Since this « perspective » is the last one before the second round of the French presidential election, I must say to those who do me the honor of reading me what is my choice, inviting them to reflect on it before making their own.
I know very well each of the two candidates. One since 1980, and the other since 1982. I worked with one 30 years ago, at the Elysee, with Francois Mitterrand; I have chaired a commission that released two reports to the other, four and two years ago (a bipartisan commission, whose outgoing president only applied a part of the recommendations, the right, of course). Both have become, for me, friends. And they remained so.
And yet, it is without hesitation that I shall vote for Francois Hollande. The main reason might be my personal tradition, like a Pavlovian reflex. It is true that I have always voted in favor of the left. But this legacy counts for almost nothing in my choice today: France is in such a difficult situation that, if I thought clearly that the reelection of the outgoing President was a better choice for the country, I would acknowledge it without hesitation.
The period ahead will be very difficult. The world will be increasingly competitive. Indebted nations will have to be bold, innovative, acting in solidarity. The French know it. They are prepared for it. They have the means.
The outgoing President does not seem to be the best prepared to face this situation.
First, because of his record. Some would say he could not do more because of the global financial crisis. I do not think so: the crisis did not prevent him from reforming further the State; It did not force him to reduce tax revenues without reducing public expenditure; it did not force him to give so scandalously an offset to the richest; it did not prevent him from modernizing the social legislation, from strengthening the training of the unemployed, from improving primary school, from capitalizing on drones that are now so badly needed in our armies. It did not prohibit him either from recommending the way forward for the construction of Europe, without which the euro will soon disappear, to the worst disaster of our country.
Then because of what his electoral strategy of confrontation announces, which makes him claim them for his own, day after day, all the ideas of the National Front. This strategy can only lead, if he is elected, to go back on the achievements of the European integration, the installation of a security republic, the questioning of the rights of women and foreigners. If this is to this kind of priorities his presidential experience has lead him to, it is better not to renew it.
As for Francois Hollande, he will be the best candidate. Of course, he has never held ministerial office; but he has been for thirty years associated with the exercise of power in France. And I know him well enough, long enough, to vauch for his competence, his transparency, his culture, his seriousness, his moral force. In addition, his program, as well as his electoral strategy are better suited than those of the other candidate to what France needs today: to come together and be calm.
The next President will succeed only if he brings together lastingly all the forces in France. One will not want it and certainly will not be able to. The other will want it, and we need to give him the means to do so.