In an official communiqué, the French Presidency announced, on January 9, the appointment of a new prime minister who was supposed to be announced on January 7, but pressure from opponents to the appointment of Gabriel Attal delayed that without succeeding in dissuading President Macron from appointing him.
Gabriel Attal (34 years old) is considered the youngest person to hold this position in the history of France, and the least experienced, although he enjoys respectable popularity compared to other political actors. Perhaps this is due to some admiration for his strict statements regarding some sensitive topics, when he was Minister of Education, such as his fiery statement that the scientific authority in the French school is respected and not contested, and that laicism is also respected and not contested, in reference to what was known as the issue of the abaya.
But why did President Macron abandon former Prime Minister Elizabeth Bourne, and why did he choose a person who did not have rich political experience? How did the political parties accept this sudden appointment? That is what we will try to address in this article.
The appointment of former Prime Minister Elizabeth Bourne was accompanied by a positive wave, even though President Macron wished to appoint someone else, because at the level of French political history, Bourne is considered the second woman to become Prime Minister after Edith Cresson in 1991, that is, a time difference of thirty-one years.
At the internal party level, she contributed directly to alleviating the differences between influential figures in the president’s party, such as what happened with the Ministers of Justice and the Interior, in order to confirm the principle of party unity. However, after nearly twenty months spent as prime minister, she became known in French media circles as ““ “As long as 49-3,” considering that on more than one occasion it held the government responsible, and passed many projects without submitting them to a vote of representatives. The retirement project was the most controversial of these projects that was approved in this way.
Bourne was not one of the president's inner circle, and she was not among those close to him. However, she did not disobey the president's orders. Rather, she intelligently used her dialogue ability to convince the opposition of the necessity of voting for the immigration law, and she succeeded in doing so, but at the same time she caused a major rift in the president's party, as she A quarter of representatives did not vote in favor of the immigration law.
Bourne's departure from the authority of implementation to the authority of influence does not please Macron, who was designed by the system to have a free hand in implementing its orders. Therefore, it is time to remove her so that she does not become a rival to the president.
Appointment of Gabriel Attal
In recent days, the talk has been limited to three figures:
Julien de Normandie, 43 years old, Sébastien Le Corneille, 37 years old, and Gabriel Attal, 34 years old. Talk quickly centered around the latter and he was appointed prime minister. It seems that Macron bet on him for his absolute loyalty, his rising popularity, and his young age, in an attempt to bring young people back into the political space.
Lucas Benjamin, a Green MP, commented on Attal’s youth, saying: He does not represent the youth. Because there is a big difference between real age and perceived age, which in my estimation is more than eighty. Environmental issues are one of his latest interests. But in reality, the matter goes beyond Macron and his choices.
The keenness of the influential chambers to appoint a young man with such modest political experience raises more than one question. It is true that since assuming the presidency of the Republic, Macron has not appointed a prime minister as loyal to him as Loyalty Attal. However, we appreciate that the appointment of Attal is not for the sake of a Macron person, but for the sake of Macronism, for the sake of the continuation of the system that Macron contributed to establishing. To serve major economic companies, which have placed concern for national affairs at the bottom of their list of concerns.
Atal's appointment also reflects the strong influence of the LGBT movement in decision-making positions. This trend, which penetrated the artistic and financial circles, then aspired to reach political decision-making positions in a clear and public manner.
Political parties and appointment of Atal
The reactions of the political parties varied between supportive, conservative, and rejectionist:
The “Revival” Party – which has the ruling majority in appointing Atal – sees the opportunity to push towards achieving all the hoped-for reforms, and Aurore Bargi said that Atal reflects the spirit of boldness and transcendence that the country needs at this stage.
As for the Republicans, they preferred to be cautious in their statements, and give Attal the opportunity to try, and hold him accountable for the achievements achieved and not for the words, as expressed by Bruno Ritaio, head of the Republican bloc in the Senate, and the head of the Republican Party, Eric Ciotti, said: “I express my sincere wishes to the president.” The new government, because we always hope for the best for our country, so that it moves resolutely and steadily on the path to progress.”
As for the far-right party – known as the National Rally Party – it saw that Macron had not found a solution to the accumulated disappointments of his term, so he resorted to clinging to Attal’s popularity, which will be eroded by Macron’s disastrous political and economic choices, as stated by the party’s president, John Bardella, a young man (29 years old), who said: He will be a real competitor for the young Atal.
For his part, Eric Zemmour, head of the “Recovery” party, which is no less extremist than the National Rally party, said that Macron will continue to spin around like a sheep, even if he stops and falls.
But the most severe criticism came from Jean-Luc Melinchot, head of the Insurgent France Party, who believed that Attal would return to his original position as spokesman for the government, as the institution of the presidency of the government no longer existed, because the emperor did not want to share the rule with him. He added that it was a real disaster for the people. His children became princes.
In Arab and Islamic countries, we are accustomed to wondering about the roles played by what we mistakenly call the deep state, but it seems that the same question also applies to countries that describe themselves as democratic.
The institutions of national states have turned into mere functional institutions to serve the globalized economy, and are no longer directly concerned with the issues of the homeland and the nation. This decline witnessed by national institutions will necessarily fuel populist tendencies and calls for independence, but they will not be able to do anything as long as they remain captive to the system of the globalized capitalist economy.