Texte intégral
Emmanuel MACRON
I do thank those who study french language and I would be very happy to interact in French if you have questions in French. And I will answer as well, of course, in English.
Okay. I don't want to make a long speech because I do prefer to have your questions and answer your questions. But I just would like to explain in a few words why I'm here and why it's important for France, your country and this region. It's largely because of the state of play of this world. As you can see, we have a lot of wars and conflicts reappearing, rising in this region, but more broadly in Europe and the margin of Europe as well. And the current situation is very concerning for all of us because more and more countries, even some countries being permanent members of the Security Council of the United Nations, meaning Russia, decided to resume some old wars. And not to respect the United Nations charter anymore. This is a big risk in this world. Added to that, we have an increasing conflict between big powers and especially the two main players, China and the US, which will probably frame the decades to come. And I think this question of how to play, maximize your interests and defend your value in such a world is a common question for Kazakhstan and France.
I'm president of the country who is part of the original organization, European Union, more and more integrated and you are in a origin with more and more cooperation, even if… I mean, this is very different. And I don't want to make a relevant comparison. But I do believe that both of us have exactly the same issue in this world: how to preserve peace and stability for us, how to be sure or more sure that international law is more respected, and how to preserve or restore more sovereignty and independence.
What does it mean? Meaning even if you have a war and take your position, even if your neighborhood is destabilized, you can preserve what makes your economies function and provide what fellow citizens want to live with. Meaning when you think about defense, security, health, education, infrastructure, technology, economy, you can have a lot of partnerships, but you have to build your own autonomy strategy. And I think this is exactly the strategy your president developed for this country. From agriculture, to oil, to connectivity and so on. And this is exactly the DNA for me of the French policy and what we want to do in Europe today. This is why we have a lot of things to do together in this world of the new wars, conflictuality and increasing conflictuality, is to have mutual respect and try to build sovereignty for each other. This is the first point.
The second point I wanted to address is that in this world, we should not just face wars, conflicts, but we have common challenges: climate change, biodiversity, just to mention two of them, obviously a regulation of this digital world and so on and so on. And the paradox is that we have more and more very important topics to be fixed if we have an increasing global cooperation. At a time where we have an increasing global fragmentation. And this is why in the face of these threats, I want as well to increase the partnership on this global agenda. If we want to deliver carbon neutrality for 2060, your country committed for 2060, we have to build more and more common solutions, innovations, accelerate the cooperation between companies in order precisely to decarbonize our economy. This is exactly what we are doing and part of the agenda we have together between Kazakhstan and France. But is this as well a diplomatic agenda for biodiversity, for climate change, for instance. You know tha,t here, water is at risk. And it's a geopolitical issue largely linked basically to the situation of the whole climate change. We want to build a common partnership on this issue as well.
I don't want to be longer, but I just wanted to highlight the fact that in this current environment, being here for a French president is at least trying to build a common agenda for more sovereignty and autonomy in this world of big powers and it's how to increase concrete cooperation in order to deal with the current challenges and climate change being one of the first one.
Now, I want to interact with you, and I want to hear from you, your remarks, your views, and perhaps answer your questions, if you have questions both in French or in English, I'm used.
Animatrice
Thank you very much indeed, Mister President, for this meaningful but also a most inspiring speech. I'm sure our students did get most of the important messages you put forward. I am deputy chairman of the board, and I will be moderating your Q&A session with our students. Before I open the floor to questions, dear students, please mind to tell your name, the program and we will have a first set of three questions and them to be answered by the President and proceed with another set of three questions. So the floor is open. Please. Oh, well. Yes, I can see the young gentleman in the red hoodie, please.
Etudiant
Good afternoon dear President. My name is Nikolaiev AIZIS (phon). I am a fourth year student of applied linguistics. And as we all know, you are the youngest President of France, taking this position at the age of 39. Also, you were the first President born after the establishment of the Fifth republic. So it's quite a title to hold up. And I'm very curious, how did you feel leading a nation at such a young age? And to follow up, I would like to ask, as such a young person, did other politicians not take you seriously or diminish any of your achievements?
Etudiante
Good afternoon, Mister President. I'm from first year of international journalism. As we all know, you're an activist in equality between people. And we are interested in your aspects and what we new generation can do for this in new equality between people? Thank you.
Emmanuel MACRON
You mean in society or globally?
Etudiante
I mean equality between people. Yes.
Emmanuel MACRON
Globally, between North and South or within the society?
Etudiante
No, in the whole world.
Etudiant
Good afternoon, Mister President. I am a third year student majoring in law. Given the current situation in the Middle East, many European countries are supporting Israel in this conflict. Meanwhile, numerous young people in European cities such as London and Paris are participating in the protests supporting Palestine. They're asking governments to cease support for Israel. And so my question is, why do you think, in your opinion, there is such a difference in opinions between official authorities and young citizens? Thank you.
Emmanuel MACRON
Thank you for your questions.
As your first question, I think to be honest, you don't have a lot of time to realize which is good, by the way. What you said is true. And I think this is an unequaled chance. And I was, you know, when I decided to campaign, I launched an independent movement. So, honestly, very few people thought it would be possible for me at that time to win. French people decided that. And I was very proud and a little bit impressed by my own people to have, in a certain way, such a bold move to give their trust in a 39-year-old guy hands. They did it. So, my unique obsession when you are elected at the very first second is just to be respectful with your people and not to disappoint them, and to deliver what you committed to deliver. I'm here because I committed a mandate and I expressed a willingness to change things and so on. So, this is what I did. And I have to say that in the French system, at least, when you are elected, you are respected because of the decision of the people. So, the age was not a big concern. And given the number of crises I had to deal with, I have to confess it was quite good to be young even if I am less young today than 7 years ago. So, here is my answer for the first question.
For the second question on inequalities. I understand that you refer to how to fix inequalities worldwide. I think this is one of the biggest questions we have. Inequality is something which could weaken a country. And this is what we have to fix. France has a very good social model, a very generous social model, one of the very first of the world when you look at all the rankings of OECD and so on. So, we have inequalities. But we correct a lot of them with our system of redistribution. What we want to do is to prevent these inequalities with a better education and to have, I would say, less social and family bias in the way to function. But globally, I mean, inequality is a big issue. During the past decades, thanks to the current organization, and I would say free trade and capitalism, a lot of countries did reduce inequalities. And we reduced poverty globally thanks to the openness of a lot of economies. If you take China, if you take a lot of big economies, India, hundreds of millions of people became progressively part of labor and middle classes.
Now the system is not functioning exactly how it should. Because we have a crisis of our way to function. First, we have an over-concentration of wealth, because we are in an economy globally which is much more driven by finance and very big innovations, and some sectors being in the hands of very few people. And it's true for the former USSR economies, where some sectors are completely captured by a few people. And it's true for very western societies where in some sectors you have very few successful people concentrating wealth. And you have an increasing divide between north and south. This issue should be fixed otherwise. We will have an increasing level of tension which could jeopardize our way to cooperate together.
And I have just a few remarks on that. Number one, ensuring a minimum level of taxation to be sure that nobody escapes to that. This is a way to correct ex-post inequalities. We pushed for that, for a minimal global tax, and we pushed for that for especially companies at the OECD+ platform. So we have more than 100 countries. It was agreed. We have to implement it. I think this thing is a big game changer to reduce inequalities between people and sectors, and to provide more money.
The second point is that we have to redistribute much more from north to south. I organized a conference in Paris last June for this new global financial pact, whose main perspective was precisely to fix poverty and climate change together. Because more and more countries were coming to us saying: ‘‘I have to choose''. You want me, you are lecturing me on climate change, but my top priority is fixing inequalities and poverty in my country, I have no more room to maneuver. And we built the 4P : Paris Pact for People and Planet. And part of this platform is how to increase global financing going from North to South. Much more money coming from IMF and World Bank. The balance sheet is being put at risk. Much more money coming from our countries, France increased its public aid, but a lot of countries have to do more and more private money to be channeled to emerging, developing poor countries in the south.
And this big shift needs to be organized very rapidly. Otherwise, we will never fix these inequalities existing today. And they are increasing by the fact that a lot of poor and vulnerable countries are the first to be impacted by the consequence of climate change and shortage of biodiversity. And there are no zoos to create them. So this big shock in terms of financing is to be organized in order to fix these inequalities in the global environment.
As for Middle-East. I agree with you. I think in a lot of countries in Europe, at least in France, you have demonstrations. You had a lot of demonstrations of Jewish communities and you have a lot of demonstrations in support of the Palestinian cause because people are very emotional for good reasons. And I speak from a country, France, with the first European Jewish community and the first European Muslim Arabic community. So I perfectly see what you mean.
Now, what is our position as a leader? My position is not exactly the one reflected sometimes by media or social networks. First, we provided solidarity to Israel, attacked the 7th of october. We condemned the terrorist attacks from Hamas. And we express our full support and the right of Israel to protect itself. Why? Because if tomorrow you were attacked and had thousands of people and babies being killed at home by people for any reason, you will call it terrorism and you want to protect yourself. And nobody can understand the opposite. First one.
Second, we said the way to protect yourself should be compliant with international law. I mean, you have to attack and punish the terrorist group, Hamas and associates I would say. But civilians are not the one to attack you. So you have to protect civilians in your counterattack. This is why the French government and myself, we ask for a humanitarian pause, and we voted in favor of the Jordan resolution at the United Nations asking for such a pause because we have to protect first in Gaza civilians because they have nothing to deal with these terrorist attacks. And we have to protect them in order to focus on the terrorist groups.
I want to make this distinction because all lives matter in this world. And I hate these debates dividing people, or saying: for me, Jewish lives are more important, and for me, Palestinian lives would be more important. This is crazy. All of us are here because of the universality of human values and dignity of people. And importance of any life in this world is precisely not a Western concept or Western value. This is a universal value, part of the UN Charter.
The proposal we made is based on three points and I can develop if some other colleagues want me to develop. 1) fight against terrorism, 2) protection of population and civilians, 3) resume the political dialog and the peace process, which is very important. But I don't want to be longer.
Animatrice
Thank you very much, Mister President. Thank you for your very sincere answer, especially about age really doesn't matter. And that's something exactly what we encourage our students to be very much proactive in public politics, global politics and public policy. And the key point you also made in your answer about the rule of law, the rule of international law, I think was the key message for our students, especially at our university. So let's proceed with the next set of questions.
Etudiante
Good afternoon, Mr. President. My name is Nirlan Ghazirzhybek (ph), and I'm the 3rd year student of Bachelor Program, International Law. You have spoken about the need for a new European security order in United Nations Assembly in September 2022. Since the war in Ukraine has shown that European security order is no longer viable. So my question is, from your perspective, what legal reforms are necessary to ensure so that international communities better prepare to respond and prevent future conflicts? Thank you.
Etudiant
Bonjour, Monsieur le Président. Je m'appelle Damien et effectivement, je ne suis pas du Kazakhstan, je suis français. Je suis élève de troisième année à Sciences Po Toulouse et ici en mobilité académique jusqu'à la fin du mois de décembre. En parcourant votre discours prononcé aux ambassadeurs le 28 août dernier, j'ai remarqué que vous insistiez beaucoup sur la nécessité d'éviter ce que vous appelez la " partition du monde ". Je pense que c'est une idée qu'on retrouve ici aussi au Kazakhstan, par exemple, dans le projet de constitution d'un corridor Trans-Caspien. Ma question est donc la suivante : est-ce que vous pensez que la France a un rôle à jouer dans la constitution de ce corridor ? Si oui, lequel ? Et vers quel pays pensez-vous que des accords en matière de coopération sont les plus souhaitables, notamment pour le Caucase et l'Asie centrale ? Merci.
Etudiante
Hello, Mr. President. My major is Translation Studies, and I'm four years' student, and you know that our countries are strategic partners for the past 15 years, and many French enterprises are doing business here in Kazakhstan. For example, Danone in the agri-food sector, or Edemia in security sector, or Alstom in railway sector. And my question for you is, what are the prospects of Kazakhstani enterprises in domestic market of France? Thank you.
Emmanuel MACRON
Thank you so much.
You raise a very large and important question regarding indeed the architecture of European security, and this one is put at risk by the war launched by Russia and Ukraine, for sure. I think if we want to build a sustainable peace in Europe, first we have to be absolutely clear on the fact that international law, international order is not negotiable. And I think it's important, by the way, for the architecture of the European security, but for your region as well.
Let me be clear. If we are weak on Ukraine, and its own territory and its national integrity, I think this is a very bad news for all the neighbors of Russia, if you want my personal feeling. But because when you start, I mean, tasting it, and nobody reproaches you not to comply with the law, and this is at the end of the day, the « état de fait », which is recognized, I mean, I would not be super comfortable to be a neighbor of Russia. So I think the war in Ukraine is a war for our own security on the long run, but the security of the whole region. And I think the positions taken by your president were both very bold, but very smart, regarding the national interests of Kazakhstan on the mid to long run.
Second, I think this architecture should not be based on escalation and conflict. This is why even before this war, I always had very reasonable words towards Russia. And I think Russia is geographically part of Europe. So you have to build a sustainable system in order to have EU, non-EU member and Russia in this area.
It's very hard to think about that because this is the day after. We are not here the day after. Today, you have people dying for liberty and for the national integrity in Ukraine. But my second point is that we have to think about that day after by having an architecture in Europe, offering the Europeans the way to protect themselves. This is why I'm the big defender and promoter of this idea of Europe of defense. And building the way to decide for the continent with some big powers like Russia. And not to leave the floor of the dialog between Russia and the US to decide about weapons, ammunitions and important equipments to be deployed in this region.
So 1) respect of international law is a precondition of the security of Europe. 2) Being sure that Russia will not win this war militarily. 3) Having an actual Europe of defense to protect ourselves and our neighborhood. 4) Having a common legal and binding framework in order to have a sustainable security for the whole Europe, being credible for those who should be protected and with a mechanism of transparency and reciprocity in order to be sure that you have not escalation from any part. This is in a nutshell. If you want to revert later on, we can revert on that.
Sur le corridor et surtout, en effet, l'absence de division Nord-Sud. C'est pour moi une obsession. Je pense qu'un des grands risques de notre temps, c'est une division entre le Nord et le Sud, qui est d'ailleurs une division largement instrumentalisée par des puissances aujourd'hui qui veulent remettre en cause l'ordre international. Et il y a eu un discours qui a été poussé par certains disant : au fond, le droit international est un droit occidental. Je crois que c'est totalement faux, à la fois historiquement et substantiellement. La dignité humaine, le respect des frontières, la souveraineté des peuples, c'est universel. Et il y a un jeu qui est largement d'ailleurs en sous-main, utilisé par la Russie aussi et quelques autres, qui consiste à utiliser le ressentiment, la frustration de plusieurs pays du Sud d'un point de vue géopolitique, historique, pour dire : au fond, ce qu'on appelle le Nord ou les Occidentaux ne vous respectent pas. Et donc au fond, ce sont les anciens non alignés avec derrière la Chine, la Russie et les pays du Golfe qui jouent plutôt cet agenda aujourd'hui.
Je pense que cette division du monde est très dangereuse. Elle est dangereuse parce qu'elle crée un relativisme de nos valeurs internationales. Elle est dangereuse parce qu'au fond, elle crée une division du monde derrière de grandes puissances. Au fond, il y aurait le Nord ou les Occidentaux qui seraient forcément les vassaux des Américains et le reste du monde, qui deviendraient rapidement les vassaux de la Chine. Parce que, quel que soit le discours politique des autres, la puissance économique et géopolitique qui s'installe est la Chine. Je pense que c'est mauvais pour tout le monde, à l'exception de ceux qui sont le numéro un, le numéro deux. Il se trouve que la France a plutôt cette vision du monde de dire : on défend des valeurs, des principes, on défend nos intérêts. Mais on est pour le respect des peuples, de leur souveraineté, parce que c'est le fruit de notre histoire, des résistances qu'on a eues contre des puissances hégémoniques. Et donc on est attaché à cet équilibre du monde qui est en quelque sorte forcément multipolaire et qui fonctionne mieux s'il est multipolaire. Et donc je pense qu'il faut tout faire pour éviter cette fracture.
C'est exactement le sens sur la lutte contre les inégalités de ce qu'on a fait avec l'agenda de Paris et les 4P, le Pacte de Paris pour les Peuples de la Planète. C'est exactement ça. C'est montrer qu'on on réengage et on l'a fait avec des pays comme l'Afrique du Sud, Barbade et autres. Donc ça a été pensé par des pays du Sud et conçu avec eux. Et en effet, sur les infrastructures et la connectivité, il faut aussi aller dans le même sens. Il y a plusieurs initiatives, dont le corridor trans caspien qui est en effet sur la table. Je pense que ce sont des bonnes initiatives. Alors, toutes nos entreprises qui sont ici présentes, Alstom a été citée tout à l'heure, mais on a des entreprises qui font des infrastructures, qui font des services, qui gèrent des ports. Nous avons en quelque sorte avec nos entreprises des acteurs qui peuvent être engagés à tous les bouts de la chaîne.
Le grand défi de cette aventure géopolitique, ce sera évidemment les conditions de sécurité et d'acceptabilité sur une zone qui est extrêmement contestée, si je puis dire. Et vous avez la Russie d'un côté et l'Iran de l'autre. Mais je pense qu'un projet économique, s'il est mené par des puissances, justement comme le Kazakhstan, qui peuvent être vues comme non confrontationnelles par les deux, ont une chance. L'intérêt que je vois à ce projet, l'intérêt que je vois au projet que nous avons poussé en G20 d'avoir une connexion allant de l'Inde en passant par le Golfe jusqu'à l'Europe, c'est qu'elles ne sont pas à la main d'une des deux grandes puissances. Et on ne peut pas dire, il y a au fond, d'un côté les grands projets américains, où il y aurait de l'autre côté les nouvelles routes de la soie, et puis plus rien entre deux. Et donc, je pense que d'un point de vue géopolitique, c'est une très bonne chose que des puissances régionales, puisqu'on parle ici de la première économie de la sous-région, en coopération avec d'autres, construisent des infrastructures alternatives qui sont vues comme en quelque sorte plus neutres et qui peuvent être, je pense, des éléments d'équilibre. Et je pense que dans ce contexte, toutes les entreprises que j'ai mentionnées peuvent tout à fait y contribuer.
As for your question, I think, if I'm fair, it's a little bit cruel for me, but our trade is unbalanced, but not in the way you seem to think. There is much more export from Kazakhstan to France than the opposite. So a lot of your entrepreneurs have a lot of things to do in France, in oil business, and oil transformation, and so on on the short run. And this is a big part of your export to France.
I repeated several times since the beginning of our discussion : sovereignty, autonomy, and so on, I do believe in this agenda. And we signed this morning a memorandum of understanding, which is absolutely key for us, on rare-earths and critical minerals. Your country has a lot of them. From lithium to a lot of others, uranium, obviously, which is part of our cooperation. And we signed and secured the furniture from your country of these critical minerals, rare-earths, and so on. This is super important. And a lot of entrepreneurs have a lot of things to do, based on this business with France, and to deploy in France, and to develop, and precisely to export.
Third, I think we can increase the exchange of oil and we can increase the exchange on financial services. Because the willingness of your country is to develop much more, to have an actual financial place. And we are the number one in the Eurozone and the EU, in terms of financing activities. So, I think a lot of your players can do much more in France.
Animatrice
Thank you very much. I think it's very important for our students. Mr. President, to learn from you, first hand, what are the key priority areas between Kazakhstan and France. And today it was a unique opportunity. But also, again, global politics, global order, predominance of the international law, I think is somewhere in the air very important as an answer to many of the questions answering today. And let's continue with the next.
Etudiante
Bonjour, Monsieur le Président. Merci pour votre visite et bienvenue au Kazakhstan. J'espère que vous êtes à l'aise avec notre météo. Donc, je m'appelle Shula (ph) et je suis étudiante en troisième en relation internationale et je vais aussi étudier à l'université de Sciences Po le semestre prochain. Donc, ma question est la suivante. Quels sont vos trois grands principes auxquels vous adhérez et qui vous aident à obtenir le bon résultat ? Merci beaucoup.
Etudiant
Good morning. Mr. President, I appreciate your visit into our university, to our country. To be honest, I was really worried about this meeting. So my name is Dordek (ph). I'm a 30 year student of International relations major. So my major is not connected with politics. It's not about interstate relations. So I want to ask you, there is an opinion that International relations graduate students are the least demanded among graduation work out of their specialization. So what do you think about that and how would you make you one of the most successful and one of the most demanded graduated students in international relations major labor market? Thank you.
Etudiant
Bonjour Monsieur le Président. Je suis étudiant de tourisme en troisième année et c'est vraiment une surprise de pouvoir vous rencontrer ici après avoir vécu 8 ans en France et vous rencontrer dans mon pays d'origine. Ma question est beaucoup plus simple que mes collègues, les autres étudiants. Vous savez peut-être, le Kazakhstan joue très bien pendant les qualifications de l'Euro 2024 et ayant joué moi-même en France pendant 4 ans et ici j'ai remarqué une différence dans l'éducation et la mentalité des jeunes dans les clubs. Voilà, ma question est la suivante : que recommanderiez-vous à l'État pour améliorer le niveau et changer la mentalité de nos jeunes footballeurs ? Et deuxièmement, le secret pour créer autant de jeunes talents ?
Etudiante
Bonjour Monsieur le Président. Merci pour votre présence. Je m'appelle Gohar (phon), je suis étudiante en spécialité tourisme. Et en créant votre parti politique En marche ! vous devez surtout souligner qu'il n'est ni de droite, ni de gauche. Comment parvenez-vous à maintenir un tel équilibre de forces politiques différentes et parfois contradictoires ?
Emmanuel MACRON
Merci. J'ai eu 3 questions en français là.
Si je voulais commencer par la plaisanterie, je vous dirais que les trois grands principes qui guident mon action sont : Liberté, Égalité et Fraternité. C'est la devise de la France. Mais ça me permet peut-être de partager juste ça avec vous, même si j'ai compris que votre question était plus pratique et je vais y répondre. Mais pour moi, la politique française repose sur ces 3 principes. Et c'est d'ailleurs en écho avec la question sur En marche ! à laquelle je vais répondre dans la foulée.
Notre devise a ces trois principes, la liberté. Beaucoup d'autres pays ont la liberté avec nous, les États-Unis d'Amérique, beaucoup de démocraties. Vous êtes une démocratie depuis votre indépendance et beaucoup de ce qu'on appelle les démocraties libérales portent la liberté comme principe d'action. Mais la liberté en matière politique, en matière sociale, en matière économique, qui permet à des individus qui ont la dignité qu'on leur reconnaît, la rationalité d'agir, de prendre les bonnes décisions et leur laisser la liberté, c'est ce qui permet d'avoir un monde meilleur.
On a un deuxième principe qui est l'égalité, qui est important parce qu'il donne la cohésion en société. Il permet de corriger les biais d'une famille. Alors c'est un objectif, il n'est jamais totalement atteint, mais il permet d'éviter que cette liberté ne devienne un individualisme et l'égalité, ce qui vous permet dans la société de corriger les injustices qui deviennent non comprises, impossibles, qui fragilisent le collectif. Donner les mêmes chances surtout aux uns et aux autres, d'où qu'ils viennent et quelle que soit la famille et c'est un mouvement, là aussi que nous continuons.
Est-ce que la liberté est parfaite ? Est-ce que l'égalité est parfaite ? Ce sont toujours des horizons, mais ces deux principes se tiennent ensemble. Il y a des pays qui ont l'égalité sans la liberté. Ça fut par exemple le cas d'à peu près toutes les républiques sous régime communiste. Il y a beaucoup de pays qui ont la liberté sans l'égalité. C'est le cas de démocraties même aujourd'hui très libérales, qui n'ont pas de politique sociale. La liberté et l'égalité ensemble est une force parce que c'est une régulation permanente. Alors elles créent parfois de la conflictualité politique, mais au bon sens du terme, parce que c'est une tension qui est féconde. Elles se nourrissent l'une l'autre.
Et puis on a un troisième principe d'action qui est la fraternité. Et la fraternité, c'est quelque chose qui ne se décide pas par les décrets, les lois, les politiques publiques, mais qui constitue une nation qui est en quelque sorte, le fait que les citoyennes et les citoyens se reconnaissent au-delà de leurs origines, de leur différence, comme appartenant à un commun, et il est le ciment des deux autres. C'est ça, les trois principes d'action de la République française. Et je crois que ça dit beaucoup de ce qu'est notre pays.
Pour ma part, mes trois principes d'action de manière beaucoup plus modeste, c'est d'essayer à chaque fois d'expliquer, de dire les choses quand je veux les faire, y compris quand elles sont impopulaires. C'est ensuite de tenir dans l'action et d'avoir l'esprit de résistance, même quand c'est impopulaire, parce qu'on l'a expliqué et qu'on pense que c'est bon, il ne faut pas céder à la démagogie. Et la troisième, c'est d'être attaché aux résultats, aux faits, et d'aller regarder si ça change vraiment la vie des gens. Ces trois petits principes de base beaucoup plus modestement sont ceux auxquels je tâche de m'astreindre.
Ce qui me permet d'aller à la quatrième question, Mademoiselle, sur En Marche. Pour citer les grands auteurs, le général De Gaulle lui-même - qui, contrairement à ce que la légende veut faire dire, n'a jamais été d'aucun parti, il a construit la Cinquième République pour que la France puisse échapper à la logique des partis à l'époque, parce qu'on était pris dans un régime parlementaire - disait : Mais on me demande de choisir entre la gauche et la droite. Mais la gauche, c'est le mouvement, la création, l'énergie ; et la droite, c'est l'ordre ; il faut les deux. Et ce n'est pas ne pas choisir ; c'est simplement se dire, on ne peut pas justement marcher avec une seule jambe. Et ce n'est pas vrai que dans un pays qui a des défauts immenses, on pourrait choisir complètement. Et le constat que j'ai fait en 2016, c'est que si la France n'avait pas fait certaines réformes depuis très longtemps, c'est qu'elle était un peu paralysée par une alternance qui s'autobloquait, entre plutôt des partis de droite et de gauche.
Et donc le mouvement que j'ai lancé a rassemblé des femmes et des hommes venant de la gauche modérée, du centre, de l'écologie modérée, du centre droit et de la droite modérée, pour faire simple, et plutôt pro-européens - parce que les gens qui n'étaient pas européens de ces sensibilités n'ont pas rejoint cet ensemble. Et ça a permis de faire des réformes. Je défends mon bilan, je ne fais pas de politique intérieure devant vous là mais on a fait des réformes, par exemple, pour lutter contre le chômage, réduire le taux de chômage, lancer l'apprentissage, réformer les retraites, ou sur la fiscalité pour attirer les investisseurs internationaux, qui ont des résultats. On a baissé le chômage comme on ne l'avait jamais baissé, les impôts comme on ne l'avait jamais baissé, on n'a jamais été aussi attractifs. Beaucoup de gens de droite ne l'avaient pas fait avant. Et l'inverse, on a réinvesti sur des services publics qui étaient en train de tomber, on a dédoublé les classes dans les quartiers les plus modestes, etc., on a justement eu cette politique aussi d'apprentissage, une politique sur l'éducation et la santé que beaucoup de gens de gauche n'avaient pas eu non plus avant.
Et c'est le " en même temps " auquel je crois, qui va avec " liberté, égalité, fraternité ". C'est de se dire, il n'y a pas une vision unilatérale des choses. Est-ce que c'est simple tous les jours ? Non, parce que surtout dans les moments où les temps sont durs, où l'inquiétude revient, on préfère toujours des réponses qui ne vont que dans une direction. Et je respecte ça totalement. Donc, il faut avoir cette capacité d'impulsion et de relancer les choses, pas en donnant des gages de manière politicienne, mais en ayant une vision qui réconcilie ces aspirations profondes qu'il y a dans tous les peuples, et en tout cas qu'il y a dans le peuple français, qui est tout à la fois une aspiration à la liberté, à la création, à l'entreprenariat, à l'inventivité, et une aspiration à l'ordre, au contrôle - oui, à l'ordre et aux valeurs qui vont avec. Je ne crois pas que ce soit incompatible, mais ça, c'est mon travail de chaque jour.
You raise a very tricky question regarding, especially in front of your professors and your minister of Higher Education, about the diplomat and the attractiveness on the labor market of international relations studies. I do believe it makes a lot of sense to study these matters. And I do believe that you have a lot of perspectives after that on the labor market. You should not look at this ranking too fast because I can tell you, the complexity of this world is so high and increasing in such a way that having people being educated, trained, with sharp visions on new trends, but international law and international relations and so on is very useful. It's very useful for governments.
So I recommend you to look at that because joining your diplomacy makes a lot of sense and is extremely useful; joining as well all the diplomacies, and you have a lot of exchange programs, but all the investors, all the large companies, all those who want to deal with, at the scale of the region or at the scale of the world, do need this type of competences. So I don't want you to be pessimistic. Sometimes it could be completed with all the formations on some technical issues, but I'm sure you have perspective, you do have a lot of offers today, but you will have more and more tomorrow for sure.
Enfin, vous m'avez interrogé sur la formation des footballeurs. D'abord, le football est un sport populaire dans notre pays, donc on a des millions de licenciés dans les clubs, donc on a un vivier extraordinaire. Et on a beaucoup de jeunes d'ailleurs, qui viennent aussi et qui sont issus de l'immigration, venant de pays où le football est très populaire, donc tout ça a créé une synergie très forte. Mais je pense que le football a d'abord, si vous voulez, une capacité d'attraction qui est l'une des plus larges en France, comme l'un des sports les plus populaires. Je pense que c'est un peu moins populaire ici, c'est plus le hockey ou d'autres sports. Le foot est plus populaire que le hockey ? Formidable. Mais c'est ça, la première chose, c'est la base.
La deuxième chose, on a progressivement amélioré et les clubs ont fait un très grand travail pour aller chercher les jeunes très tôt. Je pense que nous, le travail qu'on doit continuer de faire, c'est de le développer à l'école. C'est aussi pour ça qu'on a mis la demi-heure de sport obligatoire en primaire, 2 heures de sport en plus au collège maintenant. Et c'est avec les clubs de s'assurer que les jeunes futurs footballeurs, parfois très jeunes, restent bien auprès de leur famille dans les premiers temps, avec leur famille et surtout poursuivent les études. Ça, c'est clé.
Et puis la troisième chose, c'est d'avoir des modèles et des modèles sportifs et des modèles aussi en termes de valeurs. Parce que je pense qu'un des défis, c'est que nos grands sportifs soient des belles personnes c'est-à-dire qu'ils n'enseignent pas simplement un sport mais qu'ils inspirent. Et à cet égard, avoir un footballeur - mais aussi nos rugbymen pour qui j'ai une pensée parce qu'on vient de finir notre Coupe du monde -, en défendant parfois des causes et des sujets sociaux, nos hôpitaux, etc., c'est, je pense, très important parce que ça participe de l'édification de notre jeunesse.
On a toujours beaucoup de travail à faire, mais on est une grande nation de football parce qu'il y a cette historique, il y a eu un très gros travail des clubs, de beaucoup de bénévoles et on l'a amélioré ces dernières années.
Animatrice
What a diverse question Mister President from world, politics, labor markets and life principles. I think we would like by this to thank you very much, Mister President, for this unique opportunity for Narikbayev University's students to face to face interact with you and to ask questions that they would like to find answers.
And I think to finalize, I would like to stress upon your answer about the three main principles of your life you shared with students. You follow in your routine life as the president of France, as a world politician as well. There's freedom, equality and brotherhood. I think these three main principles are something we also teach to our students at our university, Maqsut Narikbayev University, freedom of choice most of all, and equality of opportunities second of all, and most importantly brotherhood to be supportive to each other. Thank you very much indeed. [Applauding]
Emmanuel MACRON
Thank you very much for your time and your presence. I just wanted to conclude by obviously thanking you, but to encourage you as well, obviously to follow up at these universities and all the different universities you will join, especially in France, and I commend the French students being here for an exchange program, but I commend those who will join some French universities or establishments to follow up the studies and share this language and becoming francophone.
But let me say something, you will join in the years to come a labour market. I hope you will have not just a great career but a beautiful life. But never forget to be engaged in political life and public choices. And I speak with my heart when I say that. You come from a country who built its independence and who is at a very important moment of your history, and I think this country does need your energy, what you learned from this university. And you are part of the public debate, you are part of the public decision. And politics is not a belonging of very few people, designed by whom, by what, I don't know. In democracy, public choices, public life is yours. And this is your job, your duty, your responsibility. And I think it's a wonderful experience.
I tell you that because I was not a member of a political party, I was not a politician a few months before becoming a President. And it's quite likely that when I will finish, I will do something totally different. But I'm very happy to serve my country during this decade as a President. But never forget that this opportunity could be yours, but at least at a local level, for each of you.
I don't want to be longer. Thank you for your attention.