 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
 |
| Police officers enforce the curfew in a Parisian neighbourhood. So far a total of 2,331 people have been arrested in connection with the unrest. (© picture alliance / Anadolu / Luc Auffret) |
|
 | |
In a bid to prevent further violence and looting after the widespread unrest on the weekend, curfews have been imposed in certain areas of major cities across France. Meanwhile, the Yellow Vests movement has announced new demonstrations for Saturday in protest at the high cost of living. As the 2027 presidential election draws closer, the media discuss the political and economic consequences of the unrest. |
|
|
|  | | |
| Presidential election sans a political centreKurier fears that the populists will become more radical: “Simply blaming the political opposition for the violence certainly won't solve France's deep-rooted structural problems. ... France's biggest challenge is that the country has lost its political centre – a disaster in view of the upcoming presidential election. The parties on both the far right and far left now see the events of the weekend as an opportunity to capitalise on the moment and secure the Élysée Palace. The closer the election date gets, the louder their extreme messages will become.”
| |
| | Share on | |  | |  | | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
|  | | |
| The left is giving Le Pen a springboardThe stance adopted by La France Insoumise (LFI) plays right into Marine Le Pen's hands, argues La Libre Belgique: “Jean-Luc Mélenchon bears a heavy political responsibility for this escalation. ... A presidential candidate cannot first fan the flames and then be surprised when a fire breaks out. ... Even if LFI has the right to demand accountability when a police operation gets out of hand, this in no way exempts it from unequivocally condemning the young people and adults who loot, set things on fire, assault others and wreak havoc. ... While Jean-Luc Mélenchon wants to embody the break with the past, he is providing the Rassemblement National with an excellent springboard. Marine Le Pen could not have hoped for a more effective means to revive her election campaign.”
| |
| | Share on | | | | | | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
|  | | |
| The majority are peaceful demonstratorsBlaming the far left for the rioting is too simplistic, the Irish Examiner admonishes: “The casseurs [the violent rioters] have little to do with the protesters. They arrived late in the day, split into small groups to move from street to street, and regrouped while police in heavy vehicles struggled to follow. They smashed LVMH and Darty stores and small family businesses alike. Those who got caught were largely the opportunistic looters. But blaming the far left for the movement itself is a convenient way of not listening. The great majority marched peacefully. Macron himself admitted that peaceful protesters should never be confused with rioters, and that people have a right to think fuel is too expensive.”
| |
| | Share on | | | | | | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
|  | | |
| Chronic problems to resolveFrance must tackle the problem at its root, entrepreneur and essayist Alexis Karklins-Marchay argues in Les Echos: “Whether it was the Yellow Vests movement in 2018 or the demonstrations against the pension reform in 2023, the scenario is always the same: bewilderment, lofty declarations, a few cheques, then it's all forgotten. ... Yet the root causes have never been addressed: public spending that yields no results, a state authority that is challenged, an education system that no longer guarantees social mobility, and a middle class that feels caught in a vice. ... The 2027 election will be truly decisive. Either France will finally take the decisions that are necessary to put its public finances in order, restore the authority of the state, put an end to the sense of impunity and rebuild trust – or it ventures into uncharted territory.”
| |
| | Share on | | | | | | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
|  | | |
| More funding is not the answerThe Neue Zürcher Zeitung demands new solutions: “Since the 1980s, schools in problem neighbourhoods have received more funding than those in the rest of France. ... Yet all these programmes have achieved very little. ... The temptation is great for France to try to resolve this latest unrest with money as well: more programmes, more reforms, more promises. But this classic French 'solution model' no longer works in the face of the country's economic crisis. ... This is also good news. Because the financial crisis has made necessary something that politicians have been avoiding for decades. ... France must rediscover the concept of merit and renegotiate its social contract. The flip side is that anyone who wants to live in France must make their contribution.”
| |
| | Share on | | | | | | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
|  | | |
| Debt makes everything worseEconomist Indrė Genytė-Pikčienė warns of the consequences of rising debt in IQ: “In order to satisfy the financial markets, the French government will have no choice but to implement unpopular austerity measures: increase taxes, cut public sector spending, freeze wages or raise the retirement age. But such decisions come at a high political cost: they fuel discontent among the population. ... The key lesson to be learned from this development is that debt has a tendency to erode future room for manoeuvre. The more resources you have to spend on servicing liabilities that have already accumulated, the less remains for what creates future prosperity: education, infrastructure, defence, innovation and public services.”
| |
| | Share on | | | | | | |
|
| | |
|
|
|
 | | Share on | | | | | |
|
|
|
| |
A meeting between Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping could take place in China on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in November. The plan has stoked fear in Europe that these major powers will conduct negotiations without consulting Ukraine and its allies. Commentators discuss the dangers of a redrawing of spheres of influence and the consequences for European security. |
|
|
|  | | |
| Major powers meet at Europe's expenseSuch a summit would be disastrous from a European perspective, Handelsblatt shudders: “Even the US president's announcement that he intends to negotiate nuclear disarmament cannot disguise the fact that, just as in the darkest of times, the major powers would be carving out their spheres of influence over the heads of those directly concerned. What's more: under Trump's presidency the leading Western power has not only clearly aligned itself with Russia in its war in Ukraine, but the self-proclaimed 'leader of the free world' is also behaving in an increasingly autocratic manner and actively seeking closer ties with like-minded leaders in Beijing and Moscow. In other words: at such a summit of the major powers, three autocrats would be deciding the fate of a democratic Europe.”
| |
| | Share on | | | | | | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
|  | | |
| Putin wants a new YaltaPutin will have got what he wants if the summit takes place, Ukrainian political scientist Ihor Petrenko writes on liga.net: “Three chairs at one table – that is the image the Kremlin has been striving for since 2022: Russia as one of three global centres of power determining Europe's fate. ... A source in the Wall Street Journal openly describes this ambition as a second Yalta, a new divvying up of spheres of influence. This is unrealistic, but telling. Putin is not coming to negotiate on Ukraine but on his place in the world, and Ukraine is merely a bargaining chip in this process. ... The outcome of Shenzhen would not be an agreement but a 'framework': general principles which they will then try to present to Kyiv as 'already agreed'. This is precisely what we must start working to prevent right now.”
| |
| |
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий