President Macron regularly emphasizes that he would like France to be a European leader in the field of security, which is confirmed by the peak in Paris and London. The question, however, does he have the right tools for this and, does he intend to use them properly?
As we read in “Le Figaro” On the one hand, Emmanuele Macron tries to mobilize European partners to more active action and take responsibility for themselves and Ukraine, and on the other, he is still trying to extinguish the fire, which was created after the dispute between Donald Trump and Wołodylym. However, it does not seem that this is motivated by trust in the American ally, and more than maintaining his involvement in Ukraine, which gives Europe time.
This is also to be manifested in other aspects. As the French daily rightly notes, President Macron wants to somehow meet the expectations and rebuild the abilities of European countries to self -defense. This gained in importance after visible attempts to get closer between Washington and Moscow, where these actions make efforts in implementing the concept of “Reverse Nixon” – dragging Russia to their side by the USA against China.
However, the French idea will not have a chance to implement without several components. The first is undoubtedly defensive expenses and there is nothing to cheat here – “for three years the Russians have been spending 10% of their GDP on defense. Therefore, we must prepare for the future, “said the president, supporting the proposal to increase these expenditure at least to 3-3.5% GDP (currently in the case of France it is about 2%). A certain gate would be support from the European Union and its funds.
The second issue that appears in the public debate is the ability to deter nuclear deterioration and this is not excluded to the reference of French heads in allied countries. The extension of the protective umbrella should particularly interest the eastern and northern NATO flank, including Polandbecause this is the only element that even the joint actions of the Scandinavian countries and the B9 group will not be able to balance in the near future towards Moscow. The brave step of the French could effectively solve this problem.
The third is a matter of a potential suspension of weapons or peace in Ukraine, where France and Great Britain speak louder about the involvement of the European Army to preserve peace in the East. On the one hand, it raises divisions in societies in Europe, but it can also be a show of allies in Europe and proof of security guarantee for Ukraine. If the involvement in defense of Eastern Europe would look real, then the policy of the force pursued by Russia would have to stop. Here, however, the question arises as to whether these declarations and words will also follow deeds, because at the moment the US present in Europe is necessary.