this war in ukraine French presidential election campaign shaken up. Although there were elections in France that monopolized the political life, the election debate was pushed into the background. This exceptional situation has reinforced the fans’ favorite status. Minister Emmanuel Macron.
this journalist Marc Endeweld is the author of some of the most interesting research books on the centrist leader.Like L’ambigu monsieur Macron (2016) or Le grand manipulator (2019). Before the Russian invasion, this correspondent of the business newspaper La Tribune and Le Monde Diplomatique was published in January. Effect, dedicated to French international politics, is the big topic of discussion at this presidential pageant. “A leader who makes a lot of gestures at the international level but gets little results,” he says of Macron’s deliberate role in mediating between Moscow and Kyiv in this interview with El Periódico.
How do you analyze the role of the French president in the negotiations between Russia, Ukraine and the West?
Perhaps because of his status as a young president (44 years old), Macron confused diplomacy with communication. He often uses his international image to seduce French voters. But all this did not help in finding a diplomatic solution to the war between Russia and Ukraine. The Russians do not believe his word, because he is far from the pretense of autonomous French diplomacy, that is, allied with the West, but not allied, for the most part he seemed completely aligned with US interests. That’s why, Macron appears confused and is not taken seriously, even by his allies in the democratic bloc nor by the leaders of the authoritarian bloc.
Even his initiative aroused suspicion in the Biden administration…
The French president is a leader who makes a lot of gestures internationally, but with little results. From the withdrawal of French troops in Mali to the state of the conflict in Libya, Syria or Lebanon, he suffered numerous failures in this area during his tenure. There is a certain misconception in the Biden administration itself and in the US liberal press about Macron’s willingness to act as a great power and talk one-on-one with leaders of authoritarian countries like Russia or China.
How has France’s stance on the strategic issue of Russian gas hindered Macron’s ability to engage in dialogue with Putin?
In addition to the reluctance of Eastern European countries to engage in dialogue with Russia, one of the obstacles faced by the French president was his own position on the energy dossier, which was so important in the war in Ukraine. Before the invasion of Russia, France was already against the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline project, but interestingly, it did not do so to reduce its energy dependence on Russia, To prevent Germany from becoming an energy distribution center Europe. But at the same time, the French did not find sources of gas diversification, especially with regard to Algeria. Its commitment to nuclear power also clashed with the rejection of anti-nuclear countries led by Germany. These disagreements over strategic and energy issues put European governments in a vulnerable position when war broke out in Ukraine.
Aren’t you too harsh on the French president? Europe’s commitment to its “strategic autonomy” seems most plausible in the face of the current threat from Russia and the new “Cold War” between the US and China…
Yes, it’s true that he has some good insights internationally, especially noticing the world’s growing trend towards Asia and Europe becoming a periphery in the ongoing conflict between the US and China. Before this panoramaHe claimed the “Europe of Defense” and “strategic autonomy” of the Old Continent.. But this idea has barely developed in the face of Merkel’s reluctance, who prefers Germany to be governed by more than one alliance strategy: US versus military, China versus economic, and Russia versus energy.
Macron did not attach much importance to the countries in the south of the continent.
He forgot to look for alternative alliances with the countries of the South in the Council of Europe. Relations with the Italian Government have been very difficult due to issues of business and personal interest rather than diplomacy. For example, the problem with the shipyards of Saint-Nazaire (northwest France), which must be bought by the Italian state company Fincantieri. But this project has been paralyzed for months by the interests of the Swiss company MSC, whose owners have family ties to Alexis Kohler, the general secretary of Macron’s main collaborator, Elysee.
And with Spain?
The current Spanish government did not want to strengthen its ties with Pedro Sánchez, considering it too left-wing and progressive. The president of France is not recorded at all in the history of the left and progressive. All this contradicted the image of the socio-liberal leader given in 2017, causing numerous misunderstandings at the international level.
Following the invasion of Ukraine, European governments announced massive increases in military spending. Could this conflict support Macron’s “Europe of Defense” project?
In order to calm the fear-infested public opinion, we must pay attention to the statements and heated statements of the leaders. What do we mean when we speak of a “Defensive Europe”? If this consists of believing that the Americans will always continue to protect us, it will only weaken us. In fact, the 100 billion military spending promised by Secretary of State Olaf Scholz will benefit the US military industry above all else. We see that the European fighter aircraft Scaf project, developed by France, Germany and Spain, is reflected in the difficulties it faces. Military company Dassault recently complained that this initiative did not go forward in the face of German preferences for US weapons.
France’s desire for diplomatic and strategic independence could be severely damaged by the current rise of NATO…
Yes, definitely. There is a risk that Washington will use the war in Ukraine to weaken Russia in the long run. but at the same time it weakens European countries and economies. This will make them more and more dependent economically on the United States rather than on China, which is the Americans’ primary interest in the current situation.
Despite a shady balance in international politics, Macron begins the April presidential election as a clear favorite, monopolized by the war in Eastern Europe. How would you explain this?
Because in these presidential elections, international policy discussions have been completely biased. Macron dramatizes the conflict in Ukraine as if France were also at war and staged his role for electoral purposes. This allowed national unity to take advantage of the “flag effect”, which threw it in the polls. However, given this situation, it will be very difficult to discuss important strategic issues such as the use of nuclear energy at both the military and civilian levels. All this may raise doubts about the political legitimacy of a hypothetical second term for Macron.