.

   15–17% of the rating is the critical limit where these features of the French electoral system can still benefit Macron, but a drop in the rating even lower will not allow him to take advantage of these features, because candidates loyal to Macron simply will not make it to the second round. That's why the election is still about this 15-20% support.

This does NOT mean that Macron's party is guaranteed to defeat Le Pen in June, but it does mean that it will be a close fight, and the difference in the number of deputies will be less than the current state of support for Macron and his party.

That's why this will be a better result than the Renaissance could have secured in 2027 and after. Plus, elections now are more likely to guarantee representation for Macron's successor in the upcoming 2027 elections.

So from a political logic standpoint, Macron's actions are extremely well thought out and not based on emotions. But this is only the micro level, and there is also a macro level of the reasons. 

Macro level.

What do Macron's decision, Séjourne's activities, and the resignation of Belgian Prime Minister De Creus have in common?

They are all the leading members of the European group Renew. Plus, they are representatives of the French-Belgian wing of this group.

Now there are difficult negotiations about the combination of the European Parliament and, consequently, the executive branch of the EU.

Although Ursula von der Leyen chose to start the negotiations with her traditional allies S&D and Renew, she is still looking a little further to the right because the leadership of “Ursula's old allies” cannot yet give 100% guarantees for re-election. The problem is the opposition at the level of 10-20% in these three pan-European groups, which Ursula von der Leyen is counting on for her re-election. Consequently, there is a risk of failure of the secret voting for Ursul von der Leyen.

Currently, the leader of Renew is a Frenchwoman, Valérie Ayer, who is also a member of Macron's “Renaissance” party. Before Valérie Ayer, the chairman was the Frenchman Séjourne, who we already know, and before him, former Belgian Prime Minister Gui Verhofstadt. A colleague in Gui Verhofstadt's government, Belgian Charles Michel, has been President of the European Council for a maximum of two terms. Mr. Michel needs a successor because he is unable to hold the post for a third time. And there are many more Franco-Belgian names in key positions at Renew.

But in short, you have seen the Franco-Belgian heritage. But in this election, Renew was saved from disaster (losing 3 seats) by the countries of the central and eastern wing of Renew, which are members of ALDE (Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Denmark and Germany).

Therefore, within Renew, they will also claim to expand their influence and the positions for which Renew as a whole is fighting in the Brussels offices. The Central-Eastern wing of Renew wanted to promote Zimmerman, while the Franco-Belgian wing promoted former Italian Prime Minister Draghi with the support of Marcon. In total, for the 20 seats lost by the Renew group, 12 seats were lost due to the poor results of French President Macron's party.

Macron and De Creus want to achieve 2 things with this “coordinated action”:

1. To maintain the Franco-Belgian dominance in the pan-European Renew group. Most likely, De Creus will now follow in the footsteps of his colleague and fellow citizen, Charle Michel and Gui Verhofstadt into European politics. The Franco-Belgian group has “freed up” a powerful politician for Brussels politics and negotiations for European positions. This politician can compete in weight with Straka Zimmerman or the Prime Minister of Estonia Kaya Kallas, whose position within the Renew group has grown at a time when Macron's influence on the group has suffered the biggest crisis since the group's existence.

   Ursula von der Leyen wants to cooperate with Renew, but she is not sure that she will have enough votes to be re-elected as president of the European Commission. Therefore, she is considering other options, although she is negotiating with Renew first. But when the negotiator and leader of the process on the part of Renew is a “free politician,” former Belgian Prime Minister De Creus, this will push Macron's position forward, and when the main negotiator with Ursula von der Leyen from the Renew group is Kaja Kallas, and this will strengthen the position of the other wing of the group, not Macron.

   De Creus is a politician from whom Ursula has asked for support in many of her projects in the EU, and De Creus is a politician who has presided over the EU for the last 6 months just before the European Parliament elections. So this encourages Ursula von der Leyen to both negotiate with Renew, rejecting other opportunities for cooperation with the radical right, and Ursula von der Leyen's negotiations with Renew will be influenced by France and Belgium, not by the Renew part of ALDE. Renew is a candidate for the presidency of the European Council or the head of EU diplomacy.

• 2. Macron's rehabilitation and the “Renaissance”. As we described in the first part. The early elections in France are not expected to record such a defeat of Macron's forces as was recorded in the European Parliament elections, due to the peculiarity of the local election system. Macron is holding early elections on June 30 and the second round on July 7.

Voting for the head of the European Commission is on July 18. In other words, Macron will have a chance to reduce the media coverage of Le Pen's election victory just 2 weeks before the EU summit and the vote for new executive positions. And thus, Macron will try to demonstrate that Le Pen's superiority is not so absolute. This will force Ursula von der Leyen to take Macron's arguments into account and lean toward Renew in the final two weeks of negotiations. Instead, the likelihood of any negotiations between Ursula von der Leyen and Le Pen will be reduced. In the event of a successful pre-term election, Macron will retain the political ability to appoint a comfortable European Commissioner from France. 

Therefore, at the macro level, actions are coordinated by the leaders of Renew: Macron and De Creus are an attempt to ensure that their influence in Renew remains relevant, to minimize the consequences of the poor results of the European Parliament elections, and to create the necessary conditions for negotiations with Ursula von der Leyen so that:

• а) She could not join Le Pen and her European ID group for the sake of more votes.

• b) Bargain for a position for Renew in the form of the head of the European Council or the head of European diplomacy.

So, there is an expression: “If you don't like the layout of the board and your moves are limited, you can turn the board over, rearrange the pieces and start a new game.” Without context, people perceived Macron's actions as those of a “man who has already lost,” but in reality, he is a new political party that opponents will hardly see at first. It is Macron's opponents, who are intoxicated by the results of the European Parliament elections, who will help him succeed in the early French parliamentary elections.

It is not certain that Macron's new game will be successful, but at least this party will restore a chance for success compared to the hopeless scenario that was on the “old board.”