We use cookies to help improve and maintain our site. More information.

February 06, 2019

Gilets jaunes: anti-government but business-friendly

We note an interesting observation made by Aline Leclerc and Raphaelle Besse Desmoulières in Le Monde. The gilets jaunes have engaged in insurgency-like protest against government, and demands for a fairer sharing of the tax burden are at the heart of the protest movement. But the movement is not anti-business as such - many participants are small entrepreneurs, some of whom have demonstrated together with their employees. Only few speak spontaneously of any antagonism towards le patronat - the employers, or rather the bosses. Inasmuch as large companies are being rhetorically targeted, anger is directed against global behemoths using their size and the nature of their business to reduce their tax burden way below that of less mobile competitors. Geoffroy Roux de Bézieux, head of the Medef, says he was positively astonished that the employers’ organization was not targeted. The gilets jaunes are nothing like any other protest seen since WWII.

Show Comments Write a Comment

February 06, 2019

May has reasonable chances of success

To us Theresa May acts like a chess player carefully positioning her pieces in ways that appear puzzling to outsiders. The latter's confusion is the source of an overwhelming share of Brexit commentary in the UK. She has one valuable advantage in this game: she knows the strategy and constraints of her opponent - the EU - much better than anyone else in the UK political scene. 

Most of the UK Brexit commentary falls foul of mistaken assumptions about EU politics, procedures and law. In this context we noted a comment by Anatole Kaletsky, who calls on the EU to extend the Brexit deadline unilaterally. He means the European Council should vote to offer an extension, irrespective of whether or not this is requested by Theresa May, betting on the House of Commons to then pass the necessary legislation. 

He is also wrong to portray the upcoming talks as a blinking contest. The 29 March deadline is useful both to May and to the EU. May needs to get a majority behind her plan, which will never happen without a deadline. And the EU knows it will need Ireland to support a compromise solution, which will also never happen without a deadline. They both need to take this to the brink. As we have said before, the contours of the eventual agreement are not the main point. It is the need to generate the needed unity on both sides. 

May revealed some of her strategic intent yesterday during a speech in Belfast, where she effectively killed the Malthouse compromise - which called for an extension of the transition period and the ditching of the backstop. May said the Irish backstop will remain in place. Her talks with the EU, starting tomorrow when she meets Jean-Claude Juncker in Brussels, will be about assurances on the finality of the backstop. This is to a large extent a technical discussion. Never bet against the EU finding a technical solution.

But even though the Malthouse compromise was never going to fly as a negotiating tool, it did the job of re-uniting Tory MPs behind their prime minister, at least for a while. It allowed her to persist with her strategy of running down the clock. We are already in February. Various Commons amendments were designed to stop her from doing this. The closer we get to the deadline, the stronger her position is vis-a-vis the parliament. Even Kaletsky's solution would not fly since parliament needs to do a lot more than pass an amendment in order to force an extension to the deadline. It needs to pass legislation, and one should not underestimate the UK government's ability to frustrate such a process.

The deadline is crucial. She recently told her cabinet that the March 29 deadline still holds. This is not true, of course. We know that she will have to extend it because every option now requires an extension. But her game is to get a deal first, and then to extend, not the other way around. And we think this is the EU's game as well. 

As a final thought for today, we believe that second-referendum advocacy may be the biggest risk factor for a no-deal Brexit. We have heard the view expressed that they would rather have a hard Brexit - to prove how disastrous the whole thing is - than a soft compromise like May's deal. For the hardcore second-referendum supporters, Norway is the real enemy. It appears to us that at least some moderate Tory MPs like Nicky Morgan, and moderate pro-Remain Labour MPs like Caroline Flint or Lisa Nandy, have a clear vision of the trap. They are now moving towards supporting a compromise. 

Show Comments Write a Comment

This is the public section of the Eurointelligence Professional Briefing, which focuses on the geopolitical aspects of our news coverage. It appears daily at 2pm CET. The full briefing, which appears at 9am CET, is only available to subscribers. Please click here for a free trial, and here for the Eurointelligence home page.


Recent News

  • October 01, 2018
  • After the referendum, more turmoil in Macedonia
  • What will happen if the UK parliament votes No?
  • Barnier's no-thanks works much better than a yes-please
  • April 03, 2018
  • Is the time for Brexit revocation running out?
  • October 04, 2017
  • On why Theresa May is likely to survive
  • On how to resolve the Brexit talks
  • Social housing - not a good start for the French government
  • April 11, 2017
  • What to expect, and not expect from Schulz
  • The view from Berlin
  • The view from Moscow
  • October 17, 2016
  • Ceta is dead for now
  • L’après-Hollande, c'est Hollande
  • SPD against Russia sanctions
  • Nissan to join customs union and other fanciful tales
  • April 25, 2016
  • The death of the Grand Coalition
  • Insurrection against TTIP
  • Juppé to benefit from Macron hype
  • On optimal currency areas
  • Why the Artic region could be the next geopolitical troublespot
  • From a currency to a people
  • May 27, 2019
  • The rising chances of a no-deal Brexit
  • January 18, 2019
  • Why Dublin won't yield on the backstop
  • Town hall debates vs street protests - who is winning?
  • September 13, 2018
  • Bravo Mr Juncker for raising the issue of the euro’s international role. But what now?
  • Are the eurosceptics imploding?
  • May 10, 2018
  • Time for some clear thinking on Trump and Iran
  • Will Corbyn accept the EEA? Brexiteers can relax. He won't.
  • What next for the DUP?
  • January 05, 2018
  • Catalonia's government by Skype
  • The case for EEA membership
  • August 24, 2017
  • Legislative hyperactivity for Tsipras' new narrative
  • On the deep causes of euroscepticism
  • April 23, 2017
  • The demise of the AfD has accelerated dramatically
  • On how France will need to confront Germany
  • December 21, 2016
  • A culture of denial
  • Ukraine agreement hangs in the balance
  • Valls U-turn on 49-3
  • Beware of exotic Brexit options
  • August 22, 2016
  • Gold for Brexit
  • EU and Turkey talking past each other
  • Switzerland is the next migrant transit country
  • On the death of neoliberal economics
  • April 25, 2016
  • The death of the Grand Coalition
  • Insurrection against TTIP
  • Juppé to benefit from Macron hype
  • On optimal currency areas
  • Why the Artic region could be the next geopolitical troublespot
  • From a currency to a people
  • July 29, 2019
  • No-deal Brexit is no longer just a scenario
  • No German warships to the Strait of Hormuz
  • July 11, 2019
  • Focus on election timetable, not prorogation...
  • ...and not on Darroch either
  • June 24, 2019
  • Economic reform has torn up the SPD - climate policy does the same for the CDU/CSU
  • Not intruding, not really
  • June 06, 2019
  • Is this the end of traditional parties as we know them?
  • How a no-deal Brexit could happen
  • May 22, 2019
  • Better start those no-deal preparations right now
  • Europe's real transfer union is from east to west
  • May 07, 2019
  • … while Macron’s European troubles have already begun, and might get even worse
  • Don't discount a Brexit deal
  • Is Tsipras too complacent?
  • Costa - the fiscally responsible Socialist
  • April 24, 2019
  • May's final and biggest gamble
  • Will the EP be Brexit's great parliamentary beneficiary?
  • Can Loiseau fight the far right given her past?
  • April 09, 2019
  • What can go wrong now?
  • March 29, 2019
  • Don't take Macron for granted
  • Green is EU's future - Loiseau takes a stance
  • March 20, 2019
  • EU is hardening position on long delay
  • Trump's man in Berlin is wrong on form, but right on substance
  • March 11, 2019
  • Ask what Europe can do for Germany - AKK's EU manifesto
  • March 04, 2019
  • Macron's two-month sprint
  • May's numbers are not there yet
  • Greening QE
  • On the "hope" of a rate raise
  • February 25, 2019
  • Deal versus short delay
  • The astonishing weakness of Five Star
  • The real threat is from the left not the right
  • February 19, 2019
  • Neither seven dwarfs, nor the magnificent seven. Merely a sad day for Labour
  • Will Costa last through the stand-off with the unions?
  • February 15, 2019
  • Syriza suffers defeat in constitutional reform
  • A cautionary tale about experts
  • February 11, 2019
  • SPD dumps Hartz IV
  • Macron's revival
  • February 08, 2019
  • Macron turns stand-off with Italy into a game changer
  • Is there a strategic intent behind Macron's decision?
  • February 07, 2019
  • Forget Tusk - the real action is elsewhere
  • On David Malpass and the Trump legacy