When French voters rejected the EU constitution last May, it was thought by many observers to be an anomaly -- a one-off act by voters afraid of losing cherished privileges in a land committed to an integrated Europe.
However, nearly one year on, it is beginning to look more and more as if the country that likes to style itself a "motor of Europe" might actually be more of a roadblock on the path to European integration.
A series of maneuvers by French companies and leaders have created the suspicion, in Brussels and elsewhere in Europe, that the French want to have their economic cake and eat it too -- that is, benefit from the EU's open borders while keeping a firm hand on their family jewels.
Growing criticism of alleged French protectionism provoked President Jacques Chirac into an angry defense of his country during talks with German Chancellor Angela Merkel earlier this month.
"France has been accused in the foreign media of being protectionist," Chirac said in Berlin. "This is absolutely absurd."
Nevertheless, resentment over what French leaders themselves have called "economic nationalism" has grown so strong that one Italian editorialist spoke of a "French illness that risks infecting everyone on Europe."
Italian Finance Minister Giulio Tremonti compared the situation created by French behavior to the period leading up to World War I.
"Today, no one wants a blockage of the European markets either, but ... we are risking a chain reaction," he complained.
The Italians were commenting on the most recent case of French so-called economic nationalism, which involves two French companies, French energy giant Gaz de France (GDF) and the energy and environment services group Suez.
Brussels and Rome accuse the French authorities of arranging a shotgun wedding between the two companies to head off an anticipated hostile takeover bid for Suez by the Italian giant ENEL.
As a result, Brussels has chosen to make a test case of the Suez affair about the way business will be conducted in Europe in the future.
The EU could take France to court over the case if it proves that French authorities played a role in hampering ENEL's ability to make a bid for Suez.
On Tuesday, French Finance Minister Thierry Breton -- apparently fearing censure by Brussels -- blithely said that his government was not encouraging this or any other merger.
"I only encourage companies to do their work," Breton said. "They can join with whomever they like."
This was the same Breton who two months earlier openly expressed his government's hostility to a hostile takeover bid by the world's No. 1 steelmaker Mittal Steel for Europe's Arcelor.
Breton said the French government was worried about the takeover attempt because "Arcelor carries out a very large part of its activities in Europe, notably in France."
In fact, the French government has compiled a telltale history of interference in the free market of cross-border takeovers, repeatedly selecting like a protective mother what it considers the most fitting partners for its companies.
In 2004, when the Swiss pharmaceuticals company Novartis made a bid for the French-German group Aventis, the government of then-prime minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin immediately voiced its strong opposition.
"We will do everything in our power so that this merger is not completed," a Raffarin adviser said at the time. "France is a sovereign state. We will not let the Swiss simply take over what we have spent years to build up."
Instead, similar to the way the merger between GDF and Suez has been arranged, the French authorities pushed for a merger between Aventis and the French company Sanofi-Synthelabo, creating Sanofi-Aventis.
Last year, rumors of a possible hostile takeover bid by the US foods giant PepsiCo for France's leading foods group Danone sent politicians in Paris to the barricades again.
Although PepsiCo never confirmed interest in Danone, the outrage expressed by French leaders was so great that a clear message was sent to other possible suitors.
According to the business daily La Tribune, that scare prompted the French intelligence services to draw up a list of possible takeover targets to be protected from foreign poaching.
The list -- which includes Danone, the bank Societe Generale, retailers Casino and Carrefour, telecommunications equipment firm Alcatel and media group Vivendi Universal -- goes well beyond the "nationally strategic" companies the EU would permit protecting.
But the case of Suez and GDF is particularly galling for Brussels as EU Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes has warned that the sector was not sufficiently integrated and too concentrated in the hands of a few companies.
Last week, EU energy ministers urged to speed up the creation of a frontier-free energy market, and called on Kroes to carefully vet protectionist moves in the sector.
Austrian Energy Minister Martin Bartenstein, whose country currently serves as EU president, stated the conflict clearly.
There is, he said, a contradiction between some governments' "nationalist approach" to blocking energy sector takeover bids and the EU's rules on ensuring the free cross-border movement of capital.
In September 2015, Russia intervened militarily in Syria’s civil war, propping up Bashar al-Assad’s dictatorship as it teetered on the brink of collapse. This was the high point of Russia’s resurgence on the world stage and Russian President Vladimir Putin’s ability to tilt the war in al-Assad’s favor helped make him a regional power broker. In addition to enhancing Putin’s stature, the operation led to strategic gains that gave Russia leverage vis-a-vis regional and Western powers. Syria was thus a status symbol for the Kremlin. Putin, who sees Russia as a great power on par with the US and China, attaches
With Washington substantially off-guard in power transition, China’s supreme leader, Xi Jinping (習近平), is intensifying an anti-corruption campaign against the top military leadership. At a glance, the move seems to be consistent with his emphasis on the necessity of enhancing military preparedness for a possible full military invasion of Taiwan, because the military is required to be well-disciplined without corruption. Looking carefully, however, a series of purges of several top military leaders since last year begs the question of what dynamics has worked behind the anomaly. More specifically, general Wei Fenghe (魏鳳和) and his immediate successor, Li Shangfu (李尚福), were removed as People’s
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers on Monday unilaterally passed a preliminary review of proposed amendments to the Public Officers Election and Recall Act (公職人員選罷法) in just one minute, while Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators, government officials and the media were locked out. The hasty and discourteous move — the doors of the Internal Administration Committee chamber were locked and sealed with plastic wrap before the preliminary review meeting began — was a great setback for Taiwan’s democracy. Without any legislative discussion or public witnesses, KMT Legislator Hsu Hsin-ying (徐欣瑩), the committee’s convener, began the meeting at 9am and announced passage of the
In the weeks following the 2024 US presidential election, I have received one question more than any other from friends in Taiwan — how will Donald J. Trump’s return to the White House affect Taiwan and cross-Strait relations? Some Taiwan counterparts have argued that Trump hates China, so therefore he will support Taiwan, according to the logic that the enemy of one’s enemy is a friend. Others have expressed anxiety that Trump will put pressure on Taiwan to dramatically increase defense spending, or to compensate the United States for allegedly “stealing” America’s semiconductor sector. While I understand these hopes and concerns, I
RSS