SHARE
COPY LINK

2022 FRENCH PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

OPINION: Le Pen needed a debate miracle to win France’s election. She didn’t get one

Far-right leader Marine Le Pen put in a much better performance in the live TV debate than she did in 2017. But, argues John Lichfield, she was still picked apart by an arrogant but well-prepared Emmanuel Macron.

OPINION: Le Pen needed a debate miracle to win France's election. She didn't get one
Marine Le Pen leaves the TV studios after Wednesday night's debate. Photo by Ludovic MARIN / AFP

They thought it was all over. It is now.

There was no Marine Miracle in Wednesday night’s French presidential election TV debate. To have any hope of closing the 12-point gap in the opinion polls, she needed to inflict on President Emmanuel Macron the kind of crushing embarrassment that she suffered on the same occasion five years ago.

She failed. She was far better than last time, calmer and well-briefed (despite a few stumbles.) But President Macron defied expectations by going on the offensive – at the risk of offending TV viewers.

He was ill-tempered. He was arrogant. He interrupted her constantly.  “Aie, aie, aie, Madame Le Pen…You mix up everything Madame Le Pen…You say everything and its opposite Madame Le Pen…No, no, no, you are mixing quarterly growth and annual growth.”

FACTCHECK: The Macron v Le Pen debate

Had the President lost his cool? No. He had made a strategic choice to knock her off balance from the beginning. He interrupted a discussion on Ukraine to accuse Le Pen of being a Russian asset, bought and paid for by a not-yet-repaid €9 million loan from 2015.

“You are dependent on the Russian state, you are dependant on Putin,” Macron said. “When you talk to Russia you are talking to your banker.”

Le Pen protested that she had been forced to take the loan from Moscow because the French establishment, including Macron, had blocked her from getting loans from French or EU banks .That did not make her Moscow’s creature, she said. If you took out a loan to buy a car, did that make you a vassal of your local bank manager?

Le Pen hit back quite well at times. Macron called her a “climate- sceptic”. She shot back that he was “climate-hypocrite”. She made effective attacks on Macron’s record on education, health care and security.

But by the end – almost three hours – she was clearly flagging.

An Elabe poll made Macron the victor in the debate by 59 percent to 39 percent. I’d say that was rather generous to him. His constant interruptions will have annoyed many people. They annoyed me at times.

But he achieved his aim. She wanted to make the debate a prosecution of Macron. The defendant turned on his would-be prosecutor and pointed out her many mistruths and incoherences.

READ ALSO 6 take-outs from the Macron v Le Pen TV clash

On the cost of living and low wages – her biggest campaign selling point – Macron picked her apart. She accused him of using the taxpayers’ money to send inflation-busting cheques to low-income tax-payers.

And who, Macron asked, would pay for her plan to reduce VAT on diesel and petrol from 20 percent to 5.5 percent? The taxpayer. And that policy would be half as effective. It would help the rich as well as the struggling. It would undermine the drive to reduce dependence on fossil fuels.   

On the EU, the President said that Le Pen’s policy amounted to a “false prospectus” or “dishonest bill of goods”. She said she no longer wanted to leave the EU or the Euro but, in truth,  she wanted to leave in “all but name”. Her whole economic policy – such as French national preference on jobs and trade – was contrary to EU law.

In response, Le Pen insisted that she did want to stay in the EU but she would push to transform the EU-27 into an organisation of “cooperating sovereign nations”.

“And so it would no longer be the European Union,” Macron responded. Gotcha.

Le  Pen was on safer ground on security and migration. But she looked taken aback – and had no good response – when he suggested that her plan to ban the Islamic head scarf from French streets would lead to “civil war”.

In the debate five years ago, Le Pen could not explain or, in some cases, remember her own policies. This time around she has done her home-work but she was tripped up by the fact that her core promises – on the EU, on the economy – are half-baked and self-contradictory.

Macron was right to go after her. He could perhaps have done it more elegantly. Macron haters will find no reason to change their minds after the debate – but they will never change their minds anyway.

The instant debate poll by Elabe suggests that this strange election is all but over and that Macron will win on Sunday by at least 10 points. It was always unlikely that the debate could save Le Pen. The poll may be a little too kind to Macron but it reflects a stark reality all the same.

 Le Pen’s last tiny chance has gone. Hooray to that.

Member comments

  1. John, sorry to see you repeating the “Macron: Arrogant” mantra/cliche. I think you, like me, have followed every French president since de Gaulle. Pompidou, Giscard, Mitterrand (Dieu), Chirac, Sarkozy — none of them exactly blushing flowers. Arrogance, or high self-esteem, seems to be a prime qualification to be a French president. Only poor old Hollande failed to come up to scratch.

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.
For members

JOHN LICHFIELD

OPINION: Macron’s attempts to tame world leaders shows he’s more a thinker than a diplomat

French President Emmanuel Macron's flawed efforts to charm the world's autocratic and populist leaders have previously ended in failure or even humiliation. Taking the Chinese president to the Pyrenees won't change that record, writes John Lichfield.

OPINION: Macron's attempts to tame world leaders shows he's more a thinker than a diplomat

Emmanuel Macron used to fancy himself as a lion-tamer.

There wasn’t a murderous dictator or mendacious populist that the French President would not try to charm: Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump, Boris Johnson, Narendra Modi, Recep Tayip Erdogan, Victor Orban.

The results, overall, have been poor. Sometimes Macron has been eaten, diplomatically-speaking. Years of trying to smooth-talk Vladimir Putin – with invitations to Versailles and the presidential retreat at Fort Brégancon and the long-table talks in the Kremlin – ended in disillusion and humiliation.

Macron’s attempts to create a blokeish friendship with Boris Johnson ended in cross-Channel exchanges of insults and accusations. His mission to find a core, reasonable Donald Trump ended in the discovery that there was no reasonable Donald Trump, just a self-obsessed, shallow deal-maker or deal-breaker.

And now President Xi Jinping of China. The two presidents and their wives are on an away-day to the French Pyrenees (Tuesday), visiting a region dear to Macron since his childhood.

The first day of Xi’s French state visit in Paris yesterday seems to have produced very little. The Chinese president promised to send no arms to Russia but that is a long-standing promise that he has, technically-speaking, kept.

Xi is reported to have promised to restrict sales to Moscow of “secondary materials” which can be used to make arms. We will see.

The Chinese leader also agreed to support Macron’s call for an “Olympic truce” in Ukraine and elsewhere for the duration of the Paris games in late July and August. Good luck with that.

On the gathering menace of a trade war between the EU and China, no progress was made. As a minimal concession to his French hosts, Xi promised to drop threatened dumping duties on French Cognac and Armagnac sales to China.

Otherwise, Xi said that he could not see a problem. Cheap Chinese-built electric cars and solar panels and steel are swamping the EU market? All the better for the European fight against inflation and global warming.

READ MORE: How ‘Battery Valley’ is changing northern France

Maybe more will be achieved in shirt-sleeves in the Pyrenees today. The Chinese leadership is said to approve of Macron or at least believe that he is useful to them.

Beijing likes the French President’s arguments, renewed in a speech last month, that the EU should become a “strategic” commercial and military power in its own right and not a “vassal” of the United States. The Chinese leadership evidently has no fear of the EU becoming a rival power. It sees Macron’s ideas for a “Europe puissance” as a useful way of dividing the West and weakening the strength of Washington, the dollar and “western values”.

Macron has sometimes encouraged this way of thinking, perhaps accidentally. After his state visit to China last year, he gave a rambling media interview in which he seemed to say that the EU had no interest in being “followers of the US” or defending Taiwan from Chinese aggression. He had to amend his words later.

That was Macron at his worst, an ad-lib, stand-up diplomat who ignores advice from the professionals in the Quai d’Orsay. I would argue, however, that the wider Macron argument – the EU must become more powerful or die – is the French President at his best.

Few other politicians in the world think ahead so much as Macron does. Democratic politics is mired in short-termism. Only autocrats like Xi or Putin can afford to think in terms of decades or centuries.

Macron likes to look around corners. He is often a better thinker than he is a diplomat or practical, daily politician.

His core argument – made in his Sorbonne speech last month and an interview with The Economist – is that Europe faces an unprecedented triple threat to its values, its security and its future prosperity.  

The rise of intolerant populist-nationalism threatens the values and institutions implanted in Europe after World War Two. The aggression of Russia and the detachment of the US (not just Donald Trump) threatens Europe’s security. The abandonment of global rules on fair trade – by Joe Biden’s US as well as Xi’s China – threatens to destroy European industry and sources of prosperity.

READ MORE: OPINION – Macron must earn the role of ’21st-century Churchill’

Civilisations, like people, are mortal, Macron says. Unless the EU and the wider democratic Europe (yes, you post-Brexit Britain) address these problems there is a danger that European civilisation (not just the EU experiment) could die.

Exaggerated? Maybe. But the problems are all real. Macron’s solutions are a powerful European defence alliance within Nato and targeted European protectionism and investment for the industries of the future.

The chances of those things being agreed by in time to make a difference are non-existent to small. In France, as elsewhere, these big “strategic” questions scarcely figure in popular concerns in the European election campaign.

Emmanuel Macron has now been president for seven years. His remaining three years in office will be something between disjointed and paralysed.

It is too early to write his political obituary but the Xi visit and the Sorbonne speech offer the likely main components. Macron will, I fear, be remembered as a visionary thinker and flawed diplomat/politician.

SHOW COMMENTS