The ongoing tenure of Emmanuel Macron as President of France is the subject of intense debate, as it reflects a complex equilibrium between the increasing discontent of the public and the political necessity of his position. His supporters argue that he embodies the moral responsibility and institutional stability required to guide France through challenging times, both domestically and internationally. Critics, however, argue that his presidency has become a source of instability rather than cohesion due to his political vulnerabilities and weakened legitimacy. This tension raises fundamental questions about the sustainability of Macron’s presidency as he approaches the end of his mandate in 2027.
Pro: Why Macron has political and moral reasons to remain
Institutional Stability
Emmanuel Macron, in his capacity as president, embodies the ongoing continuity of the French Fifth Republic, which is founded on a robust executive presidency that is designed to ensure political stability. During a period of substantial domestic unrest in France, which includes contentious issues such as pension reform, immigration challenges, and rising energy prices, his consistent presence in office functions as a critical anchor. A power vacuum could be created, which could further destabilize public trust in institutions and exacerbate social tensions, in the event of Macron’s departure or apparent presidential frailty.
European Role
Macron has established France as a significant player in the European arena, advocating for “strategic autonomy” in response to global geopolitical changes and promoting EU integration. In Brussels, the continuity of French leadership is particularly significant, as Germany, the other major player in the EU, has been perceived by some as hesitant or constrained in its ability to take decisive political action. Some perceive Macron’s continuous presidency as a critical stabilizing factor that ensures France’s continued influence within the political and economic frameworks of Europe.
Foreign Policy
Macron is a recognizable name in global diplomacy, where he is involved in the mediation of the Ukraine conflict, the promotion of international climate policy initiatives, and the enhancement of European defense cooperation. Proponents contend that his tenure as president ensures that France’s foreign policy remains consistent and predictable until the conclusion of his mandate in 2027, which is crucial for the preservation of France’s credibility and relationships on the global stage.
Moral Responsibility
In 2022, Macron was reelected, defeating Marine Le Pen, who garnered the support of a significant number of electors who perceived him as a protective factor against the influence of the far right. He may feel a moral obligation to complete his term fully, thereby honoring the trust placed in him by the electorate and defending the values his presidency represents against extremist political challenges stemming from this mandate.
Legacy
Macron’s aspiration is to be remembered as a transformative leader who modernized critical sectors of French governance and society, such as pension reform, the green energy transition, defense modernization, and European leadership. He has the opportunity to solidify these reforms and establish his legacy as a reformist figure who successfully navigated France through significant challenges by remaining in office for the full five-year period.
Con: Why Macron may just be hanging on
Institutional Instability Instead of Stability
Macron’s present circumstances demonstrate substantial institutional strain, despite his stated objectives of stability. He frequently employs Article 49.3 of the French Constitution to enact legislation without a parliamentary vote, as he lacks a distinct parliamentary majority. This practice has arguably undermined trust in democratic institutions rather than fortifying them, as it has sparked widespread protests and intensified political polarization.
Diminished European and Global Clout
The country’s global status is not overly reliant on Macron personally, as French influence in Brussels is derived from structural factors. However, his weak domestic position limits his ability to exert genuine bargaining power on the international stage. The diplomacy in Ukraine has reached a stalemate, French involvement in Africa is diminishing, and the ambitious rhetoric surrounding “strategic autonomy” has made little tangible progress. Foreign policy achievements have been uneven.
Eroding Moral Mandate
Macron’s 2022 reelection was primarily the result of an “anti-Le Pen” vote, rather than a passionate support for his policy platform. This vote is sometimes characterized as a rejection of the far right rather than a vote for Macronism. He is currently facing a challenge to his democratic legitimacy as a governing leader, as his approval ratings are historically low, suggesting that he has limited public support.
Not the Sole Defender of Democracy
Macron frequently positions himself as the foremost advocate for French and European democracy in the face of the emergence of far-right organizations. However, the AfD in Germany, the Netherlands, and Italy, as well as other far-right parties in Europe, continue to operate within democratic frameworks. Some overstate his role as the solitary bulwark, given the historical resilience of France’s democratic institutions.
Legacy Already Tarnished
Mass protests and controversial pension reforms, implemented without widespread consensus, have already partially defined his legacy. International setbacks have further exacerbated misconceptions regarding his presidency. Persisting in this precarious position, instead of establishing a positive legacy, could further tarnish his image.
Synthesis / Middle Ground
The French Fifth Republic’s constitutional framework guarantees a fixed five-year presidential tenure that is inviolable in the face of parliamentary maneuvers, unless the president resigns or is impeached. This renders Macron’s continued tenure less a matter of personal resolve and more a constitutional formality. Statistically, Macron appears to be too institutionally entrenched to voluntarily withdraw, but he is also too politically feeble to achieve his ambitious agenda.
Therefore, it is probable that his presidency will transition into a “lame duck” phase, during which his ability to effect change is substantially diminished, despite his continued tenure until 2027.
Scenarios for Macron’s Remaining Term
1. Managed Stability (Best-Case for Macron)
In this scenario, Macron is able to selectively broker provisional parliamentary alliances to support limited reforms, with a focus on less divisive topics such as industrial policy, climate change, and defense. Compensating for his domestic legitimacy’s decline, he relies significantly on his European and international agenda. Macron’s legacy is that of a responsible steward who prevented anarchy, despite the fact that he functions more as a caretaker than a bold reformer, resulting in a stable France.
2. Lame Duck Presidency (Most Likely Scenario)
The Parliament continues to obstruct the majority of Macron’s initiatives, and his approval ratings are at historic lows. The use of Article 49.3 to circumvent opposition only serves to escalate protests, while the political spotlight gradually transfers to the 2027 presidential candidates, including Le Pen. His final two years in office are marked by political marginalization and diminished influence, indicating a period of anticipation for the post-Macron political landscape.
3. Forced Cohabitation (Institutional Stalemate)
Macron could be compelled to cohabitate with an ideologically opposed prime minister if the National Assembly is dissolved by Macron and legislative elections result in a parliamentary majority for the far right or far left. This scenario would accelerate the transition to a new political era in France by limiting his role to ceremonial responsibilities, with limited foreign policy authority, and crippling his domestic agenda.
4. Shock Exit (Unlikely but Possible)
Macron may resign prematurely due to political exhaustion, mass unrest, or a calculated maneuver to precipitate early elections. In this scenario, the Senate President would take on the role of an interim president until new elections take place. His resignation may be perceived as abandonment by his supporters; however, it could paradoxically enhance his reputation as a leader who is unwilling to adhere to power, although it could plunge France into temporary political instability.
5. Revival Through Crisis (Wild Card)
A surge in public demand for robust presidential leadership could result from a significant European or global crisis, such as an escalation in Ukraine, an energy shock, or a terrorist incident. Macron could temporarily reclaim authority by capitalizing on the “rally round the flag” effect, resulting in a rebound in approval ratings and his departure from office in 2027 with a partially rehabilitated reputation.
Assessment
The “Lame Duck Presidency” is the most likely scenario, as it poses a danger of forced cohabitation if Macron decides to dissolve the Assembly. A revival through crisis is still feasible; however, it is contingent upon unpredictable external factors rather than Macron’s own political decisions.
Impact of Macron’s Scenarios on Marine Le Pen & 2027
1. Managed Stability
Le Pen would continue to be the most prominent opposition figure; however, her ability to capitalize on significant issues would be diminished by the absence of significant crises. Although her critique of “Macronist anarchy” would lose urgency, she would still benefit from the general fatigue associated with centrist politics and Macron’s two-term limit, which would prevent his re-election. In the interim, a centrist successor such as Édouard Philippe could emerge as a more formidable competitor, thereby eroding Le Pen’s advantage.
2. Lame Duck Presidency
Le Pen has the most to gain, as Macron’s stagnation serves to bolster her narrative that the “system” is depleted. Government paralysis and recurrent protests have bolstered her credibility as the agent of change, establishing her as the front-runner for 2027. Left-wing fragmentation could also bolster her position, as moderate divisions undercut center-left challenges.
3. Forced Cohabitation
In the event that Le Pen’s National Rally (RN) party achieves a parliamentary majority, she may be granted a preliminary governing role as prime minister within a cohabitation framework. Although this arrangement poses a risk of revealing the inexperience of the RN, it could also normalize Le Pen as a governing figure, which would contradict the narrative that she is unelectable. This scenario further diminishes Macron’s faction and establishes a head-to-head competition between the left and the RN in 2027.
4. Shock Exit
Macron’s resignation could potentially result in early elections, which could surprise opposition rivals. If the opposition is disorganized, Le Pen’s preparedness to campaign permanently could be advantageous, potentially expediting her ascent to power. While centrists may coalesce around a new candidate, fragmentation would almost certainly ensure that Le Pen secures a place in a runoff.
5. Revival Through Crisis
While a short-term Macron surge in leadership during a crisis could potentially impede Le Pen’s ascent, it is impossible to prevent it, particularly due to Macron’s prohibition from running for president in 2027. Le Pen has the potential to strengthen her long-term argument by utilizing crises to advocate for systemic failure under existing leaders. A credible alternative may also materialize in the form of a centrist successor who is associated with Macron’s crisis leadership.
Overall Outlook for 2027
Marine Le Pen capitalizes on Macron’s historically low approval ratings, the constitutional restriction of two presidential terms, and the president’s restricted capacity to designate a formidable successor. Because of this, she is the logical frontrunner for the upcoming presidential election. The primary risk for the RN lies in the credibility challenges she may face if she assumes governing responsibilities and commits policy errors.
Her opportunity is to capitalize on the persistent fatigue associated with centrist administrations and the system they represent. 2027 is likely to be Le Pen’s campaign to lose in the absence of a compelling new centrist figure to unite moderates, such as Philippe or Darmanin.