The Parti socialiste and the
Presidential Elections
In the last few years, the French Socialist Party Jacques Kergoat analyses the latest episode in has been more deeply shaken than in any period this quake, the socialists' choice of Lionel Jospin
International Viewpoint #265 April 1995 since 1969-71.
IN MAY 1988, WHEN the party's first secretary, Lionel Jospin, leaves his position, his successor is Laurent Fabius. This does not seem to create any problem: Fabius had made his intentions clear long before, he was in the president's favour, and no other candidate was running. But this was underestimating the opposition and disagreements between the Jospin and Fabius factions. Part of the Jospin-supporters nominate Pierre Mauroy and elect him with a very narrow majority.
Au revoir, Fabius. It will take him two years to take his revenge. But in January 1992, Mauroy, no longer supported by the steering committee, has to resign, and Fabius replaces him.
Does this mark the beginning of a time of stability: Fabius head of the party, and Rocard candidate for the presidency? It may seem so. Indeed, in July of the same year, Rocard is titled "natural candidate" of the Socialist Party. But things turn out differently. The disastrous parliamentary elections of 1993 change the rules of the game again. Fabius must leave, and, in March, Rocard is elected "president of the temporary leadership of the Socialist Party", and in October first secretary. Which leaves barely more than six months: first on the ballot for the European elections, he gets the worst results in the history of the PS, drops his role as "natural candidate", and is removed from the position of first secretary by Henri Emmanuelli. Pick a candidate! Any candidate!
Still missing: a candidate for the presidential elections. A replacement solution soon seems to satisfy all: Jacques Delors is finishing in Brussels a European career that the pro-Maastricht socialist party considers to be pertect, he was removed enough from French politics so as not to be involved in scandals or the party's internal conflicts, and, above all, he is ahead in opinion polls. All factions of the PS awaited Delors' decision!. He makes it public in December. Delors does not wish to run: his suggested programme as a candidate. would require a coalition between the PS and the parties of the centre, but these have not given any indication that they might agree to such a coalition. Delors deduces that, if elected, he would not have the majority in parliament to implement his
When Lionel Jospin offers to run, the spiral of self-destruction is set off again. The Fabius clique, quietly supportive of Henri Emmanuelli, worry that the presidential campaign could help Jospin win back the party that they have just taken over. The search then begins for a candidate that can create enough of a consensus to make Jospin give up. But those suggested -- Joxe, Badinter -- refuse. Jack Lang accepts, but is not nominated. As a last resort, Emmanuelli decides to run, based on his legitimacy as first secretary. Jospin does not leave the race, and a internal consultation in the party is necessary. To everyone's surprise, Jospin wins, with 2/3 of the votes. Emmanuelli thinks of resigning, but decides to remain as first secretary, at least until after the presidential and municipal electoral
Quake after quake, caused by cliques that fight ferociously for increasingly
France: Socialist Party plus meaningless positions of power in the party. One is struck by the shortening cycle of the crises: Francois Mitterrand was first secretary for 9 years (from 1971 to 1980), followed by Lionel Jospin - 8 years from 1980 to 1988. In 24 years, there was only one presidential candidate, Francois Mitterrand Other candidates always dropped out before any membership ballot.
After Mauroy's inauguration, it took only 22 months for his position to be reconsidered at the Rennes general assembly, and 21 more months for him to resign and be replaced by Fabius, 18 months for Rocard to replace Fabius, 15 months for Emmanuelli to remove Fabius, and 8 for Jospin to beat Emmanuelli. After Mitterrandism
The main reason Jospin's success in the 'primaries' was Henri Emmanuelli's suggestion that the Socialist Party join in a confederation with the "Radicals" 3, the party of the business tycoon Bernard Tapie. PS members cast a "moral" vote "against the alliance with Tapie" rather than "for Jospin". This vote demonstrates clearly that the Socialist Party has entered into the post-Mitterrand period. Tapie is
----- photo credits and running heads -----
7
International Viewpoint #265 April 1995
France: Socialist Party well seen at the presidential palace, and his run in the European elections was pushed by Francois Mitterrand to stop Michel Rocard "in his tracks" as Tapie said. And no one doubts, either, that Henri Emmanuelli was in the president's good books, or, rather, that Jospin no longer was.
The high turnout in the sections, despite calls for abstention by some friends of Jacques Delors (Ségolene Royal), also shows a strong reaction: not to let the choices be imposed by Mitterrand, nor to accept any more of his "tricks". Two Blocs reconstitution of two big blocs in the Socialist Party. On one side the proFabius, pro-Poperen, and the Socialist Left activists, and on the other the pro-Jospin,
But two elements
Firstly, revelations about Mitterrand's
This relationship with "collaborators", during and after the war. The first bloc, with Emmanuelli, chose to condemn the campaign against Mitterrand caused by these revelations. The second bloc, led by Lionel Jospin (with the Chevenement-supporters), chose to express its unease and concern.
The second element is the new weight of Jacques Delors, as well as his little political family: Martine Aubry, Francois Hollande and Ségolene Royal..
In fact, however, the existence of these two bloes does not clarify anything on the political level.
The first bloc, with Emmanuellis, speaks to the left: for instance, it forced the party to support the 35-hour week with no decrease in salary. On the other hand, it proposes an alliance to the right, with Tapie's Radicals.
The second bloc suggests alliances to the left. Through the assembly of social transformation", which Jean-Christophe Cambadélis initiated, it has turned to the ecologists of Dominique Voynet and the Communists. On questions of political programme, however, this bloc leans right, and often expresses clearly moderate positions: it opposed, as much as it could, the demand for the 35-hour week without wage cut.
So analysis is not simplified. Talk left and ally with the right -- the French working-class movement is used to the various variations of neo-molletism?. As for speaking to the right and seeking alliances to the left, the social-democrats of Germany and northern Europe do so already: Their experience suggests that a good theoretical "Bad-Godesberg" can be combined with making space in the party for a few vocal ecologists. Until now, however, this has not been attempted in France.
These two blocs are not homogenous, far from it. In the first, the capacity to "speak left" is to the credit of the Socialist Left, of Emmanuelli, and, to a lesser extent, to the Poperen-supporters. The Fabius group, despite its doctrinal agility, has never shone by the radical nature of its propositions. And in the second bloc, the capacity to dialogue with the ecologists and the critical left is to the credit of Cambadélis and Jospin. Delors' group, though it does not oppose, has never hidden the fact its interest, in terms of alliances, lies with the Christian democrats. And Rocard was eager, at the last "assembly of social transformation", to support Delors notion that it is necessary to set up a coalition government with the central parties,.
Jospin's programme has so far caused surprise by its extreme moderation and the lack of precision of its propositions. Undoubtedly, Delors' influence and that of his entourage have played here. Some of the propositions are in open contradiction with the party's programme: on the reduction of the working week, Jospin proposes only a decrease to 37 hours instead of 35. Recomposition?
What will happen in the party after the presidential elections? If Jospin makes it to the second round of voting?, and scores well, he will have the opportunity to set himself forward as head of the Socialist Party, definitely in the midst of pain, but perhaps without any major crisis. Paradoxically, this would limitt the perspectives of recomposition -- the "Jospinist" PS would be the ruling partner of any recomposition, which could make many of the rank and file in the smaller organisations hesitate. And once he finds himself at the head of a big party, Jospin may decide that his potential partners do not carry that much weight after all. He might prefer to play at "social democracy for the 1990s" as proposed by journalists 10 and political scientists!! who forget about the crisis and division of trade-unionism, the weakness of the associative sector, and the continued existence of the Communist Party. He could also work on the reconstruction of a Socialist Party that Mitterrand will have left in a worse state than he found it.
Will the ecologists and Communist then find partners within the first bloc, and in particular within the Socialist Left? For this to happen, it would be necessary for the latter to give up their inclination towards Bernard Tapie, and erase the damaging image of their continuous Uturns. If, on the contrary, Jospin scores poorly, it is probable that the knives will come out and that the crisis will shake the whole Socialist Party. A split is unlikely, but cannot be excluded. But in any case, recomposition 2 would be high on the agenda: a weak Jospin would be less frightening to the ecologists and criticalthinking members of the Communist Party. *
1. Only Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the head of the Socialist Left,
2. Formerly the Movement of left-wing radicals (MRG).
3. Bemard Tapie is currently under a legal procedure that bars him from acting as an elected representative.
4. The friends of Jean-Pierre Chevenement have since left the Socialist Party and established the Citizens' Movement (Movement des citoyens). On March 11, however, they announced their support for Lionel Jospin.
5. Now composed of the pro-Fabius, the pro-Poperen, the Socialist Left, and the small pro-Emmanuelli group.
6. Made up of the friends of Cambadélis, the pro-Rocard, and the true Jospin supporters.
7. Named after Guy Mollet, secretary of the SFIO (future Socialist Party from 1946 to 1970, who had the reputation of winning his assemblies with left-wing rhetoric, and then implementing right-wing policies.
8. Delors is chairman of Jospin's support committee.
9. We do not consider here the hypotheses that Jospin be elected president. Nonetheless, the conflicts in the right wing
10. Such as Alain Duhamel in Libération, 9 March 1995.
11. Bergougnaux and Manin in their latest book.
12. Could Jacques Chirac's victory make the central parties interested in an "American-style democratic party"? It is not clear that the PS would be able to seize such an opportunity. The forces that are so inclined are in weak positions in both blocs: Fabius behind Emmanuelli, and Rocard and Delors behind Jospin. And one can hardly imagine, given the personal conflicts, how the Fabius, Rocard, and Delors groups could defend this perspective together, which is the only way they could push it through. Unless Lionel Jospin chooses precisely this battle horse for his second round campaign Surprising behaviour? We have already witnessed, in the history of the French Socialist Party, frequent surprising behaviour...
France: the new militancy