France What Victory Will Mean

Francois Mitterrand won a second seven-year term as France's President on Sunday, with 54% of the vote against Premier Jacques Chirac's 46%. The result was hardly startling after Mitterrand's strong showing in the first round of balloting on April 24, though the release of three French hostages in Lebanon last Wednesday seemed briefly to boost Chirac's chances. Chirac failed to capture enough supporters of Jean-Marie Le Pen, the ultra-rightist candidate, who fared surprisingly well in the initial round. On the eve of his triumph, Mitterrand, 71, outlined his plans for the second term with Time Inc. Editor- in-Chief Jason McManus, TIME Managing Editor Henry Muller, Assistant Managing Editor Karsten Prager and Paris Bureau Chief Jordan Bonfante. Excerpts from the interview and from written answers to questions submitted earlier:

Q. What have you learned about France during this campaign?

A. I was astonished by the great number of young people at rallies and by their impressive support. That is new because the young ordinarily have reservations about political parties. And it brings a new, different tone to our politics. They are very sensitive to anything that has to do with human rights, generosity, the Third World, culture, scientific research, the adventure of the mind, education, professional training and equal opportunity. They reject discriminations. For them, these problems supersede the others.

Q. What are we to make of the Le Pen phenomenon?

A. The majority of French men and women who voted for the National Front always thought as they do today, but they used to vote for Premier Chirac's party. Put simply, there has been a restructuring of the right because the Premier, given his obligations, could not go as far as Mr. Le Pen in responding to the aspirations and the needs of those people.

Then there is the phenomenon that has been analyzed long before us, by historians and sociologists since the beginnings of this century: where there is serious and durable unemployment, there is a push toward the nationalist right wing. Even when they lose their jobs, middle-class people remain faithful to their cultural patterns. Logically, they should move to the left and vote Communist. No. They move to the extreme right.

There they join people excluded from everything -- the unemployed, the homeless, those who live in dirty, crowded neighborhoods devoid of any city planning, mothers and fathers who cannot find anyone to take care of their children while they still have to work. These people become desperate. They come from the left, but they vote for the National Front.

Q. What are your foreign policy priorities for the second term?

A. Peace and disarmament. The union of Europe, that is, the completion of an economic Europe and the setting up of a political Europe. The intensification of an effort of the major industrialized nations toward the Third World.

I will encourage the United States and the Soviet Union to continue on the path of disarmament to which they have committed themselves at last. I shall do my best to hasten the start of negotiations on conventional weapons in Europe. I shall remind others that though security is based on deterrence, that does not mean either constant overbidding or redundancy, and that a reduction of the arms race is the logical complement of this strategy.

Q. What will a "European pillar" of Western defense consist of? Could it permit the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Europe?

A. Through increasingly close cooperation in the Atlantic Alliance certain European countries have undertaken to build the core of a common European defense system. Other countries find that the current situation suits them better, even if all of them recognize that Europe, once it has found the way toward political union, must ensure its own defense.

In maintaining its armed forces in Europe, the U.S. is keeping its commitment to NATO and protecting its global interests. The progress of European cooperation in defense will not erase the reasons for the U.S. presence in Europe.

Q. How durable are glasnost, perestroika and, for that matter, General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev?

A. Mr. Gorbachev's rise to power was no accident. In three years he has already shown great qualities as a statesman in conceiving and applying reforms. Will glasnost and perestroika last? I am no more adept than you at reading tea leaves. But it seems to me that the majority of the Soviet people have no desire to turn back the clock.

Q. How will you make a stronger commitment to the Third World?

A. The gap between rich and poor countries is not narrowing. On the contrary, it's growing wider every day. In the past year financial transfers from south to north surpassed by $30 billion those from north to south, because debt repayments exceeded new loans. I wish to increase France's aid to the Third World and to improve its quality and its effectiveness. I believe it is necessary to re-examine means of repayment for the least-developed countries. For the poorest of all, I do not rule out cancellation of these debts.

The time has come to launch a worldwide development plan that would be to the Third World what the Marshall Plan was to the reconstruction of Europe. Countries with financial surpluses, particularly Japan, which despite new increased efforts still devotes only 0.29% of its GNP to Third World aid ((vs. 0.54% for France)), should play a particularly important role in such a program.

Q. "Europe" was on the tip of everyone's tongue in this campaign, but some French thinkers point out that the core question is not being asked: What is the future of the nation-state?

A. No nation in Europe, however ancient and glorious, can control in isolation its development. The surest way of preserving our national heritages, as well as our ways of thinking and doing things, is to pool our resources, our currencies, our knowledge and our industries, much as we have done for our agriculture.