It’s one of those controversies in which we no longer really know if France Insoumise (LFI) loves to fall into it or if it is so easy for its adversaries to make it fall into it. Saturday, at 1:29 p.m., just a few hours after the start of the Hamas terrorist offensive in Israel around the Gaza Strip, the LFI parliamentary group in the Assembly broadcast a press release which begins like this : “The armed offensive by Palestinian forces led by Hamas comes in a context of intensification of the Israeli occupation policy in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem. We deplore the Israeli and Palestinian deaths. Our thoughts are with all the victims. »
The lack of clear condemnation of the Hamas attack, and the absence of the word “terrorist” to describe the Palestinian Islamist group, has been controversial all weekend. From the anti-Nupes left to the majority, including the Prime Minister, who denounces “the revolting ambiguities” of the rebels. But also among very pro-Nupe socialists, like the deputy Jérôme Guedj, who declared for the first time: “the question of remaining in Nupes arises”. Last act this Monday morning, Manuel Bompard, coordinator of the Mélenchonist movement, assures on France 2 that his degree of “condemnation” of the Hamas offensive is “total”. He even calls it a “war crime”.
“A trial of intent”
Quite a nuance brought in in two days for a party that is not used to it. But the leadership of France Insoumise completely denies having changed tack, or even clarified things: “The interview [de Manuel Bompard] is a continuation of our press release from Saturday, which already called for an end to all violence,” said Paul Vannier, deputy for Val-d’Oise. But was the conviction missing on Saturday? No, it is “a trial of intent”, he continues. “This morning, Manuel Bompard was simply able to explain our position at greater length. I will be satisfied that it is better understood and that we move away from this abject controversy. »
So much for the theory. Because we noticed that this Saturday press release was not widely taken up by the members of the group. Some usual snipers, like François Ruffin or Alexis Corbière – but not only that -, even distinguished themselves from it without saying it. And several, who remained silent, however resumed the interview with Manuel Bompard this Monday morning. “Let’s say that the press release was made in a bit of a hurry, and that a certain number of us find ourselves more in the position of this (Monday) morning which is clearer,” assures 20 minutes a member of LFI management. There was neither broad consultation nor sufficient perspective, I think, when the press release was written. »
Double-edged freedom of action
This functioning of rebellious France distinguishes it from “old organizations”, unions and parties. A rebellious MP explained it a few weeks ago: “We don’t realize the energy we expend to convince others to do this or that thing in old organizations. With us, as long as you are in the program, you can go. We spend less time voting to appoint people or decide things, and much more time taking action. » LFI undoubtedly owes part of its leadership on the left to this method. But Nupes also owes him its endless controversies for a year, and undoubtedly that of this weekend.
Some of the LFI deputies spent the weekend relaying on social networks the speeches of the Israeli left who, like them, denounce the responsibility of the Israeli colonization policy and the government of Benyamin Netanyahu. It’s defensible. The proof: the press release from the communist group in the Assembly passed through the drops even though it said generally the same thing as that of LFI, except for one detail: it “unreservedly condemns” the Hamas attack. As during the violence in the suburbs at the beginning of the summer, the rebels therefore made themselves, largely alone, inaudible.
On the subject, the rebels in line with the leadership always respond that, in any case, they are not trying to convince the media, nor the left-wing bourgeoisie, who are outraged by their ways. That they address the people and that so far, in the last three presidential elections, things have not worked so badly. “Remember: after the episode of the searches in the fall of 2018, we should have been dead. And look, 22% (in 2022),” they repeat over and over. It’s not false. But it is also a very comfortable argument from authority: it will work because it has already worked. A somewhat disappointed Nupes MP describes the alternative: “For anti-system parties, there is always a tension between conformity and subversion. And if they are too subversive, they can exclude themselves from the political system. » LFI may be there.