Should Poles care who becomes French President or is it irrelevant?

Francois Hollande won the first round of presidential elections. Sarkozy is second.

I am not interested in French problems but does it matter for Poland/Poles in any way?

The way I understand it, things have warmed up considerably 'tween ol' France and Poland since Poland joined the EU. That unfortunate Polish Plumber incident (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Plumber) non-withstanding. There's a considerable amount of Poles in France, and so the recent turn in politics will surely mean more to them than to us. From all appearances, Monsieur Hollande looks to be the most leftist leader France will have had since Mitterand, so we can expect plenty of social programs, government hirings, and a raise in the minimum wage. For the working class Polish, especially in the mining regions and Calais, this will certainly prove beneficial and popular, n'est-ce pas?

Le Penn certainly wouldnt do much good for Poles in France or Frances relations with anywhere.

I think both candidates are crap. Le Penn is too left wing for me but the current Pres is just a douche who likes to have luxury holidays and not do much.

Very beneficial, but the real effects will come through France's influence in the EU.

WielkiPolak

Too left wing for you? Who would vote for if you had the choice? Adolf, Benito or Enoch??

One is a commie, the other has serious mental problems. Both are fecked up. At the moemnt European countries are lacking good leaders.

The communist candidate didn't poll well - the winner is M. Hollande.

Of course it matters. France is a big player and to have them in your cornr would be huge. The current president promised to work with Poland but once elected blew her off. The contender, I beleive, made at least one visit to Poland and promised to work closely with Warsaw if elected.

Yes, I read about some hidden tensions between French and Polish leaders recently. Something about French reluctance to see Poland as a reliable partner. Europe of two speeds etc etc.

This, obviously, is not an opinion France would share, and Poland - while officially only "expressing concern" over some French positions - now seems to view France as its main adversary in the EU. This is the culmination of a long process of mutual disappointment, from France's reluctance to support Poland's NATO and EU membership and President Chirac's infamous "ils ont perdu une bonne occasion de se taire", to the French veto over Poland's aspiration, as EU President, to participate in Eurozone summits and the results of the December 2011 Council Meeting. If French criticism of Poland's participation in the war in Iraq has proved not unjustified, and her veto was directed at the UK and not at Poland per se, the drive to substitute European institutions with intergovernmental summits and to substitute the EU with the Eurozone is seen by Warsaw as "a noose around our necks".

The European institutions give a voice to smaller and weaker EU member states, and Warsaw is keen to preserve them. Although the Union's sixth largest in terms of population and size, due to the relatively small dimensions of its economy Poland sees itself as a champion of that group, and is (in this sense only) seen in return by them as such. As it is not currently a member of the Eurozone (although it aspires to membership) it is also vitally interested in avoiding the onset of a 'two-speed' Europe.

These interests and French policies have placed Warsaw on a collision course with Paris. The danger for Poland, however, is that while from its vantage point French policies constitute an existential threat, from Paris' perspective Polish opposition is a secondary irritant. The French objective is to keep the Brits out and the Germans in, not to aggravate the Poles. Therefore, just like the German alliance, the French confrontation is lopsided.

ecfr.eu/content/entry/commentary_reinventing_europe_poland_and_ the_euro_crisis

Very true. Sarkozy had himself firmly nailed to the 'more europe' mast when it came to fixing EU made problems such as the Euro.

As the Euro-zone falls apart, it could be useful to have a French President not so heavily personally invested in the whole project.

I see what you're saying, however it's in France's very best interests to preserve the Eurozone. Merkozy may be on the way out, but the new leader will be as close to Germany as he possibly can be.

I just put that down to a typo.....fingers crossed :)

Francois Hollande, I think is good

I think that the current French leadership is responsible for increasing anti-European sentiment in several parts of the world, and from the looks of it, the other candidates will make it even worse.

France's influence on NATO and EU will affect how Poland is perceived globally.

As export becomes a bigger part of Poland's economy, it is important that Poland is perceived positively.

Just food for thought.

Marie Le Pen refused to back up Sarkozy.

Will Sarko be equally elated on Sunday evening?

I don't see where else could her votes go? Only to the dark side :)

She is the dark side of French politics.
She won't back Sarcozy but she should thank him. Because of his shift to the right side and his antiimigration propaganda, Le Penn popularity is rising.

Another thing is that about 80% of French population takes part in elections. The result of elections is a true mirror of the society. It sad to see the popularity of far right there.

Sarko took up an anti-immigrant stance recently.
French presidential hopeful Nicolas Sarkozy has hardened his stance against immigration, claiming that France would exit Europe's open-border zone if the EU fails to clamp down on illegal immigration.

France will be the first country to suspend participation in the Schengen Area if no progress is made in curtailing illegal immigration in France, said incumbent President Nicolas Sarkozy in front of cheering supporters at a Sunday campaign rally.

The gathering marked a key event in Sarkozy's presidential campaign, which with six weeks to go before polling day on April 22, has seen the incumbent's rhetoric focus more and more on immigration policy - much like his campaign five years ago, when he launched an anti-immigration drive in the run up to elections.

dw.de/dw/article/0,,15703843,00.html

PS. BTW, I watched the video with Maries` speech. She is so repulsive. :(:(:(:(:(

After all it comes to this dilemma according to French ppl ; )

instead of this or that , this or this.

It is good to know the past when thinking about the future, n'est-ce pas?

François Mitterrand, like Margaret Thatcher, was an implausible candidate for the role he was to play in his country's affairs. Born to a practicing Catholic family in conservative south-western France, he was a right-wing law student in the 1930s and an activist in some of the most extreme anti-democratic movements of the age. He spent most of World War Two as a junior servant of the collaborationist government in Vichy, switching his allegiance just in time to be able to claim post-war credentials as a resister. It was only after the implosion of the old Parti Socialiste in 1969, following its electoral humiliation in 1968, that Mitterrand began to plot his role in its renais-

sance: a take-over bid launched in 1971 with the appearance of a new Socialist Party led by Mitterrand and a new generation of ambitious young men recruited to serve him. He once described his religious allegiances thus: 'Je suis né chrétien, et je mourrai sans

doute en cet état. Dans l'intervalle . . . ' ('I was born Christian and shall doubtless die in that condition. But meanwhile . . . '). In much the same cynical vein he might have added that he was born a conservative and would die one, but managed to become a Socialist in the meantime.

Adam, is it possible that you include a little summary of the long text you posted? Life is too short to read such bricks about France. Come on, it is not worth it......

Indeed contemporary historians often lecture futurology :) My question is who benefits the most from that practice?


AdamKadmon's posts are interesting, but they suffer, as mine sometimes do as well, from 'unweeded' sections.

Yes, sure. Here goes the summary:

Mr Hollande is as cynical as his 'socialist' predecessor. And the gist of what has been written above about Mr Mitterrand can be shorten to what he said about himself: born a conservative and would die one, but managed to become a Socialist in the meantime. What Mr Hollande is saying that he is going to do after the election is not only irrelevant to Poland but to France as well.

Sorry, but to get to know something about history even my long post is much too short.

Thanks.

Sarko lost.

Will Hollande keep his promises, e.g., lowering retirement age to 60?


Probably you are right.

I like this one about teachers:

He wants to raise the minimum wage, hire 60,000 more teachers.

Typical socialist numbnut: lowering the retirement age, raising the minimum wage and employing an additional 60.0000 state servants. Has anyone asked him who's going to pay for all this?

Hi

I'm French and voted for Hollande - Sarko being a nightmare, he had to go.

How shall Hollande do? Very simple and French is a very rich country (no. 5 in the world): he'll just use money to improve people's daily life rather than spending it on non sense (like for instance sarko did; wars around the world, or Air sarko 1 ......).

There is money, it's just a matter of priorities. It is so everywhere and not only in France.

That's what the Greeks said, too... :)
It either comes from a lender or right out of the printing press.

Please don't compare Greece and France ;).

Believe me, there is money in France. How much did for instance sarko spene bt on his sarko air force 1, on his wars around the world and other stupid things (they wanted to host the Olympic games and France shall have the football Euro in 2016). Do you know how much this election cost? I believe such money could have been spent for instance on education, on health (since sarko, middle-class in France can't afford dental care or to buy glasses....) and also to hire police to protect people...

If you prefer to keep tighten your belt and fatten up the richest, keep going, I don't.
In any country, there is money (even in Greece, check the very rich and the Greek church - they don't pay tax ;)) but governments have different priorities and I prefer a goverment concerned about the basic people's well being rather than spending money on wars, on fat dictators around the world and so forth.

Just a matter of choice and believe me most people think the way I do.

I assume you don't know France and don't speak French, so no need to talk further.....

Except for the 48.1% who voted for Sarkozy... :)


LOL! Why do you post on an open forum then?