Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
2 points to add to this excellent run-down.

  1. Its been implied in some reporting, and seems logical, that Sarkozy's aides chose/imposed the top aides on each minister; it would be interesting to track who those folks are. Especially at Justice, Foreign Affairs, Defense, Interior, Environment, and Economy. I think its unlikely Sarkozy would give free reign to someone not close to him, like Morin or MAM, in the ministries that could bring to light Clearstream/EADS, etc.

  2. On the appointment of 3 left deputies to international relations posts, this makes sense since Sarkozy's own positions on the key issues were, at least prior to some mid-campaign repositioning, rather unpopular: pro-Europe, "Atlantic" (ie pro-US), and he didn't have the personal relationships with African and middle eastern leaders that Mitterand and Chirac did. I would expect he'll try to run a lot of the foreign policy out of Elysee, but when there are difficult or unpopular moves to make, thats when Kouchner will be called on to smile like an idiot for the cameras (which he does exceedingly well).
by desmoulins (gsb6@lycos.com) on Tue Jun 19th, 2007 at 02:10:51 PM EST
The lack of actual power for those "left" ministers make their acceptance even more shameful. It makes it clear they care more about position than influencing policy.

The fact that those three have gone to the other side also sheds a new light on their attitude during the campaign : Janneney was one of the Gracques that anonymously called for an alliance with Bayrou in Le Monde ; Bockel liked Sarko's security laws from 2002 to 2006 (ugh) and wanted a movement to a Blairite center ; and Kouchner openly called for discussion with Bayrou a few days before the first round, when it wasn't helpful nor even clear Royal would be getting into the first round. Those three guys clearly wanted to get power more than progressive ideas' success.

The two other "left" ministers, Hirsch and Fadela Amara, are outsiders who may have the excuse of naïvety for getting into government.

Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères

by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Tue Jun 19th, 2007 at 03:43:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Bockel is probably a different case - he is mostly consistent with himself, and he has always been a centrist (or rightist) member of the PS, with a strong law and order streak. So he may feel that he will be able to implement his ideas (some of which he has implemented in his city of Mulhouse).

As you say, the others are just shamless turncoats or hopelessly naive. The worst is Kouchner, who is explicitly guarded by Levitte and has been stripped of many of theu sual administrative powers of the minister (for instance, Hortefeux has taken over visas and asilum policies).

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Tue Jun 19th, 2007 at 04:04:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series