The tension between Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Commissioner Thierry Breton had been palpable for several months. The crisis finally led to the Commissioner’s resignation, announced with great drama and fanfare on the morning of Monday, September 16th.
The composition of the new European Commission, following the June elections, is underway. In July, it seemed certain that Breton would be re-nominated and that France was seeking to increase its influence through him—if possible by getting him a post as vice resident. France, hard at work on Europe’s ‘strategic autonomy,’ wanted to be given a ‘super portfolio’ linked to the internal market, economic security, and the defence industry—in competition with Italy—for which Breton seemed ideal.
But according to the commissioner, von der Leyen, who was recently re-elected for another five-year term, “asked France to withdraw his name” for personal reasons that the commission president did not bother to explain to the main person concerned.
Breton’s non-renewal was apparently requested by von der Leyen in return for France actually obtaining this famous ‘super portfolio,’ but no information has been released on this subject, and neither the French presidency nor von der Leyen’s office could be contacted for comment.
This is the latest episode in what Breton describes as “dubious governance,” and which he has been keen to denounce for several months.
Of course, the open opposition between Breton and von der Leyen, which has been well-established for months, should not lead us to believe that Breton was more trustworthy than his boss. Both were simply two sides of the same coin, a Brussels authoritarianism that has long since lost touch with the notion of the democratic exercise of power. Behind the declared and apparently laudable intention of beefing up the European Union against the attacks of “GAFA” (Google, Apple, Facebook and Amazon), Breton had sadly distinguished himself in his relentless fight against freedom of expression in Europe. Elon Musk had a chance to test him and his rather limited sense of open discussion, when Breton spoke of censoring the Space—the live audio chat on X—between Trump and Musk as part of the U.S. presidential campaign.
Breton tried a bit of humour by posting a whiteboard on X, purporting to represent his “official portrait for the next European Commission term.” The comments were quick to follow: “they made a picture of all your successes,” or “that’s just the full list of all the things you did right,” you could read as responses on his wall.
In addition to his hostility towards the resigning commissioner, the Rassemblement National MEP Thierry Mariani, a member of Patriots for Europe, reacted to the announcement of Breton’s departure by raising two major issues: What is behind the expression “dubious governance” used to describe von der Leyen’s actions? Can the President of the Commission call the shots and impose her law on France by treating its representative in this way? While no one will miss Breton’s authoritarianism, the circumstances of his departure only add to the authoritarianism of his superior and make the loss of French influence more glaring than ever.
Emmanuel Macron was quick to appoint Breton’s successor. The French President nominated Stéphane Séjourné, Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs, who has been on the move since Gabriel Attal resigned from the government in July. The man has not left a very glorious memory within the noble institution of the Quai d’Orsay. Like so many others around Macron, he came from the socialist party. Séjourné was an unassuming, mediocre character who made platitudes and French mistakes in almost every public speech he made. He is best known in France for having been the partner of former Prime Minister Gabriel Attal. He served as chairman of the Renew Europe group in the previous term of the European Parliament, and to this day holds the position of secretary general of Macron’s Renaissance party—a creature that grew up and prospered in the shadow of its master. There is no doubt that Macron’s proposal to have him replace Breton is simply a clever way of giving him a consolation prize after his departure from the government, while thanking him for his unfailing loyalty.
“Typical of the administration: the more incompetent you are, the more they promote you to get rid of you. At this rate, Mr Séjourné will end up as Secretary General of the UN,” quipped right-wing MP Julien Aubert, who is also alarmed by von der Leyen’s omnipotence.
On the Left, pressure was put on the president—in accordance with von der Leyen’s personal wish—to appoint a woman to replace Breton. But Macron did not allow himself to be influenced on this point. There is concern on the Right that Breton will in turn be ‘recycled’ in the Barnier government currently being formed.
The episode speaks volumes about the state of France and the European Union: when an autocrat gets rid of a political commissar—in the Soviet sense of the term—in favour of a servile servant of power, democracy can wait.
Breton’s Resignation: Competition Among Autocrats
Photo: JOHN THYS / AFP
The tension between Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Commissioner Thierry Breton had been palpable for several months. The crisis finally led to the Commissioner’s resignation, announced with great drama and fanfare on the morning of Monday, September 16th.
The composition of the new European Commission, following the June elections, is underway. In July, it seemed certain that Breton would be re-nominated and that France was seeking to increase its influence through him—if possible by getting him a post as vice resident. France, hard at work on Europe’s ‘strategic autonomy,’ wanted to be given a ‘super portfolio’ linked to the internal market, economic security, and the defence industry—in competition with Italy—for which Breton seemed ideal.
But according to the commissioner, von der Leyen, who was recently re-elected for another five-year term, “asked France to withdraw his name” for personal reasons that the commission president did not bother to explain to the main person concerned.
Breton’s non-renewal was apparently requested by von der Leyen in return for France actually obtaining this famous ‘super portfolio,’ but no information has been released on this subject, and neither the French presidency nor von der Leyen’s office could be contacted for comment.
This is the latest episode in what Breton describes as “dubious governance,” and which he has been keen to denounce for several months.
Of course, the open opposition between Breton and von der Leyen, which has been well-established for months, should not lead us to believe that Breton was more trustworthy than his boss. Both were simply two sides of the same coin, a Brussels authoritarianism that has long since lost touch with the notion of the democratic exercise of power. Behind the declared and apparently laudable intention of beefing up the European Union against the attacks of “GAFA” (Google, Apple, Facebook and Amazon), Breton had sadly distinguished himself in his relentless fight against freedom of expression in Europe. Elon Musk had a chance to test him and his rather limited sense of open discussion, when Breton spoke of censoring the Space—the live audio chat on X—between Trump and Musk as part of the U.S. presidential campaign.
Breton tried a bit of humour by posting a whiteboard on X, purporting to represent his “official portrait for the next European Commission term.” The comments were quick to follow: “they made a picture of all your successes,” or “that’s just the full list of all the things you did right,” you could read as responses on his wall.
In addition to his hostility towards the resigning commissioner, the Rassemblement National MEP Thierry Mariani, a member of Patriots for Europe, reacted to the announcement of Breton’s departure by raising two major issues: What is behind the expression “dubious governance” used to describe von der Leyen’s actions? Can the President of the Commission call the shots and impose her law on France by treating its representative in this way? While no one will miss Breton’s authoritarianism, the circumstances of his departure only add to the authoritarianism of his superior and make the loss of French influence more glaring than ever.
Emmanuel Macron was quick to appoint Breton’s successor. The French President nominated Stéphane Séjourné, Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs, who has been on the move since Gabriel Attal resigned from the government in July. The man has not left a very glorious memory within the noble institution of the Quai d’Orsay. Like so many others around Macron, he came from the socialist party. Séjourné was an unassuming, mediocre character who made platitudes and French mistakes in almost every public speech he made. He is best known in France for having been the partner of former Prime Minister Gabriel Attal. He served as chairman of the Renew Europe group in the previous term of the European Parliament, and to this day holds the position of secretary general of Macron’s Renaissance party—a creature that grew up and prospered in the shadow of its master. There is no doubt that Macron’s proposal to have him replace Breton is simply a clever way of giving him a consolation prize after his departure from the government, while thanking him for his unfailing loyalty.
“Typical of the administration: the more incompetent you are, the more they promote you to get rid of you. At this rate, Mr Séjourné will end up as Secretary General of the UN,” quipped right-wing MP Julien Aubert, who is also alarmed by von der Leyen’s omnipotence.
On the Left, pressure was put on the president—in accordance with von der Leyen’s personal wish—to appoint a woman to replace Breton. But Macron did not allow himself to be influenced on this point. There is concern on the Right that Breton will in turn be ‘recycled’ in the Barnier government currently being formed.
The episode speaks volumes about the state of France and the European Union: when an autocrat gets rid of a political commissar—in the Soviet sense of the term—in favour of a servile servant of power, democracy can wait.
READ NEXT
‘Young Leaders of the Iberosphere’ Programme Is Paving the Way for a Promising Future
Jaguar: All Virtue, No Vehicle
Mazan Affair: A Trial of Moral Misery