No one knows if the French team will win the World Cup. But what is a given is national pride in its results so far and the admiration it arouses in the press around the world. It goes far beyond the performances of a few stars or the cohesion of the team. It is the quality of the entire organization that is saluted. Its leader is not only a coach but the leader of a group that brings together the players and all those around them and who contribute to their technical performance and provide them with the environment essential to their good results.

The same cannot be said of their country facing an unstable political situation and poor economic performance. He would really need a Didier Deschamps to face an uncertain international environment and a rise within extremist political forces resulting from the discontent of the population generated by the action of its leaders. It is not enough, in order to achieve success, to denounce one's own weaknesses. The causes must be identified and appropriate solutions must be proposed.

The dissolution decided in 2024 by the President of the Republic testifies to a double error. The poor score of the parties supporting the government could only be confirmed in the general elections since no analysis of the failure had been undertaken. And the proposals put forward during the campaign leading up to the election took no account of the discontent that had been expressed and did not put forward any credible measures to remedy it. It is therefore not surprising that the composition of the new National Assembly perfectly reflects the score of the elections to the European Parliament. France received a yellow card.

The rest was no better. The president has chosen François Bayrou as Prime Minister. Faced with the deterioration of public finances, due in particular to the reduction of social security contributions in favour of companies, not financed by savings or equivalent tax increases, and the emergency measures taken during the Covid-19 epidemic, public deficits and the debt ratio have risen sharply and France has remained under the surveillance of Brussels for excessive deficit. Instead of preparing a recovery plan, François Bayrou has chosen to engage the responsibility of his government on the recognition by the National Assembly of the seriousness of the situation of public finances and the urgency of remedying it. A motion of no confidence was put to a vote and approved and he had to resign.

This time, France had a red card. François Bayrou was the worst choice to lead the necessary recovery. He had been a minister several times but in 2017, he was not reappointed to the Ministry of Justice because of suspicions concerning him in a case of embezzlement of European funds. However, in 2020 at the age of 69, he was appointed High Commissioner for Planning. However, this historic institution, which had played a major role in the French economy, had been renamed France-Stratégie, contenting itself with making reports.

It was specified that this new position was in fact a title, did not come with the creation of a new administration, but that its holder would nevertheless benefit from the advantages associated with such a distinction. It was another example of the "cheese" policy of awarding positions to people whose political support was expected. Its beneficiary was therefore ill-advised to engage the responsibility of his government on the recognition of the urgency of making savings. The resulting new instability has increased the doubts of the markets and the rating agencies about the quality of French debt and it is not the successes of its football team that will be able to completely solve the problem.

These doubts are now maintained by the many interventions evoking the seriousness of the current situation, in particular the publication of the latest book by the former Prime Minister who "warns" by describing France's public debt as an economic bomb. Most of the figures quoted are false. Thus, the real share of foreign holders is not 60% since the ECB and the Banque de France hold nearly 25% and many life insurance contracts in euros use funds domiciled in Luxembourg whose beneficiaries are French savers. Moreover, each debt issue by Agence Frane-Trésor is very much oversubscribed.

Similarly, the description of the situation of pension systems is misleading. The State pays the salaries of civil servants and their pensions. It is a public expense. But for the general scheme, the only role of the State is to set the rate and base of contributions and to manage the circuit for the deduction and payment of pensions. Counting these sums in public spending is again fallacious, as is talking about the deficit of the schemes. On the contrary, it is probably in surplus, the deficit of the general scheme being offset by the surpluses of the supplementary schemes, including the IRCANTEC, that of civil servants, and whose reserves total more than 100 billion euros.

The return to balanced pensions requires more of an increase in the contribution ceilings of the general scheme than a postponement of the legal retirement age, since companies employ fewer and fewer staff after the age of 60. For the State, the real issue is the use of public funds where major and lasting savings can be made in its operating expenses, in the lifestyle of its leaders and the number of elected officials. But by dint of self-criticism, except in football, France is weakening and making heavy and costly mistakes such as the shutdown of the Fessenheim power plant or the abandonment of the new airport of Notre-Dame des Landes which made it possible to serve a region rich in industrial jewels such as the shipyards of Saint-Nazaire or the factories that manufacture the parts of aircraft engines,  sectors in which France is an undisputed world leader.

This taste for national denigration is not new. Ambroise Vollard, the great art dealer, already evoked it in his Memoirs published in 1934, underlining the very negative reception given to the Impressionists: "Any novelty born of the French genius comes up against indifference, even hostility in our country". In today's open world, the catastrophic caricatures of certain politicians can do more harm than good. They are likely to end up affecting the confidence in the French economy, especially in relation to countries that are much more indebted both internally and externally, and by the increase in borrowing conditions which will make it even more difficult to restore the accounts.

France is doing better than we claim, as evidenced by the performances of our athletes, but much worse than it could. To halt the deterioration of our financial rating, we need to change our method. Instead of scaring people or launching into permanent criticism, we must highlight our successes, nuclear power, infrastructure, tourism and products that reflect our creative capacities that the world envies us.

It is up to the next management teams to understand this essential change of method and France, like its football team, will return to its AAA position. Otherwise, the coming to power of the extremists will constitute the real catastrophe.