Paul Melun is an essayist and president of “Souverains Demain!”. He recently published
Sovereigns tomorrow: manifesto for an independent, ecological and innovative France.
(ed. Marie B., 2021), a collective work.
In your book, you attempt to define sovereignty. How would you define sovereignty? Would you like to draw inspiration from American protectionism?
National sovereignty is the keystone for any policy in France in the 21st century.
We cannot pretend to lead France without sovereignty.
We no longer produce enough French, our laws are subject to Community law and our influence in the world is shrinking from year to year.
This is the calamitous assessment of 40 years of globalist ideology.
Unlike the Europe of Brussels, whose weakness is endemic, the United States has chosen to protect its interests.
Paul Melun
Emmanuel Macron is the paroxysmal version of this infernal cycle which has generated political leaders reduced to the rank of provincial governors, subject to decisions taken in Brussels and across the Atlantic.
The Americans, particularly under the leadership of Donald Trump, understood that the world was becoming deeply unstable and that their domination was crumbling.
Unlike the Europe of Brussels, whose weakness is endemic, the United States has chosen to protect its interests.
The power of the Dollar as well as the technological domination of GAFAM ensure a major comparative advantage for the Americans.
While the European Union lingered in interminable standards and budgetary austerity, the United States made the choice of major investments in their sectors of the future and protectionism in their imports.
You propose to reinstate the ISF. Is it not, on the contrary, an obstacle to our sovereignty?
I believe that reducing the patriotism of the French economic elites to questions of tax optimization is harmful. In my opinion, the problem of the wealthiest French people is not so much to pay too much tax as to find that these are badly used today. Neither income tax nor the ISF will be badly perceived by the French if they allow the country to recover its power (diplomacy, army, police) and help the most vulnerable (the elderly, people in disability, public hospital). The drama of our taxation is that we sometimes have the feeling that taxes fund administrative red tape more than high-level public services. I believe that we must fight harder against tax evasion. VS'is a deeply unpatriotic act, on the part of people who have also made their fortune thanks to France, its great schools and its talents.
In terms of defence, you plead for cooperation between the European armies, which must take precedence over NATO. Why not consider an exit from NATO?
Ultimately, the question of leaving NATO will have to be asked.
Nicolas Sarkozy made a mistake by reinstating France in the integrated command in 2009. What is the meaning of an alliance in which Turkey appears, which regularly attacks our national interests, while Sweden, a friendly country, does not appear?
Today, nothing justifies France being part of NATO.
The major geopolitical challenge for France is to reconnect with the Gaullist doctrine in matters of international relations.
Our nation has no vocation to be vassalized by the Americans, or to participate directly or indirectly in a conflict with China.
Joe Biden wants to make Europe the rear base of the United States against Beijing, accepting this pact would be madness.
France is the leading army on the European continent and we are the third largest diplomacy in the world, our military genius is recognized throughout the world.
Paul Melun
France is the leading army on the European continent and we are the third largest diplomacy in the world, our military genius is recognized throughout the world.
This treasure must be protected and nourished by massive investments.
European armies must cooperate while respecting national sovereignties.
You propose to reinstate a military training of three weeks followed by a military or humanitarian engagement of one month. Is this enough to revive the feeling of belonging to the country?
This is only a first step that will call for others.
We need to return to military service for a long time, but things will take time.
President Chirac made a big mistake in ending it and we cannot change that in a few months.
To read also "This question that the candidates forget: which French army for tomorrow?"
The feeling of belonging to the fatherland is fundamental and goes beyond military service which will contribute to it but will not be enough.
We are coming back from decades of rejection of patriotism on all sides.
The globalized elites have never ceased to criticize our country, they have outdated our know-how and our terroirs and only had eyes for the Anglo-Saxon world.
Successive governments have opted for massive immigration, without concern for assimilation, while opening France's doors wide to cultural globalization.
The result of this irresponsible policy is disastrous.
Today young French people are without landmarks, without limits, and it will take decades to rearm our national culture.
Is ecology a national priority? Can we succeed in the energy and ecological transition without more international cooperation?
I begin my preface to the book by discussing two major crises to come.
The first joins your previous question, it is about a civilizational conflict.
This crisis is already hitting our country and putting us at vital risk in the short and medium term.
The second crisis is indeed the ecological disaster.
It is part of a different time frame than the first, and should reach France more gradually, in the medium and long term.
Contrary to the Greens, I believe that the ecological question is eminently conservative, in the noble sense of the term.
It is a question of preserving a unique natural heritage, just as I am fighting to preserve our cultural heritage, our traditions.
Paul Melun
To neglect the ecological upheaval would be a mistake, as the challenge ahead is immense.
Contrary to the Greens, I believe that the ecological question is eminently conservative, in the noble sense of the term.
It is a question of preserving a unique natural heritage, just as I am fighting to preserve our cultural heritage, our traditions.
Here too, national sovereignty will be indispensable in ecological matters.
Globalization, through its incessant flows and the explosion of world trade it generates, is the main source of environmental imbalances.
A sovereign and independent France would be much less polluting than today.
If we take the relocation of production activities to France for example, we limit the carbon footprint by favoring short circuits on planes and cargo ships, and we can control manufacturing to promote quality, more durable products.
A patriotic economy is much more environmentally virtuous than a globalization that imports low-end products made on the other side of the world in deplorable social and environmental conditions.
The conservative and patriotic ecological policy that I advocate is in no way opposed to the need to dialogue with other nations in order to cooperate.
Even if, as we can see today, the COPs are unfortunately not a success.
Should we invest massively in nuclear power? What place for renewable energies?
Yes of course.
Nuclear is the most carbon-free source of energy there is.
This energy offers us significant energy sovereignty and a lower cost of electricity for our poorest compatriots.
We must invest in this sector and the recent speeches by Emmanuel Macron – the same man who closed Fessenheim – in this sense must be welcomed.
Read alsoNuclear: why France cannot repeat the industrial feat of the 1970s
Research into renewable energies must continue and France can be a leader in this field.
If today wind or solar do not meet our needs and pose major problems (deterioration of landscapes, insufficient profitability, problem of recycling materials), our engineers, among the most brilliant in the world, must reflect and identify tomorrow's energy sources.
You consider that our democracy is imperfect, what do you blame it for? How do you change things?
Indeed, I believe that our democracy is in crisis.
I want proof of this in the recent mobilizations of our compatriots (Yellow Vests, Sanitary Pass) and the growing distrust of elected officials, the media or justice.
Unlike others, I am not calling for a Sixth Republic.
It is in the Constitution of 1958, the legacy of General de Gaulle, that the solution to the evils encountered by representative democracy is to be found.
In this, the Fifth Republic is not to blame, because it carried within it the imperative of popular sovereignty.
Read alsoFranz-Olivier Giesbert: “De Gaulle believed in the difference of civilizations”
Referendums are an essential tool for me.
Since the fundamental denial of democracy in 2005 (relating to the adoption of a European constitution), the French feel, rightly, cheated by their political elites.
There must be more national and local referendums and the decisions of the sovereign people must be protected.
In the same way, I am not unfavorable to citizens' initiative referendums or to the sponsorship of citizens for candidacies in the presidential election (Cf. The sponsorship quests of Éric Zemmour or Jean-Luc Mélenchon).
The people's trust in their political elites rests in part on respect for popular sovereignty.
To reconnect with her is to reconnect with the French people.
“Sovereigns Tomorrow!”
Sovereigns tomorrow: manifesto for an independent, ecological and innovative France.
(ed. Marie B., 2021)