BAKU, Azerbaijan, July 2. President Macron continues to lose control over France as riots continue in the major cities of the country. The current situation looks a lot worse than predicted earlier. And truthfully, this was expected to a certain degree, based on the fact that grievances in French society tend to be exhibited in radical ways. Numerous aspects can be analyzed when looking at the case of protests in France, which illustrate several issues of the national political system.
The latest round of protests erupted after 17-year-old Nahel Merzouk was shot dead during a traffic stop Tuesday morning. The footage shows that one of the two police officers at the scene fired a gun despite not being in immediate danger.
The death of Nahel, a teenager of Algerian and Moroccan descent, shocked the country and sparked protests in several cities against police brutality. The systemic crisis is exacerbated by the fact that police brutality, particularly against people from Northern African ethnic backgrounds, is not a new phenomenon. The issue of social injustices and illegal law enforcement practices can be traced back to the mid-90s when these topics were one of the major themes of independent French movies.
The key questions that we need to answer are what motivates the protesters to continue their fight for their rights and how will it impact France and its political elites, namely President Emmanuel Macron.
Understanding protest motivation
Understanding the motivation for protests is vital to realize how important the fight against injustices is perceived to be for the protesting population.
It is vital to establish that the death of Nahel is not the root cause of the protests. Rather, the fatal incident was a trigger mechanism, which sparked the demonstrations. The cause that led to the eruption of violence is the deep-rooted animosity demonstrated by local law-enforcement agencies when dealing with youth from Algerian and Moroccan backgrounds. The fact that French police try to contain demonstrations via violent measures fuels the protests further.
It is obvious that the latest shooting, as well as earlier incidents, create a perception in people of Northern African heritage that they are being treated differently. This feeling is a very important motivator for protest as it illustrates the lack of feeling of security among parts of the population.
The second reason why the protests continue is more nuanced, yet critical to comprehend because it illustrates that vulnerable segments of the population have limited choice but to continue protesting. Protests against police violence enable people to issue a demand for change outside of formal institutions. This illustrates that there is limited belief in the ability of formal institutions to bring change to the troubling situation, which highlights the government's inability to enact meaningful changes in the past.
There are three additional elements, that justify the protests. First, the crowd’s actions aim to restore the freedom of vulnerable population groups. Second, the protests promote equality, as they seek to ensure that law-enforcement agencies do not discriminate. Third, the protests give voice to the grievances of the marginalized groups. These elements serve as a counter-argument for the supporters of the French president, who consider the protests illegal.
Interestingly, there is logic in the argument that President Macron needs to resign. In essence, the government is unable to control the situation, which means that it is unable to provide safety for its citizens. In a scenario when the government is not the only party with a “license for violence”, the social contract between citizens, who surrender some of their individual rights, in exchange for services such as safety provided by the government, is being broken. With this in mind, it is possible to understand why protesters may demand the resignation of the French President.
To be fair, President Macron demonstrated an inadequate reaction to the protest in the initial stage. While the early signs of trouble became visible, the Head of State chose to attend a concert of Elton John with his wife, instead of dealing with the crisis. His choice further contributed to the negative perception that he is unable to deal with the crisis.
Macron’s choices – from bad to worse
The situation is looking rather grim at this point. The potential choices of President Macron range from bad to very bad, as there is no good way out of the current crisis. Should he choose to appease the protestors, then he will face a new wave of demonstrations. One particular example that comes to mind is the possibility of renewal of the pension reform protests. This development may happen because people would pressure President Macron to address their grievances as well. Consequently, appeasing the protestors is likely to end the current crisis, yet it will be a catalyst for future protests. One element important to note here is that if President Macron appeases the protestors, then he will legitimize and highlight the effectiveness of the methods utilized by the protestors, which will make future protests in the country more intensive.
However, this is not the worst choice. A riskier way to deal with the crisis is to quell the protests via more violence. The danger here is that it will suppress the grievances of the population for a time, yet this will lead to an outbreak of more violent protests in the future. Additionally, this will lead to significant international criticism, as a large number of countries may see this measure as undemocratic.
The third choice of President Macron is to resign, in a bid to save the country from collapsing. The major problem here is that the French Head of State had a very difficult time in office, both in terms of economic policies and subsequent domestic policy issues. This creates a fertile ground for populism, which will be utilized by far-right and far-left politicians. Macron’s presidency was marred by ruinous economic and political choices, and the next generation of decision-makers will use the unsuccessful and highly controversial policies of President Macron as a foundation for their election programs.
The current crisis also gives an excellent opportunity for populist politicians to promote their agenda. In times of crisis, people often look for strong leadership and decisive action. Populist leaders often promise this, positioning themselves as strong, decisive figures who will protect the nation and its people. This will contrast with the stance of President Macron, who, in the eyes of many people, lacks the image of a strong politician capable of addressing the urgent needs of people swiftly.
In retrospect, it is easy to see that President Macron’s policies failed in several areas. His foreign policy victories were non-existent, economic policies led to massive protests over the past years, and now we are witnessing the breakdown of society due to the president’s inability to address the key issues. As the protests continue, the French Head of State is running out of time to find a way out of the existing crisis.