I have been hearing some version of the French "European autonomy" argument for over 40 years. This is about French aspirations to "lead" Europe. They are primarily interested in the European Union as a potential force multiplier for France. Like the other large West European countries, France fundamentally cannot accept that countries like Poland or the Baltics actually have political agency, and have geopolitical interests and threat perceptions vastly different from those of Western Europe. (Having been under the Soviet yoke makes a huge difference.) European autonomy in Macron's meaning will only be possible if all the other EU countries give up their sovereignty in foreign and security policy and let France manage all that. Guess what? It's not going to happen.
I am currently in France I believe Macron 's actions are rooted right here. He is in a pile of domestic troubles, which has led many another political leader to try to cut capers on the world stage.
There’s a better translation of Macron’s interview somewhere on Alex Clarkson’s Twitter (Politico “translated” in ways that really overstate how much Macron really is leaning towards China). What Macron said actually isn’t far away from Von Leyen, but he’s much worse that conveying the right tone and in any case, even what he actually said in French doesn’t actually help him any.
I got banned from Twitter for calling Macron a political idi*t, but well, he is.
Great article, thank you. Macron is right that the world is changing, and countries are trying to best position themselves for a possible change in the world order. This isn’t the first time people around the world wonder if America is in decline. Maybe it is.
Somewhere in this argument there's an assumption that there exists a stable US policy with which to align. But the hostile shift in US attitudes to China is much more than is justified by actual events, and is likely to be moderated sooner or later. We are already seeing this in Australia. Despite the AUKUS subs deal, the Labor government is trying to improve relationships with China.
In part, this reflects the fact that lots of Australian voters are of Chinese ethnicity, (justifiably IMO0 see US rhetoric as anti-Chinese, not anti-CCP or anti-Xi.
I don’t see any justification for the opinion that the US stance towards China is “likely to be moderated sooner or later” so long as Xi is in power. What evidence/arguments do you have?
And yes, Oz and others may appear nicer to China or not, but strategic interests are strategic interests, and it really isn’t in the interests of any state in that part of the world for there to be an expansionist China.
I'm relying partly on the judgement that claims about Chinese expansionism are overblown (I've written lots of this) and partly on the view that (with the exception of unconditional support for Israel) US foreign policy is subject to regular fluctuations. This is pretty much what Macron was saying.
1. I don’t agree that your second point means the US will moderate towards China meaningfully. During the Cold War, for instance, while, sure, there were fluctuations in attitude towards the USSR, they weren’t meaningful enough to an extent where any American administration was actually willing to embrace the USSR, much less call it an ally. Fluctuations could mean even more hardline approaches towards China.
And I have to admit that I haven’t read your writing on China much, but I do recall reading somewhere someone noting that China (really, Xi) is psychologically preparing the PRC populace for war with the US. I have not seen any evidence against that thesis and plenty to support it.
Well geo-politics has been grim reading of late but this article made me smile and chuckle. I can't help wondering whether Macron is aware that his, and Frances, opinion in the EU doesn't carry as much weight as it did 2 years ago. The raise of the Baltics and Central Europe seems to have lead to a dilution of the old French/German leadership role.
Has Macron’s conduct in risking relations with an ally approach DeGaulle Quebec Libre advocacy of Quebec secession from Canada in 1967 at World’s Fair in Montreal?
I have been hearing some version of the French "European autonomy" argument for over 40 years. This is about French aspirations to "lead" Europe. They are primarily interested in the European Union as a potential force multiplier for France. Like the other large West European countries, France fundamentally cannot accept that countries like Poland or the Baltics actually have political agency, and have geopolitical interests and threat perceptions vastly different from those of Western Europe. (Having been under the Soviet yoke makes a huge difference.) European autonomy in Macron's meaning will only be possible if all the other EU countries give up their sovereignty in foreign and security policy and let France manage all that. Guess what? It's not going to happen.
I am currently in France I believe Macron 's actions are rooted right here. He is in a pile of domestic troubles, which has led many another political leader to try to cut capers on the world stage.
There’s a better translation of Macron’s interview somewhere on Alex Clarkson’s Twitter (Politico “translated” in ways that really overstate how much Macron really is leaning towards China). What Macron said actually isn’t far away from Von Leyen, but he’s much worse that conveying the right tone and in any case, even what he actually said in French doesn’t actually help him any.
I got banned from Twitter for calling Macron a political idi*t, but well, he is.
What did cozying up to Russia get the EU?
Great article, thank you. Macron is right that the world is changing, and countries are trying to best position themselves for a possible change in the world order. This isn’t the first time people around the world wonder if America is in decline. Maybe it is.
Somewhere in this argument there's an assumption that there exists a stable US policy with which to align. But the hostile shift in US attitudes to China is much more than is justified by actual events, and is likely to be moderated sooner or later. We are already seeing this in Australia. Despite the AUKUS subs deal, the Labor government is trying to improve relationships with China.
In part, this reflects the fact that lots of Australian voters are of Chinese ethnicity, (justifiably IMO0 see US rhetoric as anti-Chinese, not anti-CCP or anti-Xi.
I don’t see any justification for the opinion that the US stance towards China is “likely to be moderated sooner or later” so long as Xi is in power. What evidence/arguments do you have?
And yes, Oz and others may appear nicer to China or not, but strategic interests are strategic interests, and it really isn’t in the interests of any state in that part of the world for there to be an expansionist China.
I'm relying partly on the judgement that claims about Chinese expansionism are overblown (I've written lots of this) and partly on the view that (with the exception of unconditional support for Israel) US foreign policy is subject to regular fluctuations. This is pretty much what Macron was saying.
1. I don’t agree that your second point means the US will moderate towards China meaningfully. During the Cold War, for instance, while, sure, there were fluctuations in attitude towards the USSR, they weren’t meaningful enough to an extent where any American administration was actually willing to embrace the USSR, much less call it an ally. Fluctuations could mean even more hardline approaches towards China.
And I have to admit that I haven’t read your writing on China much, but I do recall reading somewhere someone noting that China (really, Xi) is psychologically preparing the PRC populace for war with the US. I have not seen any evidence against that thesis and plenty to support it.
Here's a short piece covering the major points https://www.channelnewsasia.com/commentary/south-china-sea-trade-resource-nuclear-war-us-australia-taiwan-2398241
Well geo-politics has been grim reading of late but this article made me smile and chuckle. I can't help wondering whether Macron is aware that his, and Frances, opinion in the EU doesn't carry as much weight as it did 2 years ago. The raise of the Baltics and Central Europe seems to have lead to a dilution of the old French/German leadership role.
Has Macron’s conduct in risking relations with an ally approach DeGaulle Quebec Libre advocacy of Quebec secession from Canada in 1967 at World’s Fair in Montreal?
No.
I wonder how much the AUKUS deal pushed Macron towards a different direction.