The short and uneventful term of France’s prime minister has concluded. Seventy-four-year-old François Bayrou stepped down after deciding to risk his political future on a confidence vote the day before—and he lost.
France is now entangled in a worsening political crisis. The National Assembly lacks a clear governing majority, and Marine Le Pen’s far-right National Rally (RN) appears closer than ever to securing power. Bayrou bears some responsibility, as his efforts to garner support for his agenda were destined to fail from the beginning. Nonetheless, there is no question as to the true creator of France’s political stalemate: Emmanuel Macron.
Macron is likely to maintain his influence on French foreign policy, thanks to conventions granting presidents extensive authority internationally. Domestically, however, Macron progressively appears to be a lame duck. As his second and last term approaches its end in 2027, a troubling legacy is emerging: despite entering office with promises to reinvigorate French democracy and curb far-right support, he is significantly underperforming in both areas.
The current deadlock stems directly from Macron’s decisions. His demand for early elections led to his Renaissance party’s parliamentary majority being lost and a deeply fractured National Assembly. Furthermore, a more profound democratic issue arises from his unwillingness to acknowledge the outcome of the ballot box. Even though a significant majority of French voters supported left-wing and centrist candidates to prevent the RN from securing a majority, Macron has, for over a year, declined to appoint a prime minister from those factions, preferring to appoint individuals more aligned with his own views and effectively making the RN a kingmaker.
“He bears substantial responsibility because this dissolution propelled the nation into a crisis that should have been avoided,” Christopher Weissberg, a former Member of Parliament and spokesperson for Renaissance in the National Assembly, informed me.
Macron’s reluctance to share authority, however, predates the snap election maneuver—it represents a consistent characteristic of his time in office.
While a younger Macron championed the necessity for a “new democratic method” during his 2017 campaign and pledged to open up government, the former investment banker swiftly adopted a top-down management style. Unions lamented that Macron showed little inclination to negotiate over reforms he had already deemed essential. Journalists noted the president’s aversion to press conferences, preferring instead pre-arranged speeches from the Elysée Palace. Even politicians within his own party became exasperated by his reluctance to delegate decision-making to prime ministers or Members of Parliament.
Public opposition to Macron was fully apparent during the Yellow Vest protests—demonstrations against a suggested increase in the fuel tax that underscored wider working-class worries about living costs and diminishing public services. This crisis could have been a cautionary signal—indicating that Macron should embrace a more cooperative strategy, or at least reconsider some of his less popular economic policies—but Macron chose an alternative path. He opted to implement his hallmark reform, an exceedingly unpopular increase in the retirement age from 62 to 64, pushing through the legislation after his re-election as president in 2022. Opinion polls consistently indicated opposition, and unions orchestrated the most extensive protests in decades, yet Macron remained resolute.
The most recent austerity budget—encompassing a freeze on welfare benefits, reductions in healthcare spending, and other measures—would have also disproportionately impacted working individuals. However, what particularly incensed a significant portion of the French public was the evident lack of a democratic mandate supporting the proposed cuts. Last summer, French voters relegated Macron’s coalition to a minority in the National Assembly—yet, inexplicably, the president and his allies were again attempting to impose their will. It is hardly surprising that Macron’s approval ratings have now plummeted to a record low of 15%.
Macron alone cannot be held accountable for the ascending far-right, which is a growing phenomenon across the West. Yet, high standards should apply to a candidate who once committed to “draining the swamp” that fuels support for the RN. Not only has his presidency intensified the cost-of-living struggles and political disengagement that empower Le Pen and her associates, but his numerous efforts to address concerns regarding their primary issue—opposition to immigration—have proven counterproductive in a dramatic fashion.
Since assuming office, Macron and his governments have implemented stricter immigration policies. This involves 2023 legislation that tightened immigration regulations, whose initial passage the RN supported before the Constitutional Council invalidated substantial sections of the law. Macron has also adopted from the far-right’s rhetorical arsenal, introducing previously marginal terms like “immigrationiste” and “décivilisation” into widespread public discourse. While this subtle messaging might aim to attract staunch conservatives, it has merely legitimized the far-right’s xenophobia.
Macron’s office has indicated that he will appoint a new prime minister “within days.” However, the extent of the political repercussions and stagnation is so severe that some are advocating for Macron’s early resignation.
Irrespective of when Macron leaves office, it is evident that Le Pen’s party has never been nearer to governing France, and animosity towards the country’s political establishment remains alarmingly elevated. There is currently little common ground among French politicians, yet a majority increasingly appears to concur that the resolution to either of these challenges—the far-right’s rise and the nation’s democratic decline—will not originate from the present occupant of the Elysée Palace.
