France’s streets have been quieter, but the crisis has not eased. On Sunday, protest groups and unions called for more demonstrations after a very large security operation helped contain unrest during nationwide rallies on Saturday. The Interior Ministry said 410,000 people took part in the marches, while authorities deployed 70,000 police, helping to avert a repeat of the looting and vandalism that swept many cities on 17 October. The relative calm is real, but the underlying grievances have not been addressed, and organisers are signalling that they intend to keep up the pressure. Meanwhile, the president whom the protesters are confronting has fewer tools than he had the last time France faced a revolt over living costs.
The figures describe a state that is better prepared than a week ago, and a movement that has not run out of numbers. Some 1,314 people were arrested on Saturday, half of the previous week’s total, and about 50 police were injured, compared with more than 1,000 the week before. Disorder was limited to sporadic clashes in several cities, including Paris and Marseille. In Lyon, burnt debris remained at the side of a street on Sunday, a reminder of the damage done during the second day of nationwide protests against the cost of living and rising fuel prices.
The comparison is instructive. With 70,000 police deployed, authorities were able to prevent the kind of violence seen on 17 October. But police unions said on Sunday that they do not have enough staff to maintain such a level of deployment for any length of time. That is a significant limit: a security response that depends on a one-off mobilisation is difficult to repeat every weekend, and the unions’ warning suggests the government cannot rely on policing alone to manage a prolonged protest cycle. The protests began last month with students and have since broadened. Labour leaders are calling for further protests next Saturday, 31 October, and a nationwide strike on 5 November, arguing that frustration over wages, living costs and public services is spreading far beyond the student movement that first mobilised.
Murielle Guilbert, co-leader of the left-wing Solidaires union federation, told BFM TV: “We see an aggregation of anger.” She said grievances from students, workers, firefighters and other groups were converging. The SUD Education teaching union said it would join the 31 October demonstration, while the large CGT union said it would decide during the week. The Yellow Vests, the grassroots movement that emerged in 2018 as a revolt against fuel taxes, also called for mass rallies next Saturday, including sit-ins outside town halls and the National Assembly. Activist Azelma Sigaux described the mood: “There is anger in this country. It’s growing in schools and universities, on roundabouts, in neighbourhoods, on farms and in workplaces.”
The significance lies in the convergence. A student movement, a labour movement and a rural-suburban protest tradition normally have different demands and methods. When they share the same dates and slogans, the government faces pressure that is harder to separate and answer with a single concession. A strike on 5 November would add an economic dimension, since it could disrupt transport and public services.
The president’s position is described by Reuters as one of minimal scope to respond. In 2019, in answer to the Yellow Vests, Emmanuel Macron was able to find resources to reduce fuel costs. Seven years later the picture is different on three fronts.
First, public finances are strained. The state has missed deficit targets and faces rising borrowing costs, as the bond-market turmoil of recent weeks has shown, which limits any response that relies on spending or tax cuts. Second, his mandate expires next April, which shortens his horizon and weakens his authority. Third, his centrist party no longer has the majority needed to pass major legislation, so even a negotiated package would need support from opposition parties that have their own electoral interests.
This combination explains why the talks that the government has begun with unions and student representatives have not satisfied protest leaders. They say the measures proposed so far are inadequate. “We have received no response at all from this government,” Guilbert said. The gap between a government that cannot afford large concessions and protesters who see little on offer is the central problem of the crisis. The government faces three imperfect options.
The first is to concede on cost-of-living measures, such as targeted fuel or energy relief or wage-related support. This could calm the streets but would strain the budget at a moment when investors are watching French deficits closely. Any large package risks provoking further market pressure.
The second is to hold firm on public finances and rely on security measures. This protects the fiscal position in the short term but risks prolonging the protests, and the police unions’ warning about staffing makes it hard to sustain. It also risks provoking the kind of clashes that can radicalise sympathisers.
The third is a middle path of limited, well-targeted measures combined with dialogue on longer-term issues such as education standards and public services. It is the most plausible, though its success depends on whether protesters regard it as credible rather than as a delaying tactic.
The French protests do not stand alone. On Saturday, Belgian police used tear gas and pepper spray in clashes with anti-government demonstrators in Brussels. In Albania, peaceful protests turned into violent unrest, and skirmishes have taken place in several Italian cities for a second week running. Across Europe, a mixture of high living costs, weak public services and perceived lack of prospects is producing street movements. The wave is also being linked to student-led pressure elsewhere, and to recent political upsets that have shown such movements can have electoral consequences. For France, the international dimension offers a mixed message. It suggests that the causes are not specific to Macron, and that no single national policy can resolve them. But it also means that the government cannot count on the issue fading by itself, since the underlying economic conditions are common to many countries.
Several dates and indicators will matter. The first is the scale and character of the 31 October demonstrations, including whether the CGT joins and whether the Yellow Vests produce large turnout. The second is whether the 5 November strike goes ahead and how far it disrupts services. The third is whether the number of arrests and injuries stays low, which will depend on how long police can sustain their deployment. The fourth is the content of any government offer: protest leaders have said what is on the table is inadequate, so a new proposal could either split or unify the movement. The fifth is the financial market reaction to any spending commitments. The deeper political question is what the unrest means for the presidential election next spring. A government unable to respond to a broad coalition of grievances, in a country where opposition parties are strong, is likely to see the issue shape the campaign. Saturday’s calmer streets show that the state can contain disorder. They do not show that it can answer the anger behind it, and organisers are betting that the coming week will prove it cannot.
Comments