Jean Bodin, the famous sixteenth-century French economist (1530-1596), had famously declared, “There is no wealth but man.” While economic wealth is vital, as Bodin quoted in his Quantitative Theory of Money, leaders throughout history have repeatedly turned to population dynamics as a key indicator and instrument of national wealth. This section examines the strategic significance of demographics in historical, political, and geopolitical contexts, with a focus on France, the European Union, and the United States.
Demographics and Military Power: Lessons from Twentieth-Century France and Germany
In the 1930s, France faced a declining population, whereas its rival, Germany, was experiencing a population boom. This demographic imbalance was one of the factors behind Germany’s initial victory in 1940. To reverse the trend, successive French governments adopted pro-natalist policies, which proved especially effective after World War II. Yet even these measures couldn’t stop a more recent decline: “France, which had a fertility rate of two children per woman a decade ago, saw that figure drop to 1.62 in 2024,’ writes Pierre Buhler in the April-May 2025 issue of Questions Internationales. The only silver lining? Countries that were once considered fertile, such as Italy, Spain, Poland and Greece, now have even lower birth rates.
France’s Demographic Rearmament
Confronted with this renewed decline, France has taken bold steps. On January 16, 2024, the President of France announced an ambitious set of initiatives to boost the birth rate and combat infertility. Calling it a “demographic rearmament,” the government proposed a comprehensive plan to support families and enhance fertility services.
This political framing marks a shift: the issue of demographics is no longer confined to family or health policy but is now a matter of national strategy. Whether this plan will reverse current trends remains uncertain, but its urgency and scale reflect growing awareness of population as a critical pillar of national stability.
Demographic Weight in the European Union
The strategic implications of demographics extend beyond domestic policy to the realm of supranational governance. At the European Summit in Nice in 2000, President Jacques Chirac was fiercely witnessed to have France’s voting parity within the EU’s decision-making process. In the wake of Germany’s reunification in 1989, Chirac along with much of the French political class and public felt France needed to maintain equal standing with its now larger eastern neighbour. This issue dominated much of the summit’s discussions.
The European Project itself, described by the former European Commission (1985-1995) President Jacques Delors as an Unidentified Political Object (UPO), has always had a complex and evolving decision-making progress. Despite constant expansion of the EU’s legal powers, critics have often mocked the union, most famously by Henry Kissinger, who once joked, “Europe? What’s the phone number?”
But here’s the reality: member states have always held the reins. Contrary to what Eurosceptic parties claim, the EU has not stripped nations of their sovereignty. National governments are involved at every step ranging from setting the political direction to legal implementations. These are primarily influenced by the Council of the European Union and European Council.
The Council of the EU is divided into ten thematic groups, where ministers from each of the 27 member states meet to discuss issues in their areas of expertise, for instance, the environment ministers for legislation on air pollutant emission. Before reaching this level, discussions begin in working groups and committees, made up of national experts and EU officials. These groups form the preparatory bodies of the Council. From there the proposal either moves to Coreper I (for technical matters) or to Coreper II (for political issues), composed of each country’s Permanent Representatives to the EU.
Every Member State has a Permanent Representation (essentially an embassy to the EU), and once Coreper reaches a compromise, it is shared in advance of the Council of the EU meeting, where relevant ministers gather to make a final decision. Depending on the topic, they vote either by qualified majority (with voting power weighted by population size) or unanimously. If the Council amends the text, it’s sent back to the European Parliament for further debate. If not, the law is adopted.
Sometimes, no agreement is reached. In such cases, the proposal remains on hold, sometimes for months, or indefinitely. At that point, the matter escalated to the European Council, made up of Heads of State and Government. This body gives the EU its political direction and settles difficult disputes. Decisions are made by consensus, especially on issues like the seven-year EU budget or any changes to the founding treaties. That gives every single Member State a decisive voice in shaping Europe’s future.
France and Germany: Demographic Clout and EU Leadership
Among EU members, France and Germany have a particularly strong influence. Their post-war reconciliation is at the heart of the European project, and their demographic, economic, and geopolitical clout gives them extra weight. They’re the top two economies in the EU, and they also hold the most seats in the European Parliament: 96 for Germany and 81 for France, out of a total of 720. As a result, it’s common practice for the two countries to coordinate before and during Council meetings. Their demographic heft not only grants them formal power but also influences informal leadership in the Union.
The American Parallel: Demographics in Trump Era Strategy
Across the Atlantic, U.S. President Donald Trump also recognized the strategic importance of demographics, though his approach was controversial and often contradictory. While his administration took a hardline stance against immigration and frequently targeted women’s and minority rights through rhetoric and policy, it simultaneously proposed various pro-natalist measures.
These included a USD 5,000 baby bonus, a “Motherhood Medal” for women with six or more children, and incentives such as reserving 30% of Fulbright scholarships for married individuals or those with children. Even menstrual education programs were suggested to help women and girls better understand fertility cycles.
Yet this pro-fertility stance clashed with deeper administrative actions. On April 1, 2025, the Trump administration disbanded the Center for Diseases Control’s team responsible for monitoring assisted reproductive technologies, including IVF, a part of broader budget cuts at the Department of Health and Human Services. While publicly promoting higher fertility, the administration undermined the very institutions that support it.
This contradiction highlights a broader political reality: while population growth is often portrayed as vital for national strength, achieving it necessitates coherent, well-supported social, economic, and institutional systems that are frequently subject to political debate and division.
Conclusion
From Europe to America, and from the early modern era to today, the politics of demographics remain deeply intertwined with national and global strategy. Countries may differ in their rhetoric and policies, but the underlying concern is often the same: how to maintain or expand population strength as a means of preserving influence, security, and economic vitality.
Whether through state-driven incentives or political manoeuvring, the question of “who counts” in a nation’s future continues to shape leadership decisions. Jean Bodin’s assertion that “there is no wealth but man” endures, not merely as a philosophical statement, but as a guiding principle of modern statecraft.
Former Ambassador of France to Nepal.
