France Foreign Policy and Diplomacy

GarryB wrote:

In this context, do these events on the opposite sides of Eurasia make the term "WWII" also wrong?

WWII was not limited to Europe... it was a truly global war so should have been called WWI... what we called WWI should have been called the four year war of europe.

The USSR as well plays little to no role. France had relative small damage during WW II compared to WW I.

Yeah, they changed sides faster than a cheese eating surrender monkey would...

At the moment we also plan to improve relations with Russia.

I expect your wish could come true because the only reason there are bad relations with Russia is because the west are a bunch of .

Of course knowing the EU you will fuck it up by demanding that Russia admits to all its past crimes like killing that nobody in the UK and shooting down planes they didn't shoot down and of course invading the Ukraine but never actually taking Kiev even after years of supposed interference... and Putin will say he wants better relations but not on those terms and France will either drop that shit and just normalise relations and start making money again or it will get all prissy and claim there is no communicating with criminals that wont admit they are criminals...

Our enemy is China. Our rival is USA. And that principle is not dependend on who is president. Macron and Le Pen have same opinion about that. French foreign politics were never shaped who ruled
France.

And that will be your problem going forward because as far as Russia is concerned China is ready to do business and the EU and the US are not... China is not the problem... the west is... mainly coming from the US, but the EU is just a mouthpiece of the US anyway.

It will also have nuclear weapons stationed there in near future. Protect the south pacific against China and secure Australia and New Zealand.

Ahhh fuck off... we are not fucking idiot drones like the french or british or american public... nuclear weapons are a threat not a guarantee of peace... they would be an escalation and a huge step in the wrong direction and France is arrogant and ignorant to the opinions of others to put them here anyway... despite how counter productive they are.

Since the referendum made clear that it stays France, we will see some great investment there. Same can be said about French Polynesia

For how long...

Russia won't improve relations with Paris at the expense of her relations with Beijing. W/o good relations with China, forget it.

From a Russian perspective the EU and China and the US are all potential trade partners... Russia is not best buddies with any of them and none of them have Russias back, but of the three the US is the worst and the Chinese are the easiest to work with and deal with... the EU is unreliable and needs permission from the US even to build ships and pipelines...

2. France is only nuclear power in EU. By EU nuclear weapons, we mean a program that widens our arsenal.

Now the UK has left I rather suspect Germany will start wanting nuclear weapons now too...

3. You obviously dont know Australia well. They hate the chinese. Chinese are seen as very negative in Australia, as enemy in many areas and more and more hostilities arise. What France can offer? Nuclear protection in the future war im the pacific, which will happen anyways.

Yeah, they are some of the most racist  around... only South Africans and the Dutch are worse/more open about it.... but they also make a lot of money sending coal and other materials to China... China is a major export customer of Australia and they know that too, so the racist banter about skin colour and the shape of the eyelids will be toned down in public while those links are working.

What makes u think they don't hate u behind ur back?

Of course they hate the French... and the Germans... they tend to mock the british more than hate them... you will hear them talk about whinging poms... they like to beat them at cricket and rugby the most.

I am not a great fan of sport... as far as I am concerned I would rather play than just sit and watch... really don't understand the western culture of sitting on your ass watching other people play a game... they even watch video games being played by others... weird... but I do like to see the English win the Ashes Cricket series against Australia.

The end effect will be like japan in WW II. A big war in pacific is inevitable so it will be good to be prepared.

No it isn't... with the new silk routes China is creating trade between China and Europe wont be able to be cut with a naval blockade... but even if you could China has a large enough internal market that it could survive indefinitely being completely blocked off... which is not going to happen anyway.

China does not need to expand out into the Pacific looking for resources to steal... the military damage and the economic damage would exceed any resources they could acquire putting them in a much worse position than they are in now with sanctions.

Of course most of the sanctions are coming from the US, which will make China more independent of the US and its control... which is good for China in the long term... eventually the US will no longer dictate to anyone... eventually the EU will grow a pair and the UK might gather together its former commonwealth as a united group with power... or it might just shrink to nothing... either way the wests current power will radically diminish and to be clear its actual power is much less than its perceived power appears to be even today... everything it touches seems to go south... Syria to get rid of Assad, Libya to get rid of Gaddafi, Iraq to get rid of Saddam, Afghanistan to get rid of the Taleban and Al Quada... the result is enormously boosted Russian and Iranian presence in Syria, Gaddafi and Saddam gone but Libya in chaos spewing refugees into Europe, and Iraq largely sympathetic to Iran and growing more anti western every day... and justifiably so... and of course Afghanistan is the same old same old... no American miracle of peace and democracy after over a decade of war and death...

Seems everything the west touches these days turns to shit.

The massive trade opportunities Australia had with Japan did not change the fact that they dismissed them long before WW 2 broke out.

That said, New Caledonia will always be France. Majority population is continental french. Like me. And we place our weapons where we want them. New Zealand is our friend, so you profit from us too.

New Zealand is our friend, so you profit from us too.

No we aren't... we know what ruthless petty bastards you are... we have not forgotten.

You don't actually think you can behave the way you do and it will be all forgive and forget?

Now the UK is out of the EU I expect they will start trying to get back in touch with its commonwealth... they will likely also get a bit more friendly with China and Russia and if they do I can imagine the panic in the EU if the UK start trading with Russia and start winning some of those juicy infrastructure contracts they have on the books... hopefully most will go to Russian and Chinese companies or joint venture companies... at least they wont pull any sanctions shit.

GarryB wrote:

New Zealand is our friend, so you profit from us too.

No we aren't... we know what ruthless petty bastards you are... we have not forgotten.

You don't actually think you can behave the way you do and it will be all forgive and forget?

Now the UK is out of the EU I expect they will start trying to get back in touch with its commonwealth... they will likely also get a bit more friendly with China and Russia and if they do I can imagine the panic in the EU if the UK start trading with Russia and start winning some of those juicy infrastructure contracts they have on the books... hopefully most will go to Russian and Chinese companies or joint venture companies... at least they wont pull any sanctions shit.

There is no country more anti russian than UK. So your pipedream is just that.

And yes, New Zealand is our friend. Many tourists in New Caledonia and Polynesia are New Zealanders.

If ýou have not forgive and forgotten, why come here and spend much money?

There is no country more anti russian than UK. So your pipedream is just that.

Fundamentally I agree, normally there would be little chance of improved relations with Russia for a UK safely nestled into the bossom of the EU market, but beggars can't be choosers and there is no way British industry can ignore the Russian market... especially while the US and EU are bound by sanctions to stay out...

The Brits hate the Germans and the French at a pretty fundamental level but joined the EU quickly enough... They also turn their noses up at the Americans... listen to Jeremy Clarkson talk about American cars and while you might think that is an extreme view... he is very popular in the UK and many other places... not so much Australia now though...

And yes, New Zealand is our friend. Many tourists in New Caledonia and Polynesia are New Zealanders.

Lots of New Zealand tourists go to Auschwitz too... do you think we love nazis?

If ýou have not forgive and forgotten, why come here and spend much money?

Going to a pleasant destination and having a nice holiday is not related to friendship... they are not staying there for free and they wouldn't get much for free. It is a purely commercial arrangement... being friends or not being friends doesn't come in to it.

Exactly. Many Israelis used to go or still going to Egypt's Red Sea resorts & other places w/o having any strong love for Egyptians who enslaved Hebrews for 400 years according to the Old Testament, & fought a few wars with Israel. The same with Russians going to Turkey with which they had over a dozen of wars.
Only the 1 who never been young never been a fool, at least sometimes.

GarryB wrote:

There is no country more anti russian than UK. So your pipedream is just that.

Fundamentally I agree, normally there would be little chance of improved relations with Russia for a UK safely nestled into the bossom of the EU market, but beggars can't be choosers and there is no way British industry can ignore the Russian market... especially while the US and EU are bound by sanctions to stay out...

The Brits hate the Germans and the French at a pretty fundamental level but joined the EU quickly enough... They also turn their noses up at the Americans... listen to Jeremy Clarkson talk about American cars and while you might think that is an extreme view... he is very popular in the UK and many other places... not so much Australia now though...

And yes, New Zealand is our friend. Many tourists in New Caledonia and Polynesia are New Zealanders.

Lots of New Zealand tourists go to Auschwitz too... do you think we love nazis?

If ýou have not forgive and forgotten, why come here and spend much money?

Going to a pleasant destination and having a nice holiday is not related to friendship... they are not staying there for free and they wouldn't get much for free. It is a purely commercial arrangement... being friends or not being friends doesn't come in to it.

The brits dont hate the germans and us french. Its antipathy at a core level. We dislike the brits. They dislike us. Same stands for the Germans. With russia its different and you know that.

I dont know what new zealand tourists do at auschwitz. Here they let their girls get drilled from us french guys, party, do sea sports, hiking, diving.

New Zealand girls love us. Same counts for aussie girls. Look at our south coast is a island called Île des Pins. Its like paradise. Infront are many smaller islands like Moro and Brosse. Lots of Aussie and Kiwi girls come here, are blinded by the amazing nature and our charme and looks. They are easy to hook up so i doubt they hate us.

GarryB wrote:The Brits hate the Germans and the French at a pretty fundamental level ...

They hate the French coz the French are Catholics. But they certainly do not hate the Germans.

GarryB wrote:They also turn their noses up at the Americans... listen to Jeremy Clarkson talk about American cars and while you might think that is an extreme view

Brits love Americans. Why would they hate their fellow Anglo-Saxons? Jeremy Clarkson and a few people like him are outliers.

PRISM (surveillance program) stands testimony to the deep bonds between US and UK. The only country US sells nuclear weapons, subs is UK.

Ask any American who their closest friends/allies are and they will say Canada, UK and Australia.

The brits dont hate the germans and us french. Its antipathy at a core level. We dislike the brits. They dislike us. Same stands for the Germans. With russia its different and you know that.

I can't believe you don't get this Aris... you of all people... when you talk about hating Indians or this or that other ethnic group when you are on holiday in those places do you tell all of them how you feel... or do you pretend not to hate them in the interests of both self preservation and having a good time...

There is a western phrase that when in a bad situation to grin and bear it... it basically means making the best of a bad situation... if you tell them truly what you think things could go rather bad for you so you smile and be polite and keep your thoughts to yourself.

Imagine you have a loud boorish American... he is hardly going to stop being a prick because you... a complete stranger tells him what a prick he is being... he comes to France to explore the place and when you ask him where he wants to eat to get the real feel of Paris he says he wants to go to McDonalds...

Most people around the world are polite and friendly to an individual that hasn't offended them yet... if they are quiet and polite and friendly things can go well... be a prick and you end up with someone saying "Don't mention the war"...

People lie.

It is after they come back and what they tell their friends about their trip where you find out something like the truth...

Here they let their girls get drilled from us french guys, party, do sea sports, hiking, diving.

Some girls just want to have fun. Don't read too much in to that.

New Zealand girls love us. Same counts for aussie girls. Look at our south coast is a island called Île des Pins. Its like paradise. Infront are many smaller islands like Moro and Brosse. Lots of Aussie and Kiwi girls come here, are blinded by the amazing nature and our charme and looks. They are easy to hook up so i doubt they hate us.

Hahaha... that is no way to judge what they really think... they are just having a good time.

They hate the French coz the French are Catholics. But they certainly do not hate the Germans.

Nah... these days most westerners are athiests... religion is just something else that makes them different and easier to not understand, but it is the history of wars and conflicts that create the mistrust and fundamental dislike.

Brits love Americans.

America is the overbearing big brother who controls the whole world in a way the Brits never did despite their enormous empire... love is the wrong word...

Why would they hate their fellow Anglo-Saxons?

Why do they dismiss Australians as ex-convicts?

Jeremy Clarkson and a few people like him are outliers.

He is very popular and one of the things he is popular for is for saying things many brits think but can't say out loud themselves...

PRISM (surveillance program) stands testimony to the deep bonds between US and UK. The only country US sells nuclear weapons, subs is UK.

Yeah, New Zealand is part of all that shit too but for the last 30 odd years the US has refused to send ships to visit here because of our anti nuclear policy.

We are part of the five eyes network because the secret bases at Waihopi snoop on the radio communication traffic across the Pacific and South Asia, but especially when we have a Labour government we don't always follow the demands of the US or mother (UK)... and why should we?

Ask any American who their closest friends/allies are and they will say Canada, UK and Australia.

A pimp loves his hoes because they help him make money... an American would like those countries because they speak almost the same language and have a culture bombarded by US culture long enough to enable them to get McDonalds and KFC...

GarryB wrote:

The brits dont hate the germans and us french. Its antipathy at a core level. We dislike the brits. They dislike us. Same stands for the Germans. With russia its different and you know that.

I can't believe you don't get this Aris... you of all people... when you talk about hating Indians or this or that other ethnic group when you are on holiday in those places do you tell all of them how you feel... or do you pretend not to hate them in the interests of both self preservation and having a good time...

There is a western phrase that when in a bad situation to grin and bear it... it basically means making the best of a bad situation... if you tell them truly what you think things could go rather bad for you so you smile and be polite and keep your thoughts to yourself.

Imagine you have a loud boorish American... he is hardly going to stop being a prick because you... a complete stranger tells him what a prick he is being... he comes to France to explore the place and when you ask him where he wants to eat to get the real feel of Paris he says he wants to go to McDonalds...

Most people around the world are polite and friendly to an individual that hasn't offended them yet... if they are quiet and polite and friendly things can go well... be a prick and you end up with someone saying "Don't mention the war"...

People lie.

It is after they come back and what they tell their friends about their trip where you find out something like the truth...

Here they let their girls get drilled from us french guys, party, do sea sports, hiking, diving.

Some girls just want to have fun. Don't read too much in to that.

New Zealand girls love us. Same counts for aussie girls. Look at our south coast is a island called Île des Pins. Its like paradise. Infront are many smaller islands like Moro and Brosse. Lots of Aussie and Kiwi girls come here, are blinded by the amazing nature and our charme and looks. They are easy to hook up so i doubt they hate us.

Hahaha... that is no way to judge what they really think... they are just having a good time.

They hate the French coz the French are Catholics. But they certainly do not hate the Germans.

Nah... these days most westerners are athiests... religion is just something else that makes them different and easier to not understand, but it is the history of wars and conflicts that create the mistrust and fundamental dislike.

Brits love Americans.

America is the overbearing big brother who controls the whole world in a way the Brits never did despite their enormous empire... love is the wrong word...

Why would they hate their fellow Anglo-Saxons?

Why do they dismiss Australians as ex-convicts?

Jeremy Clarkson and a few people like him are outliers.

He is very popular and one of the things he is popular for is for saying things many brits think but can't say out loud themselves...

PRISM (surveillance program) stands testimony to the deep bonds between US and UK. The only country US sells nuclear weapons, subs is UK.

Yeah, New Zealand is part of all that shit too but for the last 30 odd years the US has refused to send ships to visit here because of our anti nuclear policy.

We are part of the five eyes network because the secret bases at Waihopi snoop on the radio communication traffic across the Pacific and South Asia, but especially when we have a Labour government we don't always follow the demands of the US or mother (UK)... and why should we?

Ask any American who their closest friends/allies are and they will say Canada, UK and Australia.

A pimp loves his hoes because they help him make money... an American would like those countries because they speak almost the same language and have a culture bombarded by US culture long enough to enable them to get McDonalds and KFC...

Your problem Gary is that you know not much about Europe nor your close nieghbors down in pacific.

What i dont understand is your bitterness. Why so bitter and frustrated?

Hahaha... you are young... you don't understand.... give it time... being told something is not the same as experiencing it for yourself...

Being told something like what it was like during WWII is nothing like what it is to experience it... the constant stress and fear... the real hatred for your enemies... not matter how you tell that to others they wont understand fully... they will just hear stories about how bad this or that country was and hear numbers... it is not the same when some of those numbers are your friends and family...

GarryB wrote:Hahaha... you are young... you don't understand.... give it time... being told something is not the same as experiencing it for yourself...

Being told something like what it was like during WWII is nothing like what it is to experience it... the constant stress and fear... the real hatred for your enemies... not matter how you tell that to others they wont understand fully... they will just hear stories about how bad this or that country was and hear numbers... it is not the same when some of those numbers are your friends and family...

We have no hate for the Germans. They suffered after WW I which led to WW II. France learned from it and we reached them our hand.

George1 wrote:France threatens Turkey with sanctions: ‘No country has any illusions about Erdogan and his regime’

https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/france-threatens-turkey-with-sanctions-no-country-has-any-illusions-about-erdogan-and-his-regime/

Carrot and stick approach to "diplomacy". NATzO is not really prepared to punish Turkey. It needs it as a strategic asset.

kvs wrote:

George1 wrote:France threatens Turkey with sanctions: ‘No country has any illusions about Erdogan and his regime’

https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/france-threatens-turkey-with-sanctions-no-country-has-any-illusions-about-erdogan-and-his-regime/

Carrot and stick approach to "diplomacy".   NATzO is not really prepared to punish Turkey.  It needs it as a strategic asset.

Although I'm not too optimistic, for what's it's worth it's a start. Macron was groomed just like Pussynian as a Soros stooge, but has at least verbally (maybe not actions-wise) shifted from social engineering and Russian demonizing (typical Soros stooge diatribe), to being more hostile to the social engineering and to almost never speaking ill of Russia. He rarely speaks bad about Russia these days, and I guess you have to start from nowhere to get somewhere.  

I'm not getting my hopes up too soon, at the end of the day actions speak louder than words. He need's to lift a finger and undo the royal fuckup that Sarkozy was responsible for in Libya. France needs to get up off it's ass and help the Egyptians in Libya for starters. Once that happens I'll start to believe, but until then I'm not holding my breath.

I am going to give him some credit for not frothing at the mouth like most of the NATzO Russia haters. But France and Germany
are still US colonies and the Navalny farce shows it. They actually imposed sanctions without any evidence of anything. Even
if Navalny got novichoked this does not prove Putin did it since the alleged nerve agent (which is no such thing as it does not
produce any symptoms of nerve damage) is not a secret Kremlin formula but available in the public domain. So Smerkel and Micron
needed to prove the actual application of the agent was an action of Putin which clearly they couldn't. To this day they refuse
to even present their non-evidence at the OPCW.

This is like Fox News being pro-Trump and anti-establishment, it is part of the farce to control both sides of the narrative, until the right time comes and masks fall off. Micron is a sock puppet, and if he ever stops being one, I will be happy to swallow my words

When the EU develops a pair of balls and can have their own opinion without having to ask Washington what to say and how to act then they might be worth talking to, but until then there is no point talking to the west.

As the article above shows with Erdogan... the west only knows demands with threats and ultimatums like sanctions.

They don't know what diplomacy even is.

"We have proof': Mali's premier accuses France of training terrorists operating in the African country, 08/10/2021.

Mali's PM blamed France for the formation of an enclave in the Malian city of Kidal, which he later handed over to a terrorist group.

France is responsible for the formation of terrorist groups operating in Mali, and Bamaco has evidence, the prime minister of the Malian transitional government, Choguel Kokalla Maiga, told Sputnik.

"The terrorists who are present in Mali came from Libya. And who destroyed the state of Libya? France with the allies. When the state of Mali began collaborating with France on intervention in Mali to fight terrorism, we asked them to help with intelligence data and air support. No one spoke of sending military personnel ashore, " the PM said.

Mali's PM stressed that France respected agreement in the cities of Konna, Gao, Timbuktu. But when the French militants approached the city of Kidal, they forbade the entry of Malian soldiers.

The French troops created an enclave and handed it over to a movement formed from the representatives of Ansar Dine, which collaborates with Al-Qaeda (terrorist organization banned in Russia and several other countries), revealed Choguel Kokalla Maiga.

"Mali does not have access to Kidal, it is an enclave controlled by France. They have armed groups trained by French officers. And we have proof of that, " according to the Premier.

Days ago, the Malian Foreign Ministry called France's ambassador to the country due to the "hostile statements" of French President Emmanuel Macron against Mali.

Mali called on the French authorities to maintain restraint and a constructive approach based on mutual respect to focus, inter alia, on the fight against terrorism in the Sahel region.

Earlier, Macron stated that it was thanks to France's operations in the Sahel region that terrorists did not seize power in Mali.

Yandex Translate from Portuguese

https://br.sputniknews.com/oriente_medio_africa/2021100818102643-temos-provas-premie-do-mali-acusa-franca-de-treinar-terroristas-atuam-pais-africano/

Macron fussed too late, by Dmitry Bavyrin for VZGLYAD. 11.27.2022.

French President Emmanuel Macron has been busier than usual lately. He quarreled with all the allies of Paris and is ready to take the conflict with Moscow to a new level, demanding that Russia be punished for the blackout in Ukraine. What goals does he pursue? And why can we confidently say that he will not achieve any goals?

“We are ready to accept such statements only if similar statements condemn Ukrainian artillery attacks on civilian objects and on residential premises in the Donbass, which have been taking place since 2014. We have not heard a single condemnation from the leadership of France.”

With these words, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov commented on a tweet by French President Emmanuel Macron that  strikes on Ukraine's energy networks  are a Russian crime that should be punished.

At the same time, Macron said that he was planning a conversation with Vladimir Putin. According to Peskov, Vladimir Putin is not scheduled to have a telephone conversation with Macron.

This is not the first time that they don’t pick up the phone in Moscow, although before Macron hung on the phone for hours, and they seemed to be interested in his opinion. Now they are obviously not interested.

Theoretically, the President of France should have understood this himself, because the hint turned out to be more transparent than ever. Commenting on a conversation with a colleague whose privacy was violated by the French side for an unknown purpose, Putin said he changed his approach to talking with Macron because of this "indecent" act.

Simply put, everything, that's it. Before there was trust – Putin and Macron even called each other “you”, but there is no more trust, and any conversation has become a formality. The advantage of building a "special" relationship with Russia by the incumbent French president is lost forever.

However, Macron may still not understand this. In general, he has been acting strangely lately - fussing and making paradoxical statements. And now: a phone call to Moscow is, according to his logic, what is a form of punishment?  
In any case, he is now in conflict with everyone, not only with Russia.

Macron is quarreling with France's former first friend,  Germany  , over the impossibility of agreeing on a joint fight against the energy crisis, since now everyone is on their own. He is blocking the appointment of a Briton as  NATO Secretary General , since relations between Paris and London have reached a breaking point under him. He openly complains about US economic policy and gathers French business captains to dissuade them from moving to America.

Turkey, China, Brazil, Saudi Arabia. Here is a far from complete list of influential countries whose governments are in conflict with Macron.

Against the backdrop of all-round swearing, the financial crisis that had previously spared her finally reached France  . In addition, it turned out that the army of the Fifth Republic  was not fully operational .

Macron fusses and rushes about - “Figaro is here, Figaro is there” - precisely because he almost does not succeed. Wherever you spit - either a failure or a missed opportunity, which does not correspond to Macron's enthusiastic opinion about himself and about France (in which he is not original, like almost any Frenchman).

France is a superpower on the minimum wage, but still a superpower: with overseas territories, nuclear weapons, its own military-industrial complex, a powerful economy, national brands of world fame. However, French pride in the past is not reflected in the present: Paris wants to lead, but remains led.

The question is no longer what kind of policy should be pursued. Lead you at least some, as long as it leads to the goal and meets the French ambitions, but Macron consistently missed opportunities, bled trump cards, lost chances. Not a leader, but a misunderstanding.

With a clear conscience, he cannot be called a complete political loser. In the end, he was able to be re-elected president of France, and the French do not allow everyone to do this. But in the second and last term, when you need to think not about re-election, but about a contribution to history, it became clear that Macron's contribution would be negative. Not a deposit, but a loan.

Taking advantage  of France's "special" relations  with Russia and the trust between their leaders, he could claim (and deservedly, which is a rarity in our time) for the Nobel Peace Prize. For example, if he forced Kyiv to comply with the Minsk agreements. Or if he led the "doves" of the European Union - those to whom the strategy of "war with Russia to the last Ukrainian" initially seemed harmful.

If Paris takes a constructive position, Moscow is usually ready to give the laurels of a peacekeeper from Europe to him, as was the case in the case of the war with Georgia and in the interaction on Karabakh in the 1990s. But instead of being constructive and far-sighted, for years Macron tried to “talk his teeth”, as if the Donbass problem could resolve itself, and then published confidential negotiations with a mysterious goal - and finally lost any chance of mediation.

If you don't want to play together with Russia, you can play for another camp if the main task is to play effectively. The goal is rotten, of course, but it was possible to make France the leader of the anti-Russian forces and the main ally of the United States in Europe, which, for example, Nicolas Sarkozy aspired to and what Boris Johnson achieved for his country.

But thanks precisely to Johnson,  we know that Macron did not believe in the beginning of the NWO at all, relying, probably, on his exceptional charm as a useless "messenger of peace." On the other hand, he believed in France’s ability to lead Europe, and in general, it turned out that for NATO allies, Macron is also now a capricious and muddy type who cannot be trusted, but who can be “thrown” indicatively. As was the case, for example, with the contract for the  construction of nuclear submarines for Australia.

If ambitions were slightly tempered to the national level, Macron could at least try to save the national economy from the consequences of geopolitical upheavals, as Hungary did. But the main means of stopping the outflow of industry in its pursuit of profitability were complaints against the United States and personal persuasions of the president. Macron's faith in his own irresistibility is indestructible, although it fails him time after time.

What can I say: the Africans -  and they now do not respect. 

The person who is going to "punish" Russia has charm, financial competence, ambitions. What is missing is the correspondence to the position held - the president of a superpower on the minimum wage, but still a superpower.

He himself wants to go down in history, the people and status demand the same from him. The result is a complete disappointment, a dull planid.

Loudly complaining about universal injustice, trail in the wake of the United States. Promising the nation the most powerful army on the continent, calling for savings on the temperature in the houses. Talking about "punishing Russia", begging for a telephone conversation with Moscow.

This is not the kind of France we respected.

https://vz.ru/world/2022/11/27/1188234.html

How Biden had to disappoint Macron, by Valeria Verbinina for VZGLYAD. 12.03.2022.

The grand and extremely expensive dinner appears to be the highlight of French President Emmanuel Macron's visit to the United States. But the purpose of the trip was not at all in search of gastronomic pleasures. What was Macron trying to convince Biden of and why was he sorely disappointed in the end?

President Macron's three-day visit to the United States ends in nothing. The pro-government press, which in France is trained to present any - even the smallest - success with fanfare and pomp, discusses the nth wave of covid and possible power outages with exaggerated attention. As if there was no visit on which such hopes were placed.

Macron hoped he could persuade Joe Biden to reconsider or at least soften some of the provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act, passed a few months ago, a $430 billion aid package that encourages American production and the relocation of industrial enterprises to the United States, as well as environmentally friendly production. As Le Figaro writes , the law "combines environmental progressivism and industrial nationalism" and also harms European economies, as it puts American industry in deliberately privileged conditions.

In the EU, it was regarded as "a potential threat to the labor market and economic prosperity in Europe and beyond." It was hoped that Macron would convince Biden to reconsider or at least soften this law. In addition, Macron was dissatisfied with the  extremely high prices for liquefied gas that the United States supplies to Europe. Therefore, the voyage of the French president in the United States was given such importance - and the disappointment became so sharp.

Of course, they write and talk about Macron's visit, but not on the front pages and, as it were, reluctantly. For example, Le Monde records Macron's trip to Louisiana and  recalls that this territory, originally French, was sold to the United States by Napoleon Bonaparte in 1803 and that de Gaulle last visited New Orleans in 1960 - names that subtly hint to the reader that Macron sort of like a successor to their cause and also the head of the country.

However, Macron is unlikely to benefit from such a neighborhood: one can have different attitudes towards de Gaulle, and even more so towards Napoleon, but these were really independent politicians, and under them France was stronger than ever. Under Macron, it is increasingly slipping into the position of a second-rate European power.

In Louisiana, Le Monde continues, the president announced the launch of the French for All Foundation, designed to “support the learning of the French language wherever it is present in the United States, from elementary school to university, and especially among the disadvantaged, who can gain new knowledge through the French language. career opportunities". Macron is accompanied by director Claude Lelouch and dancer Benjamin Millepied (why only them? What, at least there were no writers?). Foreign Secretary Catherine Colonna and Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards are also due to sign an energy transition agreement.

Another article praises the firmness of Macron, who felt it was his duty to warn Biden against the "split in the Western world" that he provokes. But you can be as firm as you like and utter big words, but you won’t achieve anything. Poll Le Figaro in this sense is very eloquent: as of 18:00 December 2 (Moscow time)

to the question “was the visit of Emmanuel Macron to the USA useful?” only slightly more than 36% of respondents answered positively. More than 63% think not.

At the same time, Le Figaro itself cannot be attributed to the opposition: she  writes that Macron was received at the highest level, that the presidents agreed to help Ukraine (as if they had some disagreements on this point before), that both consider China a threat and approve of Iranians protesting against their regime. “We must again become brothers in arms,” the French president said. “Emmanuel Macron was received on Thursday at the White House as the best friend of the United States,”  writes a special correspondent for the publication in Washington.

In fact, there is so little to brag about that the site puts a link to Madame Figaro, which discusses the dress of Macron's companion, and describes in detail the reception in honor of the arrival of the French president. 350 guests in tuxedos and evening gowns, including billionaire Bernard Arnault, actress Jennifer Garner and director Baz Luhrmann, an orchestra that played the Marseillaise, a magnificent menu that included lobsters, caviar and champagne, an extremely festive atmosphere, toasts, gifts with which presidents were exchanged - all this splendor cost the American treasury, as they say, half a million dollars. But for all Biden's outward courtesy, the matter was limited to her only.

Le Point is also delighted with the reception, but still does not hide the fact that "Paris does not stop worrying about the question of industry." Perhaps the most curious of all at the moment was Liberation. “At the White House, Macron saw that the glass of friendship was half full,” reads the headline. "Arriving without much expectation, (the president) leaves with little to nothing."

As an unnamed Élysée adviser put it, "He's not here to ask for anything... He's here to point out a problem and find a solution." Well, the problem has been identified, but so far it is not clear that the Americans were going to retreat at least in some way.

An unnamed person from the entourage of French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire, who also took part in the trip, makes a good face on a bad game: “The Americans noticed that the decisions they made could affect European industry, while this is not at all their goal.”

“I have absolutely no intention of apologizing for the law we passed,” Biden said coolly.

Nevertheless, he promised to correct "certain shortcomings" of the law without mentioning any details, which in reality means the maximum of minor concessions that France still has to achieve.

Yes, Macron has absolutely nothing to brag about. And that is why the French press, with such zeal, rushes to divert the attention of the layman to anything, just not to openly admit that the visit to the United States, despite all the signs of friendship and big words, turned out to be the most common fiasco.

https://vz.ru/world/2022/12/3/1189382.html

The EU should be thanking the US for cutting them off from cheap reliable energy supplies from Russia, the very least the US can do now is pinch their industries so they don't have to burn too much expensive US LNG so the EU wont freeze so early in winter each year.

From the EU perspective, things are starting to look dangerously close to Stockholm syndrome.

Experts explain Macron's violation of the military taboo in Ukraine,  by Alena Zadorozhnaya for VZGLYAD. 01.07.2023.

Political scientist Kortunov: Macron is trying to demonstrate to the West that he adheres to a common line on the issue of Ukraine.

Emmanuel Macron decided to demonstrate his commitment to the line of the West. However, now there is a threat of a direct clash between NATO and Russia. This opinion was expressed by Senator Alexei Pushkov and political scientist Andrei Kortunov. Earlier, The Telegraph reported that the French President, by his decision to transfer wheeled tanks to Ukraine, violated an unspoken military taboo.

“In the West, there is a general trend of a gradual and, as they see it, cautious expansion of military support for Ukraine. This is especially true recently, when the situation of the Armed Forces of Ukraine has become seriously complicated, ”Andrey Kortunov, director general of the Russian International Affairs Council (RIAC), told the VZGLYAD newspaper.

“One can argue how much Macron is “running ahead of the engine,” since similar decisions are now, apparently, being made in both Berlin and Washington. But if we talk about the President of France, then his position is in some sense special, ”the expert continued.

“For several months, Macron has repeatedly spoken about the need for dialogue between Moscow and Kyiv, as well as taking into account Russia's position on security issues in Europe. In this regard, he became the object of criticism from more radical Western politicians. And now he is just trying to demonstrate that France is ready to follow the general line of the West,” the interlocutor suggests.

“At the same time, Macron will not be able to get any political points inside France, since the French are switching to solving their internal problems. Everything that the president could take from Ukraine, he has already taken,” the political scientist noted.

Kortunov also doubted that the supply of offensive weapons to Ukraine would soon become a system. “The process will be divided into several stages,” he specified.

“Firstly, we should not forget that the West does not want to allow Russia to win. But too serious achievements of Ukraine are not good for them. Secondly, there are a number of bureaucratic procedures that create obstacles to the free transfer of such equipment. In particular, many countries will need the approval of parliaments for this,” the expert draws attention.

“There is also the issue of logistics. After all, the more complex weapons are supplied, the harder it is to deliver them, as well as to train the Ukrainian military to use them. There are certain limits that can gradually shift. But the process is not instantaneous, it requires time and money,” the political scientist assured.

“Under these conditions, Russia needs to understand that despite all sorts of disagreements, the West remains united and some escalation risks are quite possible. Moscow has enough options on how to contain them. Our country has opportunities to complicate the life of our geopolitical opponents,” Kortunov emphasized.

In turn, Senator Alexei Pushkov pointed out in his Telegram channel that the mere fact of the transfer of infantry fighting vehicles would not change the course of hostilities . However, according to him, it could become a prologue to the supply of other offensive types of weapons to Ukraine, which is fraught with drawing NATO into a direct military confrontation with Russia.

The senator added that Macron's decision also says a lot about the mood in the European elite and the degree of their bitterness against Russia.

Earlier, the British newspaper The Telegraph wrote that French President Emmanuel Macron, by his decision to transfer AMX-10 RC infantry fighting vehicles to Ukraine, violated an unspoken military taboo.

Columnists Joe Barnes and Nick Gutteridge note that Paris was the first to send Western-made combat vehicles to Kyiv, unexpectedly breaking an unspoken military taboo by crossing a red line. They also added that Macron's initiative surpassed the United States, Germany and Britain, which was among the leaders in the military support of Ukraine.

The French President announced the decision to transfer equipment in the middle of this week. He also promised new deliveries of CAESAR howitzers. At the same time, it is still not known how many cars can be discussed.

Against this background, French Foreign Minister Catherine Colonna said on Thursday that Paris considers it its duty to provide military assistance to Ukraine, writes TASS . However, such actions, the diplomat is sure, will not make France an accomplice in the conflict.

“Our goal now is to ensure order and stability in the world in order to create conditions under which everyone can live in a stable and peaceful atmosphere,” Colonna said.

President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky said the delivery showed that there were no "rational reasons" not to transfer Western-style tanks. He also called Macron's decision a clear  signal  to all of Ukraine's allies.

Recall that the AMX-10 RC combat vehicle was developed in the 1970s to track the advance of the Soviet armed ground forces. It was used as a reconnaissance vehicle and tank destroyer by French troops, including during Operation Barkhane in Africa, which officially ended in November last year.

According to Western experts, the maneuverability and speed of the AMX-10 RC allows it to strike quickly. The vehicle can be deployed ahead of a column of main battle tanks during military operations. However, its relatively light armor, recognized in the West, is a significant disadvantage over heavy Russian guns.

https://vz.ru/news/2023/1/7/1193984.html

Russia's success in Africa made France nervous, by Valeria Verbinina for VZGLYAD. 03.02.2023.

French leader Emmanuel Macron went on a large-scale visit to a number of African countries - for the second time in the past six months. This visit takes place against the backdrop of public humiliation to which Africans are subjecting France right now, and to the groans of French politicians about “Russian imperialism”. What is happening really has a direct bearing on Russia.

French President Macron's ground is on fire. Failures in domestic policy are superimposed on failures in foreign policy.

France persistently tried to offer itself as a negotiator in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, but was rejected as a country supplying weapons to one of the parties. French influence in Africa is also fading before our eyes - the former colonies, one after another, show the French the door in a more or less insulting way.

The Central African Republic and Mali, without much ceremony, put up the French contingents that were in these countries, and the government of Burkina Faso generally decided to denounce the Military Assistance Treaty, which was concluded in Paris on April 24, 1961. However, perhaps the most bitter thing for the French was the fact that, as they cease to be reckoned with in the territory that they used to consider their zone of influence, Russia's influence is growing. Thus, the place of the French military is taken by representatives of the Wagner PMC, and Russian businessmen get an advantage over the French.

Perhaps all this would not have had such a resonance if things were going well in France itself - after all, Macron's homeland is not the first former empire to lose its power and leverage. However, in France, the situation is heating up due to the stalled pension reform, which has led to increased tension in society and a drop in the popularity of both the president himself and his entourage.

Despite all the efforts of local political strategists, the French cannot be convinced that working for two years is more beneficial for health and wallets. Trade unions have already announced that on March 7 - and in fact from 19:00 on March 6 - they will start a new strike, tightening its conditions. Rémy Aufrère-Privel, a spokesman for the transport union UNSA Ferroviaire, went so far as to threaten a 10-day strike and a transport blockade of Paris for at least two weekends. The unions also called for a complete shutdown of schools, oil refineries, scavengers and to reduce the supply of electricity.

It must be admitted that under such conditions, Macron's African tour turned up extremely well. And there is nothing to complain about: the president intends to visit four states located in the central part of Africa - Gabon, Angola and both Congos. (For those who don't know, there are already two Congos - the Republic of the Congo and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The first is a former colony of France with the capital Brazzaville, the population is 5.5 million people, the second is the former colony of Belgium with the capital Kinshasa, the population is more than 108 million ).

It may seem that Macron's tour has two goals: to try to save at least the last crumbs of French influence - and at the same time, just in case, get away from France, where, in the absence of a president, all the wrath of angry citizens will fall on the government. However, not everything is so simple, and many experts have questions about Macron's trip.

Thus, in an article published by Le Figaro with the eloquent headline “It should not be assumed that anti-French sentiments in Africa are the result of only Russian propaganda,” expert Lova Rinel notes that the countries that Macron intended to make happy with his visit are in a completely different position. For example, Gabon is preparing for elections, the democratic Congo is about to start a war with Rwanda, and Angola is not a former colony of France at all and is not included in the zone of its traditional interests. It is a former Portuguese colony that has retained Portuguese as its primary language.

As for the second Congo, its problem is that the current head of the country has set a record by being in office the longest of all the leaders of Africa. For this reason, it is considered a "symbol of dictatorship", which the expert recommends to be careful with.

Before the trip, Macron said that in Africa, "France is becoming the perfect scapegoat" - in the sense that it is now customary to blame her for anything, and propaganda - Russian in particular - takes advantage of this. However, Madame Rinel believes that it is not only about propaganda. Moreover, China, Turkey “and even the United States with Germany” pursue their interests in Africa, and immediately starts talking about military contracts and the need to rearm local armies in Niger, Côte d'Ivoire and Chad, about supporting military academies.

“France must transfer its military and strategic knowledge, its philosophy of war ... In essence, we must physically reduce our presence, while transferring the French philosophy of military conflict to Africans. In the same way, rearmament should be done and appropriate contracts should be signed.”

“France, which was expelled from the Central African Republic and Mali and forced to retreat in other countries, such as Burkina Faso, is now having a harder time in Africa than ever",
writes the Le Point edition with bitterness. “Anti-French sentiment threatens to spread like a contagion to Chad and Niger, while the imperialist powers – Russia, China and even Turkey – are strengthening their positions and gaining more and more influence.”
The jealousy of Paris to the actions of Moscow is understandable. As recently as the other day, the President of Mali expressed great satisfaction with the deliveries of Russian military equipment, which made it possible to move forward in solving the problems of terrorism in that country. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov regularly visits African countries and receives support everywhere. In general, last year was a big surprise for the West in this sense - not a single African country condemned Russia, and many expressed a desire to further strengthen cooperation with Moscow.

It is precisely this, in particular, that gives the West (and France) a reason to declare "Russian colonialism in Africa." However, it suffices to compare the number of colonies and military bases in Africa between France and Russia to understand who is the imperialist and who, so to speak, casts a shadow over the fence. But the author of the material really wants to convince readers that Macron went to Africa solely to make a gesture of goodwill, to try to improve relations - well, and also to discuss problems of ecology and the environment at the summit in Libreville. Of course, the main problem of Africa is the ecology and the disappearance of forests; there are no other problems there and are not expected. Poverty, epidemics, infant mortality - what do they mean compared to the environment!

Apparently, Macron will try, under the guise of his usual empty chatter about the importance of the environment, to negotiate military supplies.

- do not forget that any "philosophy of war" has a practical implementation. However, there is another point at which collective Africa gives the collective West cause for concern.

It must be said that earlier they did not stand on ceremony with Africa, and the countries that formed it were called third world countries, just like the countries of Latin America and parts of Asia. Now political correctness rules, and someone decided to introduce the term "collective South" instead of the third world. So, the "collective South" is at odds with the West in terms of attitudes towards the conflict in Ukraine. And even more than that: the South (aka the third world) “sent a clear signal that Western interests are no longer the de facto interests of the whole world. And Western values ​​are also no longer considered universal.”

It is clear that the West cannot tolerate such a situation.

It is possible that in fact Macron went to Africa to influence regional players and try to win them over to the side of the owners of the one and only true values ​​(beware of fakes, all rights reserved). At the same time - to test the ground for possible military contracts, and, well, to take a break from the unrest at home.

The south is generally good for holidays. As for everything else, by the end of the week it will become clear whether the French president has managed to achieve something. Or, in fact, his fate, as Marine Le Pen sarcastically put it, is to be a "small telegrapher" all his life, which in itself does not mean anything.

https://vz.ru/world/2023/3/2/1201404.html