France has the Blues

Who will shift to the Elysée Palace in May?

My article France has the Blues appeared in Rediff.com


Here is the link...

'Who would have thought that Brexit would take place or Donald Trump would become US president or Kim Jong-un's madness could bring the prospect of nuclear war over Asia?'
'It is the time of the unexpected; the French elections should perhaps be seen in this perspective,' says Claude Arpi.

The world is going through strange times.
Is it not odd that so many unexpected things keep happening?
Who would have thought a few years ago that Brexit would take place or Donald Trump would become the President of the United States of America or Kim Jong-un’s madness could bring the prospect of a nuclear war over Asia. Indeed, it is the time of the unexpected; the French elections should perhaps be seen in this perspective.
Though eleven candidates are fighting hard to reside for the next five years, in the Elysée Palace, only one of them will ultimately make it.
Most electors agree that the ‘times are difficult’ for the nation which gave the triple Mantra of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity to the world (and too the Indian Constitution); today France has doubts about its future, ‘the blues’, one could say in Frenglish.
France is no longer in a revolutionary mood; during the last five years, a weak Presidency has demoralized the nation further. Francois Hollande, whose unpopularity popularity had beaten of the records, got the lowest rating any president of the 5th Republic; this is mainly due to his lack of charisma and some of his goof-ups (for example, getting caught by the paparazzis on a scooter visiting his girl friend).
General de Gaulle’s ‘grandeur de la France’ (France’s greatness) has long gone! Will France find a real leader to give again the nation a position in the world?
Another factor which is not limited to France, but has appeared elsewhere on the planet, is that the differentiation between the political ‘right’ and the ‘left’ does not mean much anymore. It is symbolic that the candidate, projected by the French media as the next president (Emmanuel Macron), refuses to carry a ‘rightist’ or ‘leftist’ label.
Regarding the opinion polls, there is today a quasi unanimity in the French public that they are manipulated either by the large ‘press groups’ or ‘influenced’ by powerful political parties; it is a fact the media today is unable to project what will happen on April 23.
I asked a mathematician friend of mine, who has worked on this issue, why the surveys were often ‘statistically’ wrong (Brexit, US elections, recent German by-elections, etc.); it was not the ‘fault’ of the theoricians, my friend said; but simply that the electors do not decide till the last minute for whom they are going to vote. A week before the first round, which will select the two candidates for a final round on May 7, 40% of French voters are still ‘undecided’. Further, the mathematician argues that in the recent elections, electors often change their preference at the last minute (this probably happens less in India).
One particularity of the present French presidential elections is that the ‘primaries’ were organized to select the candidates who will represent the ‘left’ and ‘centre/right’. On the socialist side, Benoit Hamon emerged as the winner, by defeating Hollande’s Prime Minister Manuel Valls. Unfortunately for Hamon, the two candidates from the ‘left’ who refused to participate in the primaries, are now far ahead in all polls.
First, Jean-Luc Mélenchon, a hard core Communist who believes that Xi Jinping and modern China are examples to follow for France; his popularity has seen a unexpected surge, primarily because he is a good orator and having never been in power, has not been caught in any financial scams. Some are now projecting him to reach the second round for ‘la lutte finale’ (the final struggle). His present surge is probably boosted by the lack of credible candidates.
Macron is other candidate who refused to stand in the primaries (in the French political system, anybody who manages to collect 500 signatures from locally or nationally elected representatives can register his candidature.
Macron, the 38-year-old former Economy Minister of Francois Hollande (who earlier worked as an investment banker for Rothschild), wants to ‘bring optimism’ to the country; his party ‘En Marche!’ (‘On the Move!) challenges the entire political system. Though a pure product of the establishment, having worked first with Sarkozy, then with Hollande, Macron projects himself the anti-establishment candidate. Will he be the next President?
Millions already see him in the Elysée Palace with his wife, 20-years older than him. Cleverly, he has managed to remain vague on his program, trying to please the ‘right’ and the ‘left’ at the same time. Macron is however a fervent ‘European’, contrary to several other candidates who argue for a ‘Frexit’ or at least surgical reforms for the European Union.
Macron’s candidature has created a lot of confusion for the already confused left; Defence Minister Le Drian recently joined him, hoping to get a job in May and President Hollande is also said to be inclined to vote ‘Macron’, though the latter ‘deserted’ his Cabinet last year and subsequently criticized his government.
Confusion at its best …in the Land of Cartesianism.
During the primaries of the ‘right’, François Fillon, who served as prime minister under Sarkozy, defeated the ‘hyper’ former President and Alain Juppé, the mayor of Bordeaux, who had also served as Prime Minister in the past.
Each candidate has his own recipe to take the country out of the current depressing slump; the problem is, in France like in India or the US, will the candidate who makes it remember what he promised during the campaign? Doubtful. Macron is more honest; his promises are so vague that nobody can attack him later if he becomes president.
After the two ‘primaries’ most of the observers thought that it was ‘done’, Fillon would be the next President. His intentions of introducing drastic cuts in the bureaucracy to reduce the budgetary debts had made him rather popular, but…
But… the satirical weekly Le Canard Enchainé, published documents showing that for more than 30 years, Fillon’s wife, Penelope was employed by him as a Parliamentary Secretary ...while she was not working.
As the judiciary is looking into the accusations, Fillon has attributed it to a ‘Black Cabinet’ hosted in the Elysée. It is practically impossible for the former Prime Minister to come fully clean now; a small mercy for him, his direct opponent Marine Le Pen is facing the same accusations of having created ‘fictive’ jobs as a European parliamentarian. She has claimed parliamentary immunity and refused to appear before the judiciary. She also believes in a ‘Black Cabinet’ theory, which probably exists in a form or another (has any Indian leader in power snubbed the use of the IB or other agencies to promote their political purpose?).
While millions of voters apprehend the xenophobic policies of Marine Le Pen, many are attracted by her anti-migrants rhetoric, but can she expel all the illegal migrants or take France out of Europe?
The difficulties facing France in the volatile ‘banlieux’ (suburbs) and the wave of terrorist attacks in the name of Islam, not only in France, but also Germany and more recently Sweden, will get her votes in plenty.
Can she do it during Round 2 is the question that nobody can answer today.
It is why I say strange. There is even a candidate, François Asselineau, president of the Union populaire républicaine (Popular Republican Union) who speaks of Sri Aurobindo; unfortunately he does not seem to have grasped the integral philosophy of the Rishi; Asselineau has just one obsession …the Frexit.
Foreign policy has figured nowhere in the campaign.
If Fillon or Le Pen pass, there will certainly a rapprochement (a ‘rebalancing’ would be more correct) with theRussians. During Hollande’s presidency, Putin was made a demon. Fillon asserted that it was "ridiculous to portray Putin as a monster with hands full of blood". Filon and Le Pen would see Putin more as an ‘ally’ against the Islamic State (IS) in Syria.
What about India?
India figures nowhere in the French periscope, though the sale of 36 Rafales brought some cheer in the morose economic landscape, what is happening in the subcontinent is of no interest of the electorate.
After winning the first round of the primaries, Fillon spoke of completely changing France’s ‘software’, but the hardware needs to be updated too.
This will be the job for the next president.
It is not clear who can undertake this task.

Confronting a phase of political anitya

My article Confronting a phase of political anitya appeared in the Edit Page of The Pioneer


Here is the link...

This year, the international scene will witness, if not global ‘impermanence’, at least a sea of changes. World leaders, be it Chinese, Russian, French or American, will have to learn to live with anitya (impermanence)

More than 2,500 years ago, Lord Buddha spoke of ‘impermanence’ or anitya in Sanskrit. For the sage, conditioned existence is without exception “transient, evanescent, inconstant”; all temporal things, whether material or mental, are objects in a continuous change of condition, subject to decline and destruction, taught the Buddha.
This is true for politics too, though in this sphere, things seem to move faster than in other realms. Take for example, Prime Minister Narendra Modi. For several years, he was the devil personified; he was a ‘criminal’; no name was bad enough to define the Gujarat Chief Minister; it went so far that foreign embassies in India forbade their diplomats to undertake projects in Gujarat or even visit the State.
Calculated in political eons, this was long ago. Today, foreign heads of state or Government are rushing to Indian to do business with Vibrant Gujarat. According to the Ministry of External Affairs, the Global Summit saw the participation of President of Kenya Uhuru Kenyatta, President of Rwanda Paul Kagame, Prime Minister of Portugal António Costa, Prime Minister of Serbia Aleksandar Vucic, Deputy Prime Minister of Russia Dmitry Rogozin, Deputy Prime Minister of Poland Piotr Glinski, France Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault, Japan’s Economy Minister Hiroshige Seko and delegations from other nations.
Not so long ago, I remember speaking to the Ambassador of one of the countries mentioned above (not France), who swore that his country would never set foot in Modi’s state. But past is past.
It must, however, have been pleasing, not to say a sweet revenge, for the Indian Prime Minister to ‘receive’ so many dignitaries. Take the example of France; Ayrault, the French Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Development came with a 147-member French delegation to attend the summit.
A French communiqué said,  “Reflecting its prominent position among leading foreign investors in India, France, a partner country of the summit, is committed to partnering with the Indian Government and the Government of Gujarat.”
Even a Nobel Laureate, Serge Haroche, expert in atomic physics, quantum optics, and laser spectroscopy, participated in the Nobel Laureates Conclave. How this will make Gujarat vibrate is not clear, but it is more symbolic of the new world’s state of mind vis-à-vis India and Modi in particular.
The central focus of the summit being ‘Sustainable Economic and Social Development’, the French delegation was said to have expertise in energy, power, urban development, water and waste management, aviation and logistics, agrifood industry, multimodal transport, IT, you name them.
I, however, wonder: Do the delegates really understand Modi’s ‘Make in India’ vision? It is a billion rupee question. And the foreign delegates should remember that Gujaratis are among the best businesspersons in the world, can they be a match? Do the delegates to the summit realise that ‘Make in India’ means a new type of partnership and that will have to ‘share’ the best technologies they have?
Launched in 2003, the Vibrant Gujarat Global Summit aims at attracting investment in the State, but foreign delegates should not forget that Modi’s India is not the same country as in the 1980s or 1990s.
The Indian Space Research Organisation will soon launch PSLV C 37, (Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle) which should lift three big and 100 small satellites in a single mission off from Sriharikota. A world record. Could you have imagined this 20 years ago?
The summit was not ‘business’ only, it was also the occasion for high politics. With the world scene in global flux, particularly after the arrival of a new US President, Modi made sure to use the forum to discuss politics, especially when he met Rogozin, the Russian Deputy Prime Minister (himself accompanied by a large business delegation).
Talks between the two were crucial as it was the first high-level encounter between India and Russia after Russian President Vladimir Putin’s visit to India last October. It was also an occasion for Delhi to get clarifications from Moscow whose position on the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (cutting across the Indian territory in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir) has been ambiguous, with Beijing and Islamabad trying to lure the Russians into the mega scheme.
In a first stage, Russia said that it was interested in participating in activities of the port of Gwadar, but later the information was denied. Indrani Bagchi wrote in The Times of India, “If Russia enhances its relations with Pakistan, particularly in the defence sector, India would take a very different set of measures, which could even include reducing its buy of Russian weaponry. Indian officials say they understand Russia is looking for new markets for its weapons but selling to Pakistan must not be among them...”
The other issue is the uncertainty about Donald Trump’s stand on US-Russia relations. The President-elect is bound to have more ‘normal’ relations with Putin than his predecessor who was obsessed about real or imaginary interference from Moscow on American soil, forgetting that in the past, the Chinese have harmed the US interests many times more than the Russians (in hacking for example). What will Trump tweet next on Russia?
It would certainly be a good thing for India (and for America) to balance Moscow’s dependence on Beijing, in the Middle East crisis and elsewhere. Though French Foreign Minister met Modi during the Global Summit, the attention-grabbing news concerning the French diplomacy in the changed times, came from another side of the globe. Three French MPs, one of them associated with François Fillon, who in a few months has good chances to be the next French President, met Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
Though Fillon’s campaign manager denied sending Thierry Mariani, one of the MPs, it is clear that this heralds radical changes in the months to come. Mariani said that al-Assad told him that he was willing to negotiate with rebel groups fighting against his Government, with the exception of thejihadi organisations.
According to Mariani, al-Assad was “optimistic and ready for reconciliation with them on the condition that they lay down their arms”. Furter, he was ready to negotiate ‘on everything’ during the forthcoming talks in Astana, Kazakhstan, brokered by Russia and Turkey.
Apart from the MPs, a group of French journalists from France Info, La Chaîne parlementaire and RTL television interviewed the Syrian President: “We don’t consider it [re-taking Aleppo from the rebels] as a victory. The victory will be when you get rid of all the terrorists,” said al-Assad.
Asked about heavy bombing raids that ravaged the city and claimed large numbers of civilian lives, Assad told the French journalists: “But you have to liberate, and this is the price sometimes.”
In 2017, the international scene will indeed witness, if not global ‘impermanence’, at least a sea of changes, and not just in the field of business. World leaders, whether they are Chinese, Russian, French or American will have to learn to live with anitya.

Serene French Elections?

I had written this before the televised announcement by President Hollande that he will not stand for next year Presidential Election. 
His withdrawal does not change much the analysis.

The French are known for their revolutionary spirit. One could have expected a lots of patakas during the Primaries of the Republican Party (Les Républicains), knowing that the winner of the contest will have good chances to win the Presidential elections next April.
After having watched for months the ugliness of the US Presidential campaign, it was a bit of a surprise (and comfort) to see that the seven candidates engaged in the first round kept a rather decent attitude.
Not only did the main contenders: Nicolas Sarkozy, the energetic former president, Alain Juppé, the mayor of Bordeaux and François Fillon, who served as prime minister under Sarkozy, discuss their respective programs of how to take France out of the current depressing slump, in a composed way, but there was hardly any viciousness in the debate.
However, this time again, like during the US election or the Brexit vote, the surveys went completely wrong. They had predicted an easy victory for Juppé, with Sarkozy closely coming second.
But on the ‘E’ Day of the first round, Fillon, who had been catching up in the last leg of the campaign, won with a hefty margin against Juppé.
The former PM won 44 % of the votes, while Juppé obtained 28 %. Sarkozy came third with 20 %, while the four other candidates finished with less than 3 percent (the only lady, Nathalie Kosciusko-Morizet, coming 4th with 2.6 %).
Sarkozy immediately accepted the verdict. It is probably the end to his political career. Voters were certainly ‘tired’ of Sarkozy’s ‘hyper’ style of functioning and his harsh words for those who did not agree with him (he once told someone who refused to shake hands with him, “get out of my way, poor asshole”).
While millions of voters apprehend the extreme right of Marine Le Pen, (who was not part of the Republicans primary), during the first round, the ‘anything but Sarkozy’ was prevalent: the former President is under several investigations, including over allegations of receiving funds from former Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi for his 2007 presidential campaign.
As he was leaving the political scene, Sarkozy advised his supporters to vote for Fillon in the second round: “[he] seems to have understood best the challenges that France faces."
Thereafter, the second round was a formality for Fillon who gathered 67% of the votes to be the presidential candidate for Les Républicains.
He is now the great favorite for the ‘real thing’ in April next year. With his radical rightist, though softer program, he will appeal to a larger electorate and probably defeat Marine Le Pen.
President François Hollande’s Socialist Party is in total disarray and divided over who should run for the 2017 elections. Hollande has beaten all the records of unpopularity (only 4% of the French approve his policies). It is mainly due to his lack of charisma and some blatant mistakes; for example things that a president should not do: riding on a bike behind his bodyguard to visit his girl friend or confiding State secrets to journalists for a book. Though he does not want to quit, Hollande is considered a definite looser.
To compound the President’s problems, his Prime Minister Manuel Valls is a likely candidate to the Socialist primary, while Emmanuel Macron, a close protegé of Hollande not long ago, has already announced that he will be a candidate for the top job.
The 38-year-old former Economy Minister (who worked as an investment banker for Rothschild) believes that he has witnessed the ‘emptiness’ of France’s political system; he wants now to ‘bring optimism’ to the country. Today, Macron’s party ‘En Marche!’ (‘On the Move!) directly challenges Hollande’s candidature.
The Time wrote: “In his position as Economy Minister, which he resigned from in August, Macron becomes an unlikely champion to many ‘outsiders’, like youth, immigrants and minorities.”
However, he is considered by others part of the ‘establishment’ due to his banker’s past. His candidature has certainly created further confusion in the left.
After winning first round with a large margin, Fillon declared: “My project will trigger a new hope," adding: "everywhere my fellow citizens told me they wanted change, authority and being respected."
These three points may take him to Elysée Palace a few months from now.
What really differentiates him from his opponents (Juppé and Hollande in particular), are his views on Russia.
During Hollande’s presidency, the Russian President has been made a demon. Fillon asserted that it was "ridiculous to portray Putin as a monster with hands full of blood". The presidential candidate also called for an end of EU sanctions against Russia as he sees Putin as an ‘indispensable ally’ against the Islamic State (IS) in Syria, advocating that France should support Bashar al-Assad against IS while helping the Syrian Christians.
Hollande’s anti-Putin campaign had taken such proportions that two Mistral-class helicopter carriers, which had been ordered (and paid for) by Moscow were never delivered to the Russian Navy. The deal had been signed in January 2011 by …Alain Juppé, then Defence Minister.
Hollande decided to refund Moscow and eventually, the two Mistrals were resold to Egypt (did Saudi Arabia paid the bill?). The latest gossip is that Egypt will sell them back to Moscow because the ships were fitted to Russian specifications. What an irony it would be.
After the second round, Fillon told his electors: "I will take up an unusual challenge for France, to tell the truth and completely change its software."
He will probably succeed to become the next French President; to change the software may not be so easy.