The intriguing thing about the campaigning for next April's presidential election that has started in France is not so much that, for the first time, a man will be pitted against a woman. France is no more macho than other countries.

Women occupy minority positions in politics or as heads of companies but the sexual debate is over. The election of a woman to the presidency of the French Republic would be an event but not a revolution. The main point of interest in the campaign is that the favourites attract as much doubt as support within their respective camps. Jean-Louis Debré, president of the National Assembly, and Dominique de Villepin, prime minister, who hopes to be a candidate, have never hidden the fact that they do not think Nicolas Sarkozy would make a good president. Dominique Strauss-Kahn and Laurent Fabius, rivals of Ségolène Royal on the left, made their opinions clear, saying she had no ideas. As for Sarkozy, doubts arise over his unflagging frenzy of excitement. He is active on every issue, the media have to give him daily coverage and he uses phrases to shock, such as when he referred to suburban kids as trash who needed to be swept away with a pressure hose. Isn't he a little too fond of a fight? Might this fighting spirit hide a flaw, a lack of serenity, even of maturity? As for Royal, there are doubts over her need to avoid debate. Her strategy has been not to gain the support of socialists but to seduce public opinion. She is seen a lot in Paris-Match, the magazine that covers showbusiness stars. This has paid off: Ségo, as the French refer to her, has managed to kill off the old guard, including ministers under François Mitterrand such as Lionel Jospin, Fabius, Jack Lang and Strauss-Kahn. But by putting form ahead of content, she has laid herself open to criticism that she lacks ideas and is intellectually weak. This, for the socialists, is a serious issue. For the time being, each camp's recriminations have failed to dent the images of the favourites. Sarkozy remains far ahead of other right-wing candidates with 36% of intended first-round votes, according to a TNS Sofres poll. Royal would carry 34% of first-round votes. In the second round, Royal would come out ahead of Sarkozy and become the first French female president. But the elections are five months away. Tensions in each camp will not diminish. Sympathisers who vote for the opposing candidate out of spite will always be found in France. Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, who was president between 1974 and 1981, revealed in a book how his former prime minister Chirac had secretly voted for his opponent Mitterrand in 1981. Chirac, or some of his friends, might be tempted to push for the election of Ségo because of their loathing for Sarko. Conversely, it is less likely that certain socialist apparatchiks will vote for the right. The left has a greater chance because the right is in power and the French love change. They have relentlessly ousted leaders for the past 30 years. Chirac should therefore be succeeded by a left-wing president – but uncertainty is rife. The improved economic outlook will favour Sarkozy. The government has made much of a small drop in unemployment, which has fallen to 9% of the active population, and it promises will fall to 8% by April. The effect of this on public opinion is considerable. France, grey with pessimism a year ago, has regained colour since the spring. The economy is doing better; growth will reach 2.5% this year and this improvement is felt throughout the country. So unless the US nosedives into recession – the repercussions of which would be catastrophic for Europe – the outlook should favour the right. But uncertainty prevails: it is impossible to discern the policies of the candidates. This is another oddity about the French: Sarkozy wants to win over the left by using the economy. Royal wants to seduce the right by using social values. The right-left barrier, normally unbreachable in France, has shattered. It is hard to find your bearings any more. A year ago, Sarkozy boasted of his break with Chirac's politics. He criticised the weakness of reforms of the health system, the labour market and state management. This liberal stance favouring a cut in taxes and the market economy has vanished to make way for a series of social promises – such as the right of abode and various allocations – and to criticism of the European Central Bank, which has been blamed for French unemployment. For a right-wing candidate to move to the centre for the second-round fight against the left-wing candidate is not without logic. But another doubt remains, not only because of Sarkozy's personality but also because of his programme: what will he do once he is elected? Will he have the courage to undertake the reforms he said were indispensable a year ago? Or will he weaken? The same question applies to Royal. We know she is a success outside the structure of the socialist party but what will she make of the policies to be drawn up before summer by the party? What parts will she abandon, what bits will she keep? She has called herself a Blairite and has criticised the reduction in the working week to 35 hours before acclaiming Chilean and Swedish socialism. Royal is clearly courageous but will she be brave enough to impose reforms on socialist militants and then on the French? The election will be a historic moment for France: will the country come out of its state of stagnation to take on the challenges of globalisation? With five months to go, neither of the candidates has given a clear answer.