François Bayrou’s political gamble: a reflection of European democratic instability

By announcing his decision to call a vote of no-confidence on September 8, French Prime Minister François Bayrou has chosen to take a risky political gamble. Beyond its immediate implications, this move highlights a broader reality: the growing difficulty for European democracies to build stable majorities in increasingly fragmented political landscapes.

Coalitions as the new normal

Since Emmanuel Macron’s reelection in 2022, French politics has been shaped by constant upheavals, repeated use of Article 49.3 of the constitution, the dissolution of the National Assembly, and 4 governments without solid majorities. Bayrou’s decision is only the latest episode in this cycle of instability.

But this phenomenon goes far beyond France. In the Netherlands, government formation has reached unprecedented levels of difficulty. Spain has seen repeated parliamentary deadlocks. Across Europe, traditional parties are struggling to compete with new, often more radical or issue-specific forces, making the construction of durable majorities increasingly elusive.

This difficulty in forming stable governments is most acute in Western Europe, where political culture historically relied on dominant parties capable of producing clear majorities. Northern Europe, by contrast, has a long tradition of coalition governments and generally succeeds, despite fragmentation, in building solid and lasting compromises. This contrast suggests that the current crisis is less about multipartism itself than about Western Europe’s difficulty in adapting its political systems to an era of permanent negotiation.

Fragile governments

The immediate consequence of this division is the growing difficulty for national governments to govern effectively over long periods of time. France provides a striking example: a Parliament split into three major blocs— the left, centrist Macronists, and right/far-right—with no stable coalition in sight.

This instability directly affects policymaking. Reforms no longer follow one another smoothly, compromises remain fragile, and long-term strategies become difficult to sustain. This situation weakens governments not only domestically, but also in their ability to carry weight in European negotiations.

It also undermines France’s position as a reliable partner on the international stage. How can the country claim to defend strategic ambitions, honor its military commitments, or sign new bilateral agreements — with Germany, for instance — when even passing a military programming law proves difficult? Political instability inevitably weakens France’s ability to act as a driving force for European integration and to ensure the continuity of its strategic commitments.

This weakness also spills over to the European Union as a whole. At a time when Donald Trump’s United States pursues an aggressive trade policy — marked by protectionist measures and a rejection of multilateral cooperation — a fragmented Europe, plagued by national instability, struggles to respond in a coherent and united way. France’s fragility, far from being an isolated case, compounds the EU’s difficulty in positioning itself as a strong economic and strategic actor in the face of global powers.

The European challenge

Since 2024, the reformed Stability and Growth Pact has required member states to present four-year budgetary trajectories. This demands predictability and consistency — qualities increasingly undermined by national political upheavals. France is not alone in facing this challenge: from Rome to Berlin, difficulties in sustaining European commitments under divided parliaments undermine the credibility of the entire European project.

The tension between national democratic sovereignty and European budgetary discipline has never been more visible. Each domestic political crisis now resonates immediately at EU level, creating a ripple effect of shared instability.

Instability as opportunity

While instability complicates public action, it also creates new opportunities. Periods of political reshuffling open unexpected windows for influence, compromise, and policy innovation. Shifting power balances allow more room for negotiation, political experimentation, and sometimes rapid change.

In such a context, the winning combination lies in the ability to quickly decipher political dynamics, anticipate possible alliances, and seize the right moments to advance agendas. Public and private actors alike must constantly adjust their strategies to a political scene that is far more fluid—and far less predictable than before.

Towards a new European governance?

François Bayrou’s gamble, whatever its immediate outcome, highlights a central question on how governments can lead effectively in a Europe where stable majorities are becoming the exception rather than the norm.

Political fragmentation is now a structural fact. It requires new forms of governance, more flexible, more cooperative, but also more fragile. The future of European democracies will depend on their ability to reconcile this complexity with the need to deliver tangible results for their citizens.

The challenge is to maintain the capacity for action in the face of the economic, social, and geopolitical crises of the 21st century, while preserving democratic legitimacy. Bayrou’s initiative is only one episode, but it perfectly illustrates the delicate balance all European democracies must now face.