Relief and pride are the main emotions many French citizens are feeling after the first round of the French presidential election, in which former French economics minister Emmanuel Macron finished first.
For once, the pollsters were right: The two favored candidates — Macron and the National Front’s Marine Le Pen — advanced to the second-round runoff on May 7.
Gone is the sense of anxiety that had attended the weeks, days, and hours before the election, owing to fears that France would wake up to a second-round choice between the far-right Le Pen and the far-left Socialist Party candidate Jean-Luc Melenchon.
Many observers saw France as economically, socially, and politically vulnerable — even more so than the UK, US or Germany — to such a choice. After the UK’s Brexit vote and US President Donald Trump’s victory in the US presidential election, surely this was Le Pen’s window of opportunity.
Some of us, only half-jokingly, have even mused about where we would flee if Le Pen won. Between a UK that is leaving the EU and a US under Trump, there are few good options.
Fortunately, reason and hope prevailed over anger and fear, and French citizens defied those who warned that populism might triumph in the land of the French Revolution. While a Le Pen victory is technically possible, the composition of the French electorate makes it highly unlikely.
Very few of Melenchon’s leftist voters will cross over to the extreme right, and while some of the center-right candidate Francois Fillon’s supporters may now vote for Le Pen, it will not be enough to sway the election in her favor.
In other words, the French exception is alive and well. France’s contrarian electorate has demonstrated to the world — and especially to the Anglo-Saxon world — that one need not betray one’s defining values to defeat populism.
Despite a recent wave of terror attacks, the French have proved their resilience against the politics of fear. Even with Euroskepticism on the rise, the pro-European candidate, Macron, received more votes than any other.
Exceptional circumstances sometimes give rise to exceptional characters. Without the French Revolution, Napoleon Bonaparte would have remained a junior officer in the French Royal Army.
Similarly, albeit less dramatically, if France’s two main political parties had not collapsed, the 39-year-old Macron, who was unknown to most French voters a year ago, would still be just another economic whiz kid.
Macron looks like a French former US president John F. Kennedy and he campaigned in the mode of former US president Barack Obama, but he got where he is because the Socialist Party that produced former French president Francois Mitterrand is dead, and the conservative Les Republicains are in shambles.
The Socialists, for their part, could not come up with a modern political agenda, and the Republicans failed to tap another candidate after Fillon became tainted by a scandal. As a result, France, despite its reputation for melancholy, self-doubt and pessimism, is about to elect its youngest-ever president.
At that point, however, Macron will face a whole new set of challenges, starting with legislative elections that are scheduled for June.
Will Macron end up with a governing majority in the National Assembly, or will the right present a united front and force him into the uniquely French practice of cohabitation?
In France’s semi-presidential system, cohabitation means that the executive branch can become paralyzed if the president and the prime minister represent different political factions.
However, Macron wants to prove that he can implement the majority-coalition model followed in parliamentary systems, with an “alliance of the willing,” comprising different but compatible political sensitivities, pursuing a common goal.
To my mind, France is ripe for a coalition government that can transcend increasingly anachronistic left-right political lines. The real political divide in France, as in so much of the West, is now between those who defend global openness and those who favor a return to nationalist isolation.
Macron will have to acknowledge the cultural roots of traditional left-right divisions, while also addressing the deep-seated, revolutionary anger that now exists in France.
Despite Macron’s strong showing in the first round, some 40% of the French electorate voted for the Euroskeptic candidates Le Pen and Melenchon.
Restoring these voters’ confidence in existing institutions, and reintegrating them into the political mainstream, will not be easy.
Defeated parties will be tempted to take to the streets and block attempts at reform. Having failed at the ballot box, they may — in traditional French revolutionary fashion — resort to “the barricades.”
Macron has demonstrated his immense qualities as a candidate. After May 7, he will have to prove that, despite his youth and lack of experience, he can become a great president. Winning power is one thing; but it is another matter to exercise power effectively, while avoiding the authoritarian tendencies that can emerge under extraordinary circumstances.
That is the task facing Macron. Driven by a sense of destiny, he must resist the temptations of Bonapartism. In the meantime, the democratic world should see Macron for what he is: a beacon of hope in a sea of doubt and despair.
Dominique Moisi is a senior counselor at the Institut Montaigne in Paris.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
The US Senate’s passage of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which urges Taiwan’s inclusion in the Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) exercise and allocates US$1 billion in military aid, marks yet another milestone in Washington’s growing support for Taipei. On paper, it reflects the steadiness of US commitment, but beneath this show of solidarity lies contradiction. While the US Congress builds a stable, bipartisan architecture of deterrence, US President Donald Trump repeatedly undercuts it through erratic decisions and transactional diplomacy. This dissonance not only weakens the US’ credibility abroad — it also fractures public trust within Taiwan. For decades,
In 1976, the Gang of Four was ousted. The Gang of Four was a leftist political group comprising Chinese Communist Party (CCP) members: Jiang Qing (江青), its leading figure and Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) last wife; Zhang Chunqiao (張春橋); Yao Wenyuan (姚文元); and Wang Hongwen (王洪文). The four wielded supreme power during the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976), but when Mao died, they were overthrown and charged with crimes against China in what was in essence a political coup of the right against the left. The same type of thing might be happening again as the CCP has expelled nine top generals. Rather than a
Former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmaker Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) on Saturday won the party’s chairperson election with 65,122 votes, or 50.15 percent of the votes, becoming the second woman in the seat and the first to have switched allegiance from the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to the KMT. Cheng, running for the top KMT position for the first time, had been termed a “dark horse,” while the biggest contender was former Taipei mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌), considered by many to represent the party’s establishment elite. Hau also has substantial experience in government and in the KMT. Cheng joined the Wild Lily Student
Taipei stands as one of the safest capital cities the world. Taiwan has exceptionally low crime rates — lower than many European nations — and is one of Asia’s leading democracies, respected for its rule of law and commitment to human rights. It is among the few Asian countries to have given legal effect to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant of Social Economic and Cultural Rights. Yet Taiwan continues to uphold the death penalty. This year, the government has taken a number of regressive steps: Executions have resumed, proposals for harsher prison sentences
RSS