In Paris, visions, dreams or visions of NATO and Europe of Defense? | Iulian Chifu


If the major title made him the idea that "NATO is an alliance in brain death ”, the press in Central and Eastern Europe and the press in the post-Soviet area, at least in the same way, retained and commented, and possibly in tandem, the reference to the need as The European Union should partner with Russia. Beyond these strong, excessive statements, taken over and commented on by most political leaders, the interview deserves more attention than the two would claim unfortunate and inadequate approaches of the French President, not to say excessive and unmerited, inconsistent with the reality of some perceptions oriented to their own interest.

Gaullist Europocentrism: Great Britain, the leader of the Defense of Europe

Indeed, the French President is based plea because of a house necessary first of all to the internal market in France which has become excessively large sovereignist and nationalist, of a sovereign Europe in which The hexagon would play the dominant role of the required Defense and Security dimension. Transatlantic rupture is implicit in the thinking presented by the French president and his arguments are deeply debatable, incoherent, illogical and inconsistent, and his vision is absent, beyond this sensation of the need to express the power policy of France from the guideline, the thread of the entire interview. But it is a pity that we remain light and superficial in appearance and things, though uttered excessively by the French President.

What we can say with certainty is that Emmanuel Macron is a profound pro-European. In contrast to the Eurosceptic approaches of the other French parties – see Sarkozy's Law – and anti-European approaches of the National Front of Marine Le Pen – which had announced until the epic of Brexit the wish to dissolve Europe into national states, the abolition of the European Union as a whole (with specific revisions later, like all European parties on this bill) "En Marche" and Emmanuel Macron, as well as his European party "Renaissance" are deeply pro-European, indeed Europo-centered. He makes a transfer of of French sovereignty and nationalism at European level, speaking and pleading for her Sovereign Europe – what does this mean – and for a type of European Community nationalism as the basis of European patriotism and a European army. After all, Macron is advocating a Great France to rule, on the dimensions of defense and security, a Europe to lead in satisfying their own interests with the resources of all Member States.

Against this background and from one transparent need of internal electoral nature, with gestures intended for the French voter, the whole speech and vision of President Macron is built. For this reason, the perception of his desire for transatlantic rupture, which he realizes withdrawal and retractability Trump's America from Global Responsibilities – Although nowhere in his argumentation does it result in a withdrawal from Article 5 powers and allied foundations, only the well-known claim of responsibility and cost sharing Allied defense through investment in self-defense. Nor does the reference to withdrawal from Syria, country outside the Alliance where France has interests but NATO is not present as Alliance again The US has never assumed the representation of French interests, is not a viable argument.

NATO and the EU regarded as a simple market for arms sales

Emmanuel Macron is not an anti-American. She expresses it in the interview and refers only to decreased confidence and US actions – just before Trump – like the interventionism of neo-conservatives or the fact that Obama blinked and chose not to follow the red line of the chemical attacks he had announced. Otherwise, the reproaches against NATO – which justify its qualifications – are weird and unconvincing: We did not subscribe to buy American armament, says Macron, to be a market for American weapons production.

An equally unrealistic claim that ignores Europe's lack of competitiveness vis-à-vis the US and other producers and lack of competitive European technology that would produce what an army of European states needs, not at all under an obligation to purchase American military equipment. Obsession comes back when talking about The European Union as a simple market, "Forgetting" about political integration, of multilateralism and shared values, of the normative power of the European Union, fully proven on the occasion of Brexit.

Even with regard to it the controversial approach and partnership with Russia, Emmanuel Macron is much more nuanced in the interview, and he accepts – maybe Beyond his own deeds, actions and gestures of more real approach – the duration of the decades until Russia could take these steps, also recognizing the need for sanctions and mismatch of aggressive gestures of Russia. But, in an impulse of wishful thinking, of own desire rather than reality, it concludes Russia's need for proximity to Europe, resuming the arguments of Eurasianism under Russian veto for the defense and security of Europe and America outside the continent.

The appetite for Emmanuel Macron's High Power policy

Emmanuel Macron acknowledges here as well appetite for high-power politics which he has personally and which he projects on the France he wants the domination of Europe after Brexit, and the negotiations on behalf of the Eastern European, the neighborhood of the Eastern Partnership, which, along with the Western Balkans, he indirectly grants it to Russia, recognizing its sphere is an influence, even if he talks about a comeback after the reformation and deeper integration of member states into a quasi-state united Europe, with Paris in the lead. Done with Post-modern Europe and current European competitive advantages, which made the interests of all European states harmonized by consensus. Macron efficiency actually means the domination and the high power status of the united Europe over the Member States.

President Macron's claims are in tune between a world of realpolitik, the need to adapt to the power politics of those around and the weaknesses of Europe, in counterpart, of NATO through the alleged and non-documented withdrawal of the US, but subsist the plea for a Great Power Europe, with France at the helm of his military arm. References to "Europe a US junior partner", "US-China rivalry leaving Europe isolated", "Russian and Turkish domination in the Middle East after US withdrawal" are just as little credible as arguments and so on inadequate to support his project such as references to the rise of populism in Europe, the fragmentation of the political party system in European states or predicting the disappearance of Europe as geopolitical relevance through the inability to dispose of one's own destiny. Instead the level of ambition is an unmeasured one for France and Emmanuel Macron: regaining military sovereignty, power policy, Euro-Atlantic rupture (US account) Euro-centricity, launch of a Europe strategic and powerful.

President Macron is still talking about Europe of Defense and Europe autonomous militarily, strategically and in terms of capabilities – no connection with the terms of reference accepted at EU level for autonomy of EU action – in parallel with the reopening of the strategic dialogue with Russia. The reason would be the desire to Europe must be diplomatic and balanced, between rivals – see isolated or misaligned, Gaullist – not to be trained by the US in wars with its enemies and to prevent the world from catching fire! Departing from the US, Europe Defense under French leadership, Gaulist non-alignment, partnership with Russia would be destined for give Europe a leverage in the neighborhood, which means for President Macron the use for the fight against terrorism in Africa and by no means for defense of the territory of EU states, because Macron is convinced that the partnership with Russia solves the problems of military threats to the Allied territory. Putin's word and commitment is a guarantee!

Emmanuel Macron's strategic Europe: vision or dream?

Emmanuel Macron is a European centrist and apparently solves its problems of credibility and internal legitimacy in France through the project of this Sovereign Europe – although unclear, unconvincing and deeply debatable as a public approach – on account of the transatlantic relationship. Basically, he claims that The US has withdrawn – because he has not solved / assumed France's positions and interests in Syria, for did not develop Turkey in line with common values ​​(although such an approach has never existed and does not enter into the Washington Treaty) and because demanded investments from Europeans in their own defense – and that's why NATO would be useless or outdated, "in clinical death".

But on the other hand, President Macron argues that France is powerful and that Europe can defend itself – using the same argument of national investment in the common defense and in the European institutions but also the model of France that can and does defend itself – but it does not explain anywhere why, if Europeans are strong, NATO with a withdrawn US cannot fulfill its common defense duties territorial in this form and a parallel, of the European defense within the EU, to be dominated by France.

On the contrary, the insistence on UK withdrawal after Brexit and on uniqueness – read French exceptionalism – the only state with a nuclear weapon, a permanent member of the Security Council and with expeditionary capabilities – it does not seem like a good deal, especially as it talks about the cooperation in Defense and Security with London after Brexit and the explanation why this is not developing within NATO, where the UK remains a member, is eluded, but should be developed within the EU, where France claims to be single, dominant, all-powerful. Then you must not forget that NATO with the US, Canada, Turkey, Norway and the UK is incomparably stronger than EU with Cyprus and neutral states in addition, in the balance of force.

Criticism, mourning, shades, errors, suspicions of allies, praises and applause in Moscow

Emmanuel Macron's interview was greeted with critics, mourning, shades and errors and especially with suspicions by the various NATO allies and by Brussels. And applauded and praised in Moscow, of course. Moreover, the interview being one taken by professionals, the questions touch Germany's lack of confidence and agreement for the various projects of France evoked by President Macron in an interview, the reluctance of Poland or the Baltic countries and especially isolation of France in the vote against the opening of negotiations with North Macedonia and Albania. The explanations and answers betray the fragility of the theses promoted and Macron's approach to France.

A very interesting area that deserves a more careful approach in the analysis of President Emmanuel Macron's interview is that of technology. Here the need for investment in creativity, research, new technologiesIt is a fully justified one and the approaches of the French president are worth it special attention. Investments in this technological development they must be multiplied beyond the Defense Fund.

And yes, here he resides the acceptable European answer for the part of the interview that discusses the legitimate problems and concerns of the French president: come on let's try to develop the technology, there is to demonstrate the military capacity of the European states through investment – the Pompeo-Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer discussion on the occasion of 30 years since the fall of the Kremlin Wall revealed the ambition to increase Germany's military investment commitment by 2024 to 1.5% and up to 2% in 2032 – and then let's see if NATO is really good, the present and the future US presidents are still employed in the common defense and whether European expeditionary forces are needed to solve France's problems in post-colonial Africa or in promotion and development on the money of the European states of its military industry.

Source link


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here