The respite occurred on financial markets after the appointment of the new Italian government should not delude people. The fall of the Spanish government, even if it has not happened after disagreements about European issues can generate new tensions. The first meetings between these new leaders and Brussels must be watched with attention. Europe is taken in a stranglehold between internal dissent which is increasing everyday and a hostile international environment, worsened by the last decisions of the Trump administration. The project is under threat. It is not the first time. France has no choice. Its action will be decisive to reach solutions and to emerge from the crisis.

The rejection by Italian people is serious because it comes from a founding country and from one of the most important economy inside the eurozone. This rejection is not resulting, as in Greece, after a poor public management, but from the resentment against Brussels attitude about the difficulties the country is facing. Due to its geographical position, Italy has become the most important destination of migrants arriving from Africa. Europe never tried to put in practice an efficient African policy in favor of the continent development able to slow these migrations which have affected the populations leaving in the south of the country. The  League was created on different purposes. The wealth generated by companies established in the North of the country where this party got a strong support was directly linked to the benefits generated by the Common European market which allowed them the possibility to export to the whole zone. Its electors were challenging the transfers in favor of the poorest Italian areas, especially in the south. To the opposite, these voters which were affected by the restrictive policy dictated by Brussels were confronted to the new charges generated by the arrival of the migrants. They denounced the lack of European solidarity. These two political forces have found in the criticism of Europe a ground for their rapprochement when until now everything was opposing them.

All the same, Italy, to the opposite of what is frequently reported, is not going so badly. First, it is a much wealthy country than the evolution of its GDP allows to suppose. More than 60% of Italian people are owners of their home against hardly 40% of the German people. Growth has been slow but it didn’t impeach Italian enterprises to be competitive. As an average, for the last three years, foreign trade has shown a 45 billion euro surplus when France, for instance, had a 70 billion deficit (caf/fob) and the peninsula has almost no fossil fuels resources and nuclear power, which would reduce their need and their import as in our country. If the Italian public debt ratio is, with 125%, much higher than the European average, public deficit is inferior to 3% since several years, to the opposite, once more, to France. So, the stigmatization of the country by Brussels and by several State-members of the eurozone is quite unjustified and has not been without consequences on the Italian vote.

To avoid the crisis get worse, France will have a decisive role. It can follow the usual way and rely on the logic of the “Franco-German” couple through the organization of a kind of hiring meeting with the new Italian leaders and maybe tomorrow with the Spanish ones. That will increase tensions. But it can also take its inspiration from the attitude of François Hollande, at the beginning of his mandate during the crisis of the eurozone. At that time, that was poorly noticed. Each time he met Angela Merkel, he saw heads of the Italian and Spanish governments, a few days before or after, and even, at several times, the head of the European Central Bank. It is easy to check: It was on the official presidential agenda. Consciously or not, the Chancellor felt isolated and did not dare to oppose herself to the proposals elaborated by the ECB. That allowed its chairman, Mario Draghi, in July 2012, to declare that he will do whatever is needed to save the common currency. The crisis was overcome. The president of the Republic cannot have forgotten that because he was, at that time, the most important economic advisor of François Hollande.

To the difference of Italy, Germany is not going as well as it is generally reported, especially in France. Its growth is in the European average and the favorable situation of its job market is essentially the consequence of its demographic weakness. It partially compensates it through the call to foreign workers. A large part of German voters attributes that immigration to European rules and criticizes them. The good situation of the labor market results also from the fact that half of women have a part-time job. The weakness of social equipments makes very difficult in Germany to be a mother and in the same time to have a full time job. The situation of public finance is frequently quoted as an example with a budget surplus and a public indebtedness lower than in the other countries. But it has, as a counterpart, ageing infrastructures and low defense expenditures. The private sector is not without weaknesses and the biggest bank in the country, the Deutsche bank, is going through a crisis which has provoked the fall of its market value and the degradation of its notation by Standard & Poor’s.

German industry success, on the opposite, is unquestionable. It results from business practices regarding employees and suppliers and from localization choices for their activities. This success manifests itself through a foreign trade surplus which, by its size, has become a major point of tension with the United States. Its two most important items, the car industry and mechanic equipments, are also the two most important ones of the U.S. deficit, even if they only represent 20% of them. It is enough, for the American administration, to attack Europe as a whole, to decide to tax steel and aluminum exports and to threaten to go further, which will affect countries which don’t significantly contribute to American disequilibrium. It could be added to all these points, the weak commitment of the German government to fight against fiscal optimization practices, made possible by legislations in countries like Netherlands, Luxembourg and Ireland. So it is easy to understand that rigor preached by Berlin infuriates its partners.

France must put itself as a mediator and explain to Germany that it is the most important beneficiary of the European project and that its attitude, on the contrary, makes it weakening. Its fear of having to pay for others is unfounded. Its obsession about public deficits is excessive. The country is very happy to have clients in European countries. If it goes along in that way, it risks losing them. Paris must also welcome with kindness the new Italian and Spanish leaders and work to the project to reconcile them with Brussels instead of giving to them lessons as some are suggesting.

Europe will be saved if it knows how to transform itself. It is France role to take the initiative. Time is not anymore for technical reforms or even the creation of a common budget which correspond more to some European technocrats love for power than to a real necessity. Time is to promote solidarity between countries and to work towards the union in front of a hostile world.