Listening to the debates in France today—which, for the moment, resemble those that preceded the election of a village mayor in 1920 more than a presidential campaign in 2026—I get the feeling that too few candidates understand, or are willing to admit in public, what the country’s real situation is: despite what those who have led it recently—and all those who claim they will lead it tomorrow—might claim, France is no longer, in today’s world, capable of making a truly sovereign decision. This is, in fact, the case for nearly every country in the world, and it would be tragic to continue denying it.
France is no longer the happy agricultural province capable of feeding itself, to which nothing can happen, that can survive an occupation, a war, or an epidemic. It is caught in a global network from which none of the extremist provincialisms threatening it will be able to free it. And even more so: it can no longer continue to claim sovereignty while living off its neighbors.
Added to this are now at least two new constraints that have just closed in on it:
The first is the one just put in place by the six most frugal countries in the European Union: Germany, Austria, Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands, and Sweden, who met on Thursday, August 27, 2026, in Berlin, convened by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, and made historic decisions that went almost unnoticed: In the absence of other European leaders—and in particular France, which was excluded for the first time from a small-group meeting of the Union’s key members—these six leaders decided the future of European finances. They rejected the 2,000 billion-euro budget over seven years (2028–2034) proposed by the European Commission as the multiannual financial framework (which would have represented a 60% increase in current prices compared to the current framework (2021–2027)); they demanded (in fact, insisted on) a reduction of several hundred billion euros from this budget and rejected any new joint debt at the European level; in other words, they decided to put an end to the issuance of Eurobonds. These were all measures that France was very keen on, and which it absolutely needs to finance its debt. This diktat from the frugal countries can be seen as the founding act of a new “inner circle of the euro,” replacing the Franco-German duo in this role. Moreover, these six countries (out of 27 member states), which alone finance nearly 40% of the European Union’s budget, are now demanding detailed control over how these funds are used and wish to redirect all disbursements toward competitiveness, migration control, support for Ukraine, and the Union’s security in the face of the threat of an imminent Russian attack on one of Europe’s countries—even if this means using a significant portion of that money to purchase American weapons, which, they claim, are the only ones available in an emergency. All other priorities (agricultural, industrial, technological, scientific, environmental, social, cultural, or development aid) that France holds so dear will be set aside. In short, between now and 2034, France will no longer have a say in how the European budget is spent.
The second obstacle is the one that the National Rally (RN) can (and likely will) impose on the 2027 budget. This budget can only be adopted in two ways: either through executive orders (a procedure never before used, clearly undemocratic since it bypasses Parliament’s primary responsibility, and which would be a sign of the radical impotence of a dying government); or through the passage of a series of 49/3 votes, which can only succeed if the RN abstains. And the RN is undoubtedly preparing to make its abstention a very costly bargaining chip: one can already imagine Marine Le Pen explaining that, since she is certain of being elected next May, she is determined not to waste a single minute and insists that the 2027 budget align with her policy priorities, as it will be impossible for her to amend it before September 2027, when the 2028 budget must be presented. Therefore, in exchange for abstaining from the vote on the 2027 budget, she will demand that it include the key flagship measures of her platform: a 50% reduction in France’s contribution to the European budget, the elimination of social benefits for all undocumented foreigners, a return to retirement at age 60 for those who began working early, 125 billion euros in savings, and tariffs on industrial imports—even those from European Union countries. If the government were to give in to such measures, they would place France in a position of breaking with our European commitments—which is precisely what the National Rally (RN) wants. It would then have an easy time arguing that France is no longer sovereign and that this must be changed as quickly as possible. A strong campaign argument, especially in the face of the “diktat” from the northern countries mentioned above.
These two obstacles—for which the current French government bears primary responsibility, and which compound all the others—will remain in place even after Marine Le Pen’s potential election. They will give her every reason in the world to provoke a crisis with our most frugal partners, a crisis that can only end in her submission or a Frexit.
There is still time to avoid this double trap, by finally beginning to get our finances in order and by not promising miracles after 2027. The French people are ready to hear this.
Image:The Lock of Jean-Honoré Fragonard, painting around 1777-1778