Chirac spooked by a Turkish ghost

By Dana Spinant

Date: 07/04/05

PHOTOGRAPHS of Recep Tayyp Erdogan, the prime minister of Turkey, at the signing ceremony of the EU constitution in Rome on 29 October last year are likely to haunt Jacques Chirac, president of France.

Chirac, who is trying to convince the French people to back the EU constitution in the 29 May referendum, is facing a challenge going beyond the constitution's text: to reconcile the French with an enlarged EU, in which Paris has less political clout, and to make them forget about Turkey's EU membership.

Chirac is struggling to appease both the French political class's malaise with an EU of 25 states, in which France, even in alliance with Germany, is less likely to be the motor, and the population's uneasiness with a raft of social and economic changes.

The main arguments dominating the campaign in France are not about the content of the constitution. They are Turkey's EU membership bid, fear of a neo-liberal drive to undo the 'European social model' and fear of competition from the EU's low-wage new member states. Although there is nothing unusual in referenda debates being mired in unrelated issues, the present confusion is also down to the fact that no political party in France is clearly supportive of the direction that the enlarged EU is taking.

The political class is divided on the constitution with the centre-right UMP (Union for a Popular Movement) and the centre-left Socialist Party (PS) being officially in favour and the parties at the extreme ends of the political Left and Right against it. But even parties that are in favour of the constitution are torn on some major EU debates, such as further enlargement, in particular to include Turkey, the Union's socio-economic agenda and foreign affairs. The 'Yes' camp is weakened by other splits.

The ruling UMP, while in favour of the constitution, is largely against Turkey's EU bid (with the exception of President Chirac). The centre-right UDF (Union for the French Democracy) is also in favour of the constitution but is against Turkey's accession.

The challenge for the 'Yes' camp is to separate the two issues. Chirac tried to do so by promising a referendum on Turkey's entry. But his citizens appear unwilling to postpone the vote on Turkey, as a poll by the French daily Le Figaro shows that 25% of those intending to vote 'No' base their decision on opposition to Turkey's entry.

The rivalry between UMP's two leading figures is also likely to damage support for the constitution. Its popular chairman Nicolas Sarkozy, who supports the constitution but is against Turkish membership, is said to prefer a minimalist victory for the constitution to a strong one. A modest 'Yes' would deal a blow to Chirac's chances of winning a third mandate as president and improve Sarkozy's chances of replacing him. Sarkozy has already declared that he will challenge Chirac in the presidential elections in 2007.

The Socialist Party, on the other hand, is split over support for the constitution itself. The official line, adopted after a hard-fought internal referendum on 1 December, is to back the constitution. But more than 40% of party members voted against it. Opposition to the constitution is built on fears that it fails to tackle a perceived neo-liberal trend which risks undoing social Europe.

These fears are largely fuelled by the proposed EU directive to liberalise services and the trend of businesses to move manufacturing and services to new member states. But the constitutions' weak provisions on social policy are considered to be its 'Achilles heel'.

The constitution's Article I-3 states that the EU aims at achieving a "social market economy aiming at full employment and social progress", which shall "combat social exclusion and discrimination, and shall promote social justice and protection", and "solidarity between generations". But many Socialists claim that the means that are being given to the EU to implement these objectives are weak. Under Article III-210, the Union can only "support and complement the activities of member states" in social protection matters, and the European Commission shall "encourage co-operation between the member states and facilitate the co-ordination of their action" in social policy fields (Article III-212). Chirac himself recently said that he wished the member states were "more ambitious" about social policy in the constitution.

Although traditionally pro-European, the Greens have also decided their stance on the constitution through an internal referendum where 42% of party members voted 'No'. They also fear that the European social model is being challenged by a neo-liberal trend.

The parties plainly opposing the constitution are the far right National Front of Jean-Marie Le Pen, traditionally anti-European, Philippe de Villiers' Mouvement pour la France, a 'sovereignist' party, and the far-left Communist Party, the Communist Revolutionary League and Lutte Ouvrière (Workers' struggle). The loss of national sovereignty to the EU is an argument used by both sides who have anti-integrationist views and warn against France being ruled by 'Brussels' or against diluting 'French identity'.

The confused popular debate on the constitution in France is not surprising. It mirrors the unease of the French political establishment in an enlarged Union where the new member states are changing the balance of power and affecting the ideological debate in a way that the French political establishment perceives as being against its interest.

Analysis feature on the popular debate in France ahead of the referendum on the ratification of the European Constitution, to be held on 29 May 2005.