Now that Macron and Biden are vulnerable, so is Europe

This month, President Biden, flanked by French President Emmanuel Macron, stood on the cliffs of Normandy to commemorate the young men who climbed ashore 80 years ago, under Nazi gunfire, because “they knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that there are things worth fighting and dying for.”

Those things, according to Biden, included freedom, democracy, America and the world, “then, now and always.” It was a moving moment when Macron spoke of the “blood bond” between France and America, but just a few weeks later, both leaders’ ability to stand tall in defense of their values ​​seems more fragile.

The United States and France—pillars of the NATO alliance, of the defense of Ukraine’s freedom against Russia, and of the postwar construction of a united Europe—face nationalist forces that could undo these international commitments and leave the world in limbo. can dump land.

A wobbly, vacillating debate performance by Mr. Biden, in which he struggled to counter the disingenuous bluster of former President Donald J. Trump, has caused panic among Democrats and raised doubts about whether he should even be on the ticket for the Nov. 5 election.

Uncertainty is reaching new heights in the United States, but also in shocked and shocked France.

The country will vote on Sunday in the first round of parliamentary elections led by Mr. Macron have been deregistered, much to the surprise of his compatriots. He had no obligation to do so at a time when the far-right Rassemblement National, which recently triumphed in the European Parliament elections, is likely to repeat that feat and thus perhaps achieve the once unthinkable: control of the office of the French Prime Minister and therefore also about cabinet seats.

“Since Normandy, the Biden debate and the National Rally score have been heavy blows,” said Alain Duhamel, a leading French author and political analyst. “Mr. Macron’s decision was an unwinnable bet, and therefore a dangerous one, which is now, it seems, heading for failure.”

Mr Macron, barring a shock resignation, will remain president after the election and has repeatedly warned against the very international scenario that now seems more likely. In essence, he has argued that an unreliable America, where the return of Mr Trump was plausible, made the creation of a “European power” necessary.

It was striking in the debate that Trump did not deny that, if elected for a second term, he could withdraw the United States from NATO. Last month in Dresden, Mr Macron said that a “more independent, sovereign Europe that can defend itself and survive against all threats” is now of paramount importance, given that “America’s priorities sometimes lie elsewhere.”

The problem now for Macron is that his ability to create a Europe of integrated industries, greater defense capabilities and deep military integration could be limited or even impossible if he works with the Eurosceptic Rassemblement National of the Navy. Le Pen should rule.

A failed gamble on the two rounds of elections ending on July 7 would likely leave him with a lower score, unable to implement his bold international plans. The latest Ifop-Fiducial poll this week gave Mr. Macron’s party and his allies just 21 percent of the vote. The Rassemblement National had a comfortable lead of 36 percent, with the New Popular Front group of parties ranging from the socialists to the far left at 28.5 percent.

A group of 170 anonymous French diplomats warned in the newspaper Le Monde last Sunday that “our opponents will see the victory of the far right as a weakening of France” and an invitation “to aggression against Europe, including militarily.”

They didn’t mention Russia by name, but their message was clear enough. The Kremlin, which has long had close ties to Ms. Le Pen, the perennial far-right presidential candidate, and her party, has said it is “closely following the advances of the forces on the right.”

It remains to be seen whether the Rally of the National would hold a high position, but it would mark a turning point in Europe.

France, together with Germany, is the cornerstone and driving force of the European Union. It is not Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s anti-immigrant Hungary, which irritates the European project, but is ultimately marginal. As France turns against a united Europe, the possibility of a wider unraveling of the 27-nation union grows as its core begins to dissolve.

The fact that Chancellor Olaf Scholz of Germany is also weakened by a faltering economy, a fractious coalition and a rising far-right party poses a further challenge for Europe.

Jordan Bardella, Ms Le Pen’s 28-year-old protégé who would likely become prime minister with a victory in the National Rally, has gone out of his way to signal he will not break France’s international commitments. He pledged to continue supporting Ukraine, but he has drawn a red line over French troops on the ground or the delivery of long-range missiles that could hit Russia.

Mr. Macron has said that “nothing should be ruled out” regarding sending Western troops, such as military instructors, to Ukraine. France has already supplied SCALP cruise missiles that could attack Russia from Ukraine and more were expected to be sent, although that plan may now fall through.

Despite Mr. Bardella’s assurances, the National Rally is nationalist at heart, drawn to autocratic leaders such as President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, whose annexation of Crimea it supported in 2014. It is intent on returning power from the EU headquarters in Brussels to national capitals, xenophobic in the belief that immigrants dilute some of the essential Frenchness, and determined to reintroduce some border controls in the Schengen area of ​​29 European countries that have officially abolished borders between them.

In short, the party is far removed from everything that Macron has dedicated his political life to progress, and the United States has spent untold amounts of money in the post-war years supporting: a Europe moving towards an ever closer union and away from nationalism in the world. cause of peace.

“We must be clear about the fact that our Europe is mortal,” Macron declared in April before an audience of government ministers, European ambassadors and other dignitaries at the Sorbonne. “It can die. It can die and whether it dies depends entirely on our choices.”

He spoke for almost two hours, but the political energy had already moved on to another vision – on the revival of the nation – and Mr Macron was not ready to see that.

For Mr. Trump, unlike Mr. Biden, NATO and the European Union have no particular value. During his campaign this year, he said he would encourage Russia to do “whatever they want” to any NATO member country that does not meet defense spending guidelines. A growing number of NATO countries have now met the target of spending 2 percent of total output, but Mr. Trump’s America-first hostility toward the alliance remains.

NATO and the European Union are the building blocks of the postwar, interlocking system that the United States and Europe built to spread prosperity and peace. They are resilient institutions, but between the war in Ukraine and rising nationalism, they have rarely faced such daunting challenges.