Consultant and political analyst, Mathieu Slama collaborates with several media, notably Le Figaro and Le Huffington Post. He published
Adieu la liberté - Essay on disciplinary society
(Presses de la Cité, January 2022)
.
To discover
Find all the results of the legislative elections
Boris Johnson.
Karl Nehammer.
Mateusz Morawiecki.
Roberta Metsola.
Ursula von der Leyen.
Edouard Heger.
Charles Michel.
Pedro Sanchez.
Mette Frederiksen.
Scanned Marin.
Here is the list of European leaders who have made the trip to kyiv since the start of the invasion of Ukraine by Russian forces.
Until now, Emmanuel Macron had distinguished himself by his absence, which had prompted the head of Ukrainian diplomacy Dmytro Kouleba to have this word last May: “
He is welcome, no matter when.
It would be good for Mr. Macron to come during the French presidency of the EU, and the best would be for him to come with other arms deliveries for Ukraine
.”
There is undoubtedly in this trip a desire to clarify a rather vague and sometimes frankly incomprehensible French position, as when the Head of State mentioned in a video the idea of going to Moscow before kyiv, or even when he had called, in an interview with La dépêche du midi, “not to humiliate Russia” and that he had mentioned possible territorial concessions.
Words impossible to accept for the Ukrainians, who have suffered and continue to suffer the war crimes of the Russian army and who see their sovereignty challenged by a leader whose aim is clearly to annex part of the east from the country.
The head of Ukrainian diplomacy had also reacted strongly on Twitter, believing that this position "humiliated" France and that "
we'd all better focus on how to put Russia in her place.
It will bring peace and save lives
.”
France had a privileged role to play with the Ukrainians: instead, it dithered, refused to take a clear line and favored a posture of “dialogue” with Moscow, which had no effect.
We also remember Emmanuel Macron's much criticized communications operations, which had staged his involvement in the resolution of the conflict through kitsch and excessive images and photos where we saw the Head of State in a sweatshirt and jean (in a style close to that of Zelensky), looking pensive and inhabited, with a serious face, in telephone conversations and exchanges with his diplomatic advisers.
These images had been mocked by the Ukrainians who saw in them - rightly - propaganda made on their backs.
And we couldn't help but feel uneasy about these stagings which more or less amounted to exploiting a tragedy for the purposes of political marketing.
The Ukrainians, tired of these marketing acrobatics, invented a word to describe the French attitude: “macroner”.
This word,
appeared on the social network Telegram last April, means "to show concern about a situation, but to do nothing".
An honor which we imagine that the head of state would have done well…
If the symbolism of a united Europe is important, we would have liked this trip to be an opportunity to assert, even belatedly, France's strong position as a sovereign and autonomous power.
Mathieu Slama
No doubt this trip is a response to this bad communication around the Ukrainian crisis.
But we can be surprised, if not regretted, that Emmanuel Macron undertook this trip not alone but with his German counterpart and the head of the Italian government.
If the symbolism of a united Europe is important, we would have liked this trip to be an opportunity to assert, even belatedly, France's strong position as a sovereign and autonomous power.
But does this strong position exist?
Macron's hesitations and his inability to take a firm position vis-à-vis Russia show that there is a caution in him that prevents him from taking up the cause of Ukraine and its freedom fighters.
Finally, the timing of this trip raises questions.
He is not neutral, since we are a few days away from the second round of the legislative elections, and the campaign of the Macronist candidates is in the eyes of the main observers very difficult.
No breath, no theme put forward, sluggish leaders, cascading controversies and movements punctuated by hostile harangues on the issue of violence against women.
On the other side, the Nupes are leading a vigorous campaign and can hope for a very close result on Sunday evening.
Macron's response strategy, which consists of demonizing the Nupes by questioning its republicanism and its respectability, finds little echo in public opinion, no doubt because it is crude and, like any crude strategy, it can be seen... So inevitably,
Can we be satisfied with a campaign during which none of the major issues of the last five-year term, from the yellow vests crisis to the health crisis and the climate crisis, were really addressed?
Mathieu Slama
It is by this strategy that Emmanuel Macron has always won: to depoliticize and neutralize any debate that would not be to his advantage.
Have we seen a single real debate during this legislative campaign?
The major candidates of the macronie all refuse to debate, starting with Élisabeth Borne who considered that a debate with Jean-Luc Mélenchon was to do “a lot of honor” to the latter… But without debate, what remains? of democracy?
Can we be satisfied with a campaign during which none of the major issues of the last five-year term, from the yellow vests crisis to the health crisis and the climate crisis, were really addressed?
Can we be satisfied with a campaign where everyone, in the wake of the presidential election,
presented its program without ever confronting it?
Is it reasonable, on the part of the Head of State, to confiscate the end of the campaign in this way by an action that he could have - and should have - taken months ago?
And what about this strange speech on the tarmac at Orly, where Emmanuel Macron said in a strange way: "
Not a voice must be missing from the Republic
”, as if he were the one and only representative of it?
Emmanuel Macron has demonstrated his ability to maneuver during crises and use them as political and electoral springboards.
The crisis of "yellow vests" and the health crisis have allowed him to remobilize the hearts of his electorate, but at an exorbitant price: that of national harmony.
It is regrettable that the Ukrainian crisis has been transformed into a mere electoral issue, to the detriment of the national interest - and of the Ukrainian cause.
