U

ntil President Macron, the shortest-lived government in French history occurred a century ago during the Third Republic and lasted three days. Two months later, World War I began. Three years after that, Alexandre Ribot formed a new government and became prime minister. However, this government also lasted only six to seven months.

Sébastien Lecornu, the third prime minister that President Macron appointed in a year, broke Ribot’s record and the century-long record for both tenure and reappointment. Lecornu spent 26 days appointing his ministers and, according to calculations by the newspaper Le Monde, remained in office for 836 minutes. Furthermore, the fiasco did not end there. The former prime minister was reappointed on Friday evening before the end of the week.

Macron breaks Mitterrand’s record

In a semi-presidential system, the prime minister’s role is largely ceremonial when the president and parliamentary majority belong to the same party. However, when they belong to different parties, the prime minister gains power, which usually results in crisis and chaos. Since the 2024 Early General Elections, though, neither of these scenarios has been the case. With no party holding an absolute majority, sharp ideological divisions, and large and small parties struggling to form alliances, finding a candidate for prime minister and governing within the country’s economic conditions is challenging.

Over the past year, Macron first appointed Michel Barnier, a former European Commission member and chief Brexit negotiator. Barnier is known for his skill in uniting opposites and for his success in negotiating with the UK without causing a rift in Europe. Even Marine Le Pen approved of this choice. Considering the early general election results were announced on July 7, Barnier was a good choice. Macron selected him after two months of deliberation, and he was widely credited by almost everyone. Macron then appointed François Bayrou, the leader of a small centrist Christian democratic party that has run a presidential candidate in every election, as mayor of Pau.

To give you an idea of how well-informed Bayrou is about the world and its countries, he said the following, which would be very understandable in Turkey: “Before the start of EU accession negotiations, let’s give Ankara 20 million euros in the French National Assembly so they give up their candidacy!” He failed to win a vote of confidence after the parliamentary majority rejected his €44 billion austerity budget, and he left, just like Barnier. As for Lecornu, his government faced backlash from not only the opposition but also the president’s own party. Gabriel Attal, the president of the Renaissance Party group and former prime minister whom Macron brought into the country’s history as the youngest prime minister, lashed out at Lecornu, given his characteristics and scandals.

Conversely, when Bruno Retailleau—leader of the Republicans (LR) and Lecornu’s appointee as Minister of the Interior—also reacted, it became clear that the government would not win a vote of confidence. Thus, Macron surpassed Mitterrand’s record. Mitterrand was the Socialist president who appointed the most prime ministers in the Fifth Republic. Mitterrand appointed seven prime ministers over two 14-year terms (the presidential term was seven years at the time; now it is five), whereas Macron surpassed this number in eight years.

Causes of the economic crisis in France

Of course, there are many causes and aspects to this political and economic crisis. Beginning with the most recent and technical issue, Macron aimed to push the 2026 budget through parliament without making concessions. The most controversial item in the budget is Macron’s plan to gradually raise the retirement age from 62 to 64 for individuals born in 1968 or later. This means that individuals who were planning to retire in five years will now have to work two years longer. According to Le Figaro newspaper, if this budget is not passed, “an additional 14 billion euros will be added to the budget each year.”

Many analysts claim that the country is on the brink of financial collapse. The budget deficit exceeds 5% of GDP and is growing, and public debt has reached 3.3 trillion euros (114% of GDP). In other words, France, a G7 and EU founding member, is far from meeting the Maastricht criteria and could not join the EU today, even if it wanted to. In fact, France, the second-largest economy in the EU and the eurozone, is now considered riskier than Greece or Italy. The British press has already begun writing about worst-case scenarios, albeit somewhat exaggerated ones. According to The Independent, “France’s situation not only harms its neighbors, but also encourages the Kremlin.”

Following Lecornu’s resignation, President Macron stated that he would not engage with representatives of the Unbowed Party (LFİ) and the National Rally Party (RN), which he described as “extremist,” and invited all parliamentary parties to the Élysée Palace for consultation. The LFİ, on the far left, is the strongest left-wing party and the second-largest party in the country in terms of votes. The RN, on the far right, is the largest party in the country. Macron himself is responsible for the rise of these two parties. Although the country had already taken a sharp turn toward its current situation, Macron had one more opportunity when he took office at the Élysée Palace in 2017 as the youngest president of the Fifth Republic. During his election campaign, he had stated, “Colonialism is part of France’s history. Colonialism is a crime against humanity.”

“France must apologize,” he said, defending liberal secularism, which means freedom of belief and worship for all, rather than “secularism,” which, in his words, targets Muslims. In response to France’s century-old rhetoric, “Leave your differences at the door and meet in the Republic,” he was talking about opening the door to meeting in the Republic despite differences. With his promises regarding the economy, Europe, and foreign policy, he was perceived as a “savior” and won 66 percent of the vote against Marine Le Pen. Conversely, France in 2017 was not embarrassed by the 17 percent vote for the far-right Jean-Marie Le Pen against Chirac in 2004. The country was becoming accustomed to the far right.

Cultural racism against Muslims was prevalent on the right and left, perpetuated by the media and influential intellectuals. Incidentally, although this is not the subject of the article, it should be emphasized from the outset that this hostility cannot be explained by ISIS terrorist attacks because it has a much more serious history. As for the economic and social environment, it was bleak and troubled. In a country with alarming macroeconomic data, there was a widespread belief that powerful figures in banks and financial centers had fleeced the masses since the 2008 crisis. Additionally, many complained about certain European Union practices.

Islamophobic and extremist attitudes

Contrary to the promises made during the presidential election campaign, France, which has the highest Muslim and Jewish populations in Europe, has quickly introduced legislation that has opened the door to the most Islamophobic rhetoric in continental Europe. The president introduced the concept of “separatism” for Muslims, citing their refusal to eat pork as an example. According to the Minister of the Interior, Christophe Castaner, “having a beard, breaking the fast in a group, praying regularly, and not kissing are signs of radicalism.” France has conducted surveys with questions such as, “Have you encountered requests for separate toilets for girls and boys or for taps in toilets?” (IFOP, 12/9/2021).

The Interior Minister, Gérald Darmanin, criticized Marine Le Pen for being “too soft on Muslims.” Horrific and vulgar cartoons were displayed in government buildings. Two 10- to 11-year-old students who refused to look at the cartoons in class were taken from their homes in the early morning hours with their families and subjected to investigation. After a French brand began selling a hooded tracksuit for women wearing headscarves in its North African online store, senior politicians attacked the brand, stating, “Such a thing cannot be permitted in our civilization,” and Macron’s party spokesperson, Aurore Bergé, called for a boycott.

According to Minister of State Schiappa, “This sporting product was clearly a promotion of political Islam—proof that religion controls everything.” A unique document was published showing the transfer of anti-Muslim sentiment to the state level during Macron’s first term. Imams would swear to abide by this text, and, in their view, so would Muslims. According to the document, Muslims were considered a separate and dangerous group in relation to the French constitution and laws. For example, they had to swear not to “discriminate against sick and disabled people”! Not to mention the number of mosques and associations that were closed, or the civil society organizations that fought against Islamophobia and were shut down!

On the other hand, Macron, who was quickly described as “the president of the rich, but the richest,” introduced the “Green Tax” initiative in his first term, which imposed an additional burden of over 20 percent on the French. For many people living on the outskirts of metropolitan areas who have no choice but to drive because public transportation is unavailable and who live on 700–800 euros, the green tax initiative meant an additional 100 euros in expenses. Shortly after, the government increased the tax deduction from salaries to 37%, while simultaneously granting tax breaks to large companies, abolishing the wealth tax, and implementing legal changes that made it easier to lay off workers.

F

rance’s outgoing Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu began two days of emergency consultations on Tuesday in a last-ditch attempt to resolve the country’s escalating political crisis, just a day after tendering his resignation following the collapse of his government — the shortest-lived administration in modern French history.

President Emmanuel Macron tasked Lecornu with leading the talks amid mounting confusion, frustration, and criticism from across the political spectrum. The 39-year-old former defence minister, long seen as one of Macron’s closest allies, will meet party leaders and parliamentary heads in a bid to find a viable path forward for the deeply divided National Assembly.

The president has set a Wednesday evening deadline for Lecornu to report back, but even Macron’s supporters have privately expressed doubts about whether the discussions will yield any breakthrough.

“Like many French people, I do not understand the president’s decisions anymore,” said centrist lawmaker and former prime minister Gabriel Attal, voicing a sentiment echoed by many across the political class.

Resignation after record-short government

Lecornu’s resignation on Monday morning capped an extraordinary 24 hours in French politics. His cabinet, announced only the night before, was swiftly rejected by both allies and opponents, leaving Macron’s government adrift and underlining the paralysis that has gripped France since last year’s snap parliamentary elections.

The move left Macron without an effective prime minister — the third to step down since June 2024 — and reinforced perceptions of a president struggling to govern amid an unprecedented political stalemate.

Lecornu, standing on the steps of Hotel Matignon after submitting his resignation, said he would “continue to serve France as the president requests,” but did not elaborate on the scope of his new mandate.

Macron under pressure

The latest political turmoil represents the gravest challenge yet to Macron’s authority since the creation of the Fifth Republic in 1958. France’s semi-presidential system was designed to ensure stability through a strong presidency backed by a clear parliamentary majority. That system has now been upended.

Macron’s decision to dissolve parliament last year — after the far-right National Rally (RN) scored historic gains in European elections — produced a fractured National Assembly with no single party commanding a majority. The result has left Macron’s centrist Renaissance party reliant on fragile alliances and procedural maneuvers to pass legislation.

Since then, efforts to forge a governing coalition have repeatedly failed, and Macron’s opponents — from both the left and right — have seized on the chaos to accuse him of eroding France’s democratic institutions.

The president’s latest attempt to install Lecornu as prime minister was meant to restore order, but the swift rejection of his government instead deepened the perception of drift.

Uncertain mandate, limited options

What exactly Lecornu can achieve in two days of talks remains unclear. His schedule on Tuesday included meetings with Gerard Larcher, the conservative president of the Senate; Yael Braun-Pivet, head of the National Assembly; and representatives from Les Républicains (LR), the Socialists, the Greens, and the far-right National Rally.

But there is no clear consensus among parties about the way forward. The left-wing New Popular Front (NFP) coalition, which emerged as the largest bloc after the 2024 elections, has called on Macron to name a prime minister from its ranks — a demand the president has consistently resisted.

A leftist government would likely seek to roll back Macron’s flagship pension reform and alter tax and immigration policies, moves that would reverse much of his second-term agenda. Macron has so far refused to yield to that pressure, arguing that the NFP lacks the cohesion needed to govern effectively.

Opposition leaders have instead urged Macron to either dissolve parliament again or resign — both options the president has firmly ruled out. His term runs until 2027, and under the French Constitution, he cannot seek a third.

“France is stuck in a constitutional deadlock,” said political scientist Dominique Reynié of Sciences Po Paris. “The president refuses to compromise, the opposition refuses to cooperate, and the public has lost patience. The danger is paralysis — or populist revolt.”

Business leaders voice alarm

The crisis has rattled not only the political establishment but also the country’s economic stakeholders. The head of France’s leading employers’ federation, Medef, warned that prolonged uncertainty could further weaken investor confidence and damage growth.

“We are witnessing a political spectacle that saddens us,” said Patrick Martin, president of Medef, in an interview with Franceinfo radio. “This crisis adds to the concern that already existed within our ranks. We call for responsibility from all political players.”

The French economy has shown resilience in recent quarters but remains vulnerable to slowing European demand, high public debt, and labour unrest. Analysts warn that continued gridlock in Paris could derail key reforms and complicate the 2026 budget process.

An eroding presidency

Macron’s approval ratings have fallen sharply amid perceptions that he has become increasingly isolated and erratic in his decision-making. The president, who once promised to rejuvenate French politics with centrist pragmatism, now faces accusations of arrogance and detachment.

Lecornu, though still loyal, has also become a symbol of Macron’s narrowing circle of trusted allies. A former defense minister and widely regarded as competent and loyal, Lecornu was expected to steady the government. Instead, his 24-hour administration has become a political embarrassment.

For now, Macron’s immediate goal is to prevent the crisis from spiraling further. Lecornu’s talks are seen as a temporary measure to “buy time” before a new prime minister is appointed — possibly even Lecornu again, though that would likely trigger further backlash.

“Macron is trapped between his refusal to empower the left and his inability to govern alone,” said Reynié. “Every move risks deepening the divide rather than resolving it.”

In France, a founding member of the European Union, the far-right party has advanced to the threshold of the Élysée Palace, and its voice is now being heard not only at home, but around the world. Marine Le Pen has never been so close to winning the presidential election. What if she crosses the threshold?

Since the night of April 10, French politicians, academics, intellectuals, journalists, and especially President Emmanuel Macron, have been repeating both verbally and in writing: “This is a historical responsibility, it is time to unite against the extreme right!” In the Fifth Republic, when this call was first made 20 years ago, in 2002, Jean Marie Le Pen eliminated the socialist candidate Lionel Jospin, but President Jacques Chirac won the election with 82.21 percent in the second round.

In 2017, when Emmanuel Macron won 24.1 percent and Marine Le Pen 21.30 percent of the votes in the first round, the call was repeated: “This is a historical responsibility, unite your votes against the extreme right!” Although the difference was not as clear as last time, Macron came in at 66.10 percent and Marine Le Pen at 33.90 percent. Here it is, five years later, in the first round, Emmanuel Macron got 27.84 percent, Marine Le Pen got 23.15 percent, and the other two far-right candidates Eric Zemmour got 7.07 percent and Nicolas Dupont-Aignan 2.28 percent.

The far right thus received a total of 32.50 percent of the votes in the first round. This time, according to various polls that see Macron ahead, the gap between the two candidates is closing and is only between 2 and 7 points.

In the last elections, the country’s traditional left and right parties had weakened in favor of Macron’s “neither right nor left, both right and left” party; this time, they were buried. Anne Hidalgo, the candidate of the socialists and the mayor of Paris, received 1.75 percent of the votes. Valérie Pécresse, the candidate of the center-right party of the Gaullist tradition, Les Républicains, is crying foul because her 4.78 percent will not allow her to receive state aid, and has launched a campaign to cover election costs.

Parties that receive less than 5 percent of the votes in France are not eligible for state aid. While that is the scenery, Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the leader of the ultra-leftist La France Insoumise party, who is a presidential candidate for the third time, scored unpredictably high, receiving 21.95 percent of the votes. In other words, he almost scored high enough to qualify to run against Macron for the second round, the difference with Le Pen being only 1.2 percent.

Why did the far right and the far left get stronger?

So, what happened to make the far right and far left so strong in France? Why is everyone, especially Macron, screaming that “Republican values” are under threat? Why are the leaders of the Rassemblement national (National Rally) party (Le Pen), the Reconquête (Reconquest) (Zemmour), and Debout la France (Dupont-Aignan) called far-right? Who are their enemies, what makes the far right a far right?

The economic measures of Macron’s rival, Marine Le Pen, are similar to those of the far-left and even centrist parties. She wanted to take France out of the military wing of NATO, but De Gaulle also did so in 1966. She does not say, “France should leave the European Union,” but she makes promises that will inevitably create a de facto departure from the EU. “I will recognize the supremacy of constitutional law over European law by holding a referendum,” she says.

While Macron said in his 70-minute speech on “Fighting Separatism” that “in some schools, some students want meals in the canteens based on their religious beliefs” (i.e., they do not eat pork), according to Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin, this was communitarianism and unacceptable. In October 2019, Macron’s former interior minister, Christophe Castaner, described having a beard or celebrating Ramadan as “conspicuous” and a sign of radicalism. These and similar absurd statements were well received by France’s elite, whose apparently influential majority is extremely Islamophobic, and became the cover story of weekly magazines.

The Imam Charter, for example, a unique state-level text on anti-Muslim hostility, was the official declaration that Muslims were a separate and dangerous entity under the French Constitution and laws, even in their very existence. Judging by the ideas and actions that the imams, and thus Muslims, were supposed to commit to never think or act, they were a community prone to committing all kinds of evils, including “discrimination against the sick and disabled.”

Indeed, Macron’s government this year even shut down the Collective Against Islamophobia in France, one of the leading anti-discrimination organizations documenting hate crimes against Muslims. Between 2018 and 2022, France rummaged nearly 25,000 mosques, schools, associations, and workplaces, and shut down 718 bodies, including more than 20 mosques. The state demonizes Muslims with its Imam Charter, Anti-separatism Law, its so-called French Islam with its fabrications and rhetoric, and portrays Islam as a dangerous religion that needs mass surveillance and oppression. Muslim French are presented as an existential threat to France’s “civilization,” “tradition,” and “values.”

With a president and government that patented Islamophobia for themselves, naturally, Marine Le Pen had to go from door to door in the election campaign in order not to get euchred out of her voters. What’s more, Zemmour emerged as another candidate in the elections. “Sow the wind and reap the whirlwind,” say the Turks.

In his brief 10-minute speech after the election results were announced, Macron hastily began embracing Muslims. In his refutation, he said excitedly and surreptitiously, “I do not want a France that prevents Muslims or Jews from eating as their religion dictates. No, we will not.” For the first time, Macron mentioned Muslims and Jews in the same sentence, but because of the strict laws and sanctions against anti-Semitism, no one cares about the kosher of the Jews. He could not stop himself and went on to give a message to Muslims before the second round on April 24: “Madame Le Pen says she will ban the headscarf. Then, she will not be president of all French people.”

Before that, however, Macron had said, “The headscarf contradicts our country’s civilizational understanding of the relationship between men and women, and therefore makes us feel insecure.” Each of his ministers made numerous statements on the same subject. Marlène Schiappa, Minister Delegate in charge of Citizenship attached to the Ministry of Interior stated, “The headscarf is a political act,” and Minister of National Education Jean-Michel Blanquer said, “The headscarf is undesirable in our society.”

The Minister of the Interior Darmanin, who opposes Le Pen today, said, “In no democratic country in the world, is there a ban on religious symbols and signs in public spaces,” the women wearing headscarf were taken hostages in accordance with traditions that are not compatible with the Republic.

While hostility to Muslims brought votes from the far right, respect for Muslims also brought votes from the far left to Jean-Luc Mélenchon. French Muslims, who had to choose between deliberate abstention and voting, gave their votes to the far-left candidate Mélenchon by 70 percent, according to polls. Many French Muslims posted the following message verbatim on their social media platforms: “I never look at the world ideologically from the same angle, but Mélenchon does not discriminate, does not point fingers, does not label us and even condemns Islamophobia.”

The legitimization of Islamophobia, which resurged in France after the colonial period, especially since the 2000s, has played a very important role in the growth of the far right. Today, it is no longer just a threat to Muslims, but it indirectly threatens the rule of law, the European Union, and even the country’s strategic choices and alliances.

Who would have thought that French President Emmanuel Macron and the Muslim minority living under pressure in France especially during his term, would breathe a sigh of relief at the same time, for the same reason, albeit for a temporary period! The war launched by Russian President Vladimir Putin on February 24, 2022, on the grounds of the “demilitarizing and de-Nazification of Ukraine,” turned the political climate in France upside down.

With the biggest conventional war that Europe has seen since World War II, Russians took the place of the Muslim minority in France, who were spoken of with hostility from morning to night and subjected to legal regulations one after another. Muslims, who were the target of far-right candidates in the first round of the presidential elections, could thus partially breathe because people are now more afraid of the Russians.

On the other hand, compared to the other candidates, President Macron, whose popularity had started decreasing as far back as directly after he was elected, turned into a dignified statesman who tried to manage the crisis in his capacity as the EU term president. Naturally, he was relieved.

After three years in which the most discriminatory laws of the Fifth Republic were enacted and anti-Islam and anti-Muslim hostility turned into a state policy, “immigrants, Islam, and Muslims” were at the forefront of the propaganda during the election campaigns.

The most media-savy and strongest candidates of the election campaign, hang on to 75-year-old former socialist militant Renaud Camus, who has turned into one of the most influential figures of the far right, and his conspiracy theory called “Le Grand Remplacement” (The Great Replacement) which claims that Arabs and Muslims will seize control of France.

This infamous theory had also influenced Brenton Tarrant, who attacked two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand in 2019, causing 51 deaths and 49 injuries. While the far-right Marine Le Pen has long expressed her admiration for Camus, Éric Zemmour, a far-right candidate who called for banning Arabic names, and giving employers the right not to employ Arabs/African,  has turned Camus’s theory into the central idea of ​​his media show and political propaganda.

Aside from the discussion of whether the left would be a remedy in the face of this storm, where the extreme right ideas sailed into the stern, Liberation Newspaper asks: where was the left? At the beginning of the election campaign, the newspaper asked, “Well, who will protect Muslims, women, Jews, officials, intellectuals, and other targets from this hate speech?” and argued that the left should come out with an inevitable historical mission.

However, there was no reply to this article. Could Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s coming third with 22% of the total votes be an answer? The left in France has not been able to straighten its back since the socialist François Hollande, who ruled the country between 2012 and 2017.

The Socialist Party candidate, 62-year-old Anne Hidalgo, who was elected mayor of Paris in 2014, could not exceed 2% at the polls. It is not new for the French left to lose some of the working class to the far right, and to leave others in despair and make them abstain from the elections. To some, this is a lost ideological war. In fact, no leader candidate from the left could emerge with a political agenda to meet this need at a time when social democracy is most needed because of the COVID19 crisis.

Nevertheless, not on the left but on the extreme left wing, Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the leader of La France insoumise (France Unbowed), was the surprise of the first round in his third run as a presidential candidate. With his promises to increase the minimum wage, to bring back a tax that was lifted for the rich, and to be positive towards the Muslim minority, he got 22% of the total votes.

Far-right ideas were seriously moving along, but Russia’s invasion of Ukraine directly affected the dynamics in French politics. As Russia claimed that its purpose was to destroy the neo-Nazis in Ukraine, far-right and right-wing candidates in France that engage in anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim propaganda were suddenly cornered. Le Pen, Zemmour, and even Mélenchon had to make people forget about their long-held admiration for Vladimir Putin and their various relations with him in person. Each tried to condemn Putin and Russia in their own way.

There was another important development revealed by the war: the immigrant was in disguise! He was no longer Arab and Muslim, but European. The commentator on the French television channel BFM put it thus, “They were not Syrians fleeing the bombings of the Syrian regime, but Europeans, with cars like ours, who simply set out to save their lives.” “Immigrants,” which was one of the most talked about topics for all candidates, including President Macron, in the election campaign, thus turned into a sensitive issue that have forced candidates to use a careful language.

Far-right candidate Zemmour said, “I would prefer the Ukrainians to be in Poland. Also, when the war is over, they can return home more easily: it is not good to destabilize France, which is drowning in immigration.” And after saying this he suddenly became “heartless”! His far-right rival Le Pen must have sensed the changing tide and and said that “Ukrainian acceptance is very natural.”

And President Macron, whose support went down right after he took his seat in the Elysée Palace, who had to struggle with the consequences of the Yellow Vest protests all over the country, who had to deal with the weaknesses in the health and industry sectors caused by the COVID19 pandemic, announced his candidacy for the elections on March 3, just five days after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

His tactic was to watch the opposition candidates from the stage and turn the first round of elections into the opposition’s primary election. Although this situation was criticized as a “democratic deficit,” he was redressed as a candidate who sought a solution to the Ukraine crisis before the Russian invasion, who tried to persuade Putin, and gave the image that he strove for peace. Thus, he assumed the most reasonable role as both the French president and the president of the EU Council.

Macron broke away with his closest rival Le Pen, passed her by 4.7 points, and got 27.8% in the first round. Macron’s claim was to fill the seat of European leadership left vacant by Merkel and to foster France’s role in finding solutions to the problems of the European Union. Although this was opportunism and was criticized as such, until the war, the French elections were publicly discussed with headlines such as “Will Europe win the elections?” The Russia-Ukraine War changed the country’s priorities.

Macron’s famous opinion that “progress in the common defense capacity is of critical importance to ensure the sovereignty of the European Union,” which he frequently emphasized, now gained a special meaning during the war. Macron defines himself as “a defender of democracy against populism” and the only candidate who could find answers to questions such as: What red line will be drawn against the dictator who tries to seize European order? What weapons will be used to resist since there is no one ready to die for Ukraine in the European Union? What should be done for France to gain its sovereignty industrially, strategically, and militarily?

Political commentators in France put it all down to the lack of alternatives. Now the question is whether there can be a surprise in the second round.