Emmanuel Macron to Javier Cercas: “There is an unprecedented crisis due to the war. The answer is a powerful Europe”

2023-01-19T05:12:38.995Z

The French president and the Spanish writer address in this dialogue the main problems that torment the continent, such as the rise of populism, the consequences of war or the loss of identity due to the economic crisis

Emmanuel Macron (Amiens, 45 years old), President of the French Republic, and Javier Cercas (Ibahernando, 60 years old), a Spanish writer, talked on Monday evening in the former's office in the Elysée Palace.

EL PAÍS brought together the most intellectual of current European leaders and a European novelist who has dissected like few others the mechanisms of power and history on the occasion of the Spanish-French summit that this Thursday will host Macron and President Pedro Sánchez in Barcelona.

Macron admires the work of Cercas;

Cercas was always curious about this politician who, in the midst of a populist and nationalist wave, came to power in 2017 with the flag of Europe.

This was the conversation.

Javier Cercas.

The big problem for me, today, in Europe, in the West, is the problem of democracy and the struggle between "national-populism" and democracy.

I call "national-populism" something that became especially visible, dangerously visible, in 2008 with the crisis, which was enormous, which was terrible, in Spain and in all parts of Europe, in the West.

It was a common problem for all Europeans.

This crisis was only comparable, perhaps, to that of 1929. That of 1929 brought about the rise to power of fascism, or the consolidation of totalitarianism, throughout Europe.

What caused the 2008 crisis was the coming to power, or the consolidation, of the so-called “national populism”.

Of course, there are many legitimate ways to interpret the Ukrainian war, but perhaps future historians will understand that,

In the same way that the Second World War was the culmination of the 1929 crisis, it is obvious that the war in the Ukraine is the culmination of this great crisis.

The truth is that Putin has supported this “national populism” everywhere.

It has been important for the arrival of Donald Trump to power, in Brexit, in Catalonia.

He supported Mrs. Le Pen and Salvini.

I deeply believe that today Ukrainians are fighting for our values, for the values of Europe, like the Spanish republicans in 1936. Then, unfortunately, Europe, democratic Europe, abandoned Spain, and the result was a total disaster.

Today, fortunately, Europe helps Ukraine.

But the Spanish Civil War was the prologue to World War II, its first act.

And I think that many of us today wonder if the war in Ukraine could be the prologue of something else,

whether there is a possibility of an extension of this war.

Do you think it exists?

Emmanuel Macron.

You have said many enlightening things, with the limitations that historical comparisons always have.

In any case, I would distinguish the war in Ukraine from the rest of what is happening in European societies, because, in the war in Ukraine, as you said, the honor, the pride and the interest of the Europeans go through supporting the Ukrainians since, in fact, they are defending not only the values, but also principles of international law: national sovereignty and the integrity of borders, without which there is no peace.

I believe that the trigger for this war is a phenomenon fundamentally driven by the crisis that the Russian model is experiencing and Russia as a power, which is searching for itself and looking for a destiny.

I do not believe that this is a war whose origin is in European societies.

I think that the root of this war is, above all, a very deep crisis.

Russia is a great people and a great nation territorially and historically.

The ability to metabolize the period after 1991 has been very difficult.

And when it comes to a people geographically settled, as it is, in the middle of so many borders, which has been shaken by different forms of terrorism, whose demography is declining and which is surrounded by demographic giants... What is at stake it is their future, and that is the abyss before which they have found themselves.

And they have made a choice.

That of President Putin, sure, and without a doubt that of those who accompany him, but I don't know if it is what the Russian people have chosen.

I prefer to be very cautious on this subject.

But this choice is in some way to answer the question of what is Russia today and what is its destiny by saying that its destiny is an imperialist destiny and consists of waging a colonial war against the neighboring powers over which they believe they have rights.

But I believe that the origin of this war is an existential crisis of Russia, its great narrative and the future of it.

And that's also why I think that always, as we fight for Ukraine to resist and win, as we fight to deliver equipment to kyiv and sanction Russia, we must always ask ourselves this question, because there will be no lasting peace if we do not contribute our part of the answer to this question. .

and certainly that of those who accompany him, but I don't know if it is what the Russian people have chosen.

I prefer to be very cautious on this subject.

But I believe that the origin of this war is an existential crisis of Russia, its great narrative and the future of it.

and certainly that of those who accompany him, but I don't know if it is what the Russian people have chosen.

I prefer to be very cautious on this subject.

But I believe that the origin of this war is an existential crisis of Russia, its great narrative and the future of it.

but I don't know if it is what the Russian people have chosen.

I prefer to be very cautious on this subject.

But I believe that the origin of this war is an existential crisis of Russia, its great narrative and the future of it.

but I don't know if it is what the Russian people have chosen.

I prefer to be very cautious on this subject.

But I believe that the origin of this war is an existential crisis of Russia, its great narrative and the future of it.

09:11

Conversation between Macron and Cercas

Photo: LUIS SEVILLANO |

Video: ÁLVARO DE LA RÚA / LUIS MANUEL RIVAS

I also believe that part of the crisis that our Europe is experiencing, of the existential questions it has, of the divisions on certain issues, stems from the fact that collectively we have not fully digested the period after the Cold War and the fall of the Berlin Wall.

The decision was made to enlarge Europe, and it was believed that the problems had been solved.

And basically, I think that in many European societies there is a return of History, because many societies that have lived for decades under the Soviet yoke —with all that this implies in terms of cultural transformations, political yoke, different relationships with freedoms— In the globalization that we are experiencing, they suffer the crisis differently.

We have to know how to listen to them.

That is why I am always very prudent.

I fight against demagogy, I fight against extremes.

But I try to respect those who think that there are important things to do at the national level.

I have been nationally elected, and I believe in patriotism, which is not nationalism.

Patriotism is love for our country, its defense.

Nationalism is hatred of the other, and to think that loving yourself is shaking your neighbor.

But the homeland and the nation are important to many countries that resisted the Soviet Union through these concepts.

And, therefore, our responsibility is not to oppose Europe at the national level, but to continue knowing how to link them, showing that they feed each other.

The capitalist system is experiencing a deep crisis”

Our democracies are suffering a crisis that is a model crisis that is not only linked to Europe, because look at the United States and all our democracies, which are experiencing a kind of fatigue, of loss of collective references.

First, there is a crisis of the global open financial capitalist system.

This system is experiencing a deep crisis because by acquiring this financial character it has caused inequalities to skyrocket.

It has had positive results, because it has lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, many more than all other previous systems, especially in the poorest countries.

But it has created again, especially in the last 20 years, many inequalities in our society.

Therefore,

The economic and social part that accompanies our democratic systems is in crisis because it no longer spontaneously generates progress for all, but rather once again creates inequalities between social classes.

The second thing is that it does not provide solutions on the climate: it makes it worse.

And that poses a deep crisis of conscience for our democracies.

The third is that the technological transformation has shaken the agora.

A democracy is a place where there is a public square, where we talk about what is common, where we build frames of reference to decide together.

The third is that the technological transformation has shaken the agora.

A democracy is a place where there is a public square, where we talk about what is common, where we build frames of reference to decide together.

The third is that the technological transformation has shaken the agora.

A democracy is a place where there is a public square, where we talk about what is common, where we build frames of reference to decide together.

But the common is needed.

There has to be this debate of people to encourage it, agreements and disagreements within an established framework.

And our societies today, I would not say that they withdraw, but rather that they explode upon withdrawing.

There's a kind of spasm there.

In other words, today, our societies are much more open than ever thanks to social networks.

But they are open to things that are completely decontextualized and, at the same time, they withdraw into affinity groups such as those of friends to be followed on Facebook or Instagram or those of followers on Twitter, which are basically elective affinities that are somewhat closed. and dangerous.

We need to regain control in this world that seems to be turning completely liquid."

And so this combination of infinitely large and narrowing has broken this common framework, be it national or European.

That is why there are these multi-crises that we are experiencing in our democracies.

In multi-crises, extremes and demagogues do much better because they have simple messages.

But the core of your message, when I try to decipher it, what is it?

It is a promise of regaining control.

And I think we need to take back control in this world that seems to be going completely liquid.

Cercas and Macron exchange impressions during their meeting in Paris.Luis Sevillano

For me, the fundamental problem with creating a united Europe is that it remains an elitist project.

It is not what it should be: a popular project.

I am afraid that people today do not feel that Europe is essential to their lives.

Can I argue otherwise?

Of course.

Europa is a project that has been structured through popular projects.

The euro is a popular project, the fact of going from one country to another and having the same currency, and the fact that this currency protects you.

Because if inflation hasn't skyrocketed, if there hasn't been a crisis, it's because the euro is there.

The euro is very good, it is popular.

Who does he protect?

The richest people always managed to wriggle out when the hard times came.

The middle and popular classes were the ones who lost the most from the disorganization.

But now even the extremes in France who said we were going to leave the euro are no longer saying it because people were afraid.

In 2017, when I launched this debate in France, the middle and working classes were saying: “They are telling us to leave the euro.

No, that's not reasonable."

I have not been involved in politics for a long time.

I'm not sure I'm going to dedicate myself to politics, I do democratic exercises, and I believe in my country and the continent.

I start from a premise that goes against demagogy.

People are smart, they know that the euro is good for them.

The Erasmus program is good for all categories of young people.

And this Europe that has opened up with freedom of movement allows you to travel, trade and walk around Europe.

It's extraordinary, so I think it's very concrete.

And here, at this geopolitical moment, Europe has brought vaccines, which also concerns everyone, including the most modest people in our societies.

So that goes on.

You just have to explain it well.

The big flaw is that national leaders tend to say, "You got this because of me."

And when there is a problem or a blockage, they say: "It is Europe's fault."

What are our challenges in our societies?

What are the fears?

People say: "There is a war."

Europe is a lever to protect us.

We have our national armies, but it is still at the European level that we will have the ability to act together if we are attacked by a great power.

That is why the European defense is so popular.

It affects people.

This is the main mission of a State: to protect.

Javier Cercas, during the conversation at Elíseo.Luis Sevillano

Mr. President, when you arrived at the Élysée, many things about you surprised me, like everyone else.

His youth.

The importance given to literature in his life.

His fictional vision of politics, which by the way is not mine, perhaps precisely because I am a novelist.

But, above all, what caught my attention at the beginning was his speech in Athens, in September 2017, a speech of enthusiasm and European ambition that I had not heard in a long time.

You are going to Spain, which is still a very Europeanist country.

I myself am an extremist Europeanist.

I am in favor of a federal Europe, and perhaps that word is too much for you.

The European Union is, in my opinion, the only reasonable utopia that we Europeans have invented.

We have invented many lethal utopias, but a united Europe is, as far as I know, the only reasonable one.

I really like France, but I don't see, in France, its European ambition, its enthusiasm.

I see skepticism towards Europe, left and right, and it worries me: we have resigned ourselves to a Europe without Great Britain, but a Europe without France is impossible.

And look: in Britain I have not found a single intellectual who is in favor of Brexit;

On the other hand, in France, as you very well know, there are important intellectuals –Houellebecq, Ernaux, Onfray– who do not believe in Europe, and have very nationalist thinking, very focused on France.

As for Le Pen and Mélenchon, perhaps they are less eurosceptic today, after Brexit, but they do not believe in Europe.