Paris may struggle to hold on to its regional influence

In April next year, French voters will decide on their next president. Pummeled by the right wing, incumbent Emmanuel Macron finds himself increasingly pandering to nationalist voters. The once fresh face of the center-left En Marche movement has found himself increasingly fixated with France’s place in the world. The last two French presidents, Francois Hollande and Nicolas Sarkozy, made an impact at home, for better or for worse. But rather than seek to impose France’s will on international affairs, they seemed content to act as custodians of the republic’s now cliched international decline.

The last grand seigneur of French diplomacy was the late Jacques Chirac, known as “Le Bulldozer” by colleagues for his forthrightness. His tenure is fondly remembered as a decade during which France clearly made its mark on international affairs.

Macron has tried to adopt a similar approach, embracing the Gaullist principle of “affirming national sovereignty and unity.” However, in focusing exclusively on the former, his muscularity has not necessarily always increased France’s influence.

The Arab world is of immense strategic importance for France, which has otherwise been in a steady state of decline. Macron tried to embrace this when he was first elected by focusing on the threat posed by Daesh. However, his focus on the region became too narrow and the anti-terrorist narrative served to strengthen xenophobic voices at home, thus putting his government on an offensive footing with Islam, France’s second-largest religion.

Excluded from the Astana process on Syria, many had thought Macron would take the Iran nuclear program issue upon himself, but he has failed to have an impact despite France having the most cordial ties with Tehran of any of the P5+1. Where Hollande courted

Riyadh and Sarkozy opted for Doha, Macron had the opportunity to adopt a more holistic approach to the Gulf. However, his relations with Saudi Arabia have been frosty at times, while his haste to endorse the UAE’s struggle with political Islam served to further ostracize France’s Muslim community.

With the election on the horizon, he was in Riyadh at the weekend. But it is unclear how this Middle East charm offensive will do little more than show him as statesmanlike in front of voters.

The “Macron method” has been used to describe the president’s hyperactive and supposedly disruptive approach to foreign policy, which is centered on his personal relations with other leaders. But this may have overstated his charm and tact.

The exit of the UK from the EU gave France a once-in-a-generation opportunity to take the lead within the bloc, but his goal of revitalizing Franco-German relations and founding a “new partnership” between Paris and Berlin have foundered, as he has simultaneously sought to increase French power overseas.

As Germany has sought to mend and empower the EU, Macron has sought to preserve autonomy in defense policy and to unilaterally fill the strategic vacuum that has been created by the waning US interest in Europe.

Now in his fifth year in office, the bold diplomatic interventions that were once seen as daring have destabilized the French presidency at several moments. As seen in Lebanon, France can have an impact in a failed state in the throes of crisis. However, on the big issues, France still struggles to have sway. The announcement of the withdrawal of its anti-extremist military force in the Sahel region in the first quarter of 2022 is a case in point. Like Macron, France can posture, but it lacks the long-term vision to establish and maintain influence.