It’s a bizarre obsession-no one questions France’s and Europe’s freedom to be the master of their destinies the only debate is about what strategic choices maximize the interests of European citizens and countries. It is therefore anachronistic when Macron continues to stress that France has “never been aligned behind or the vassals of any global power” and warns against “becom vassals.” France nowadays has plenty of self-confidence, security, wealth, and global attractiveness. Arguably, that mission has been accomplished. Perhaps the only prominent leader not to have received his attention is North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un.īut for de Gaulle, maximizing French power, including by preserving tactical freedom of maneuver with other great powers, had a clear goal: It was a means of restoring France’s prestige and honor after surrender and collaboration in World War II. President Donald Trump, former Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, Russian President Vladimir Putin, and Chinese President Xi Jinping-is difficult to explain otherwise. His energetic and persistent diplomatic outreach-to former U.S. Macron, like de Gaulle, seems to want to be the man in the arena-any arena, as many arenas as possible, and all the time. Underneath his attention-grabbing rhetoric, Macron’s strategy for Europe is ultimately grounded in a well-established French diplomatic tradition that long predates him: maximizing “France’s strength, influence and independence.” As Macron instructed the country’s ambassadors in September 2022, this is “the primary goal, and sometimes when there is only one goal to follow, that is it.” As much as he talks about European strategic autonomy, that idea is ultimately subordinated to France’s strategic autonomy. Indeed, just as de Gaulle stalled European integration until Paris had its way, Macron has thwarted a genuine EU global strategy from emerging. Macron’s pursuit of Gaullism redux-wrapped in phrases such as “European sovereignty” and “strategic autonomy”-risks paralyzing Europe with a French veto against the emerging strategic consensus. Macron, on the other hand, appears to have drawn inspiration from another Cold War strategic thread: French President Charles de Gaulle’s foreign policy of restoring France’s primacy in Europe, keeping the United States (and its ally, Britain) out of continental affairs, and freely maneuvering with other great powers such as Russia and China. Von der Leyen has vocally defended the above formula, if not in those exact words. It was evident from last month’s simultaneous trip to China by French President Emmanuel Macron and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, whose views could not be more different. Yet there is another, very different outlook that is keeping a common European strategy from coalescing. When EU foreign ministers meet on May 12 to update Europe’s approach toward China, many of them will likely push some variation of this three-pronged strategy. Deep beneath public statements and contentious debates across the European Union, this view likely represents the core beliefs and strategic outlook on which the majority of policymakers have converged since the Russian attack began in February 2022. The strategy that emerged from the discussion was a variation of a Cold War-era theme: Keep Russia down, the United States in, and authoritarian China out. They asked incisive questions on three geopolitical topics-Russia, China, and the West-moving seamlessly from the big picture to tactics and logistics. We support scholars who conduct rigorous research to identify and evaluate optimal policy solutions.Several weeks ago, I was invited to brief officials in a major Central European country conducting a national strategic review in light of Russia’s ongoing war against Ukraine. Our foreign policy should be based on facts and reasoned, scientific inquiry, not idealistic assumptions about the world. It is also vitally important that our veterans, who have sacrificed so much implementing our country’s foreign policy, do not suffer from internal and external barriers inhibiting the realization of their potential. foreign policy should be characterized by a grand strategy of realism and restraint, free trade, and diplomacy focused on articulating - but not imposing - liberal values and the advantages of a society of equal rights and mutual benefit.ĭeveloping and applying a better grand strategy will make the United States safer, secure the conditions of our prosperity, and protect our liberal democratic system here at home. This approach undermines our security and saps our strength. But our foreign policy relies too often on the use of military force - asking our service members to do too much in too many places. The United States needs a strong military to keep the nation safe.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |