On New Macron's Ukraine Strategy, Russian Threats and the Competition for Leadership in Europe: Interview with Nicolas Tenzer, a Political Analyst

In the last few weeks, the statements of the President of France, Emmanuel Macron, have visibly shaken the politicians and public in Europe. Macron, who a few years ago believed that it was possible to negotiate with Putin, now publicly says that Russia must be defeated, and does not even rule out the scenario of sending French troops to Ukraine.

What is behind such a change in the French leader’s public statements, how his Ukraine strategy is perceived in France, and why relationships between Paris and Berlin are not developing in the best way — read in the interview of "Telegraf" with Nicolas Tenzer, a French political analyst, a Chairman of the Center for Studies and Research on Political Decision (CERAP) based in Paris, and senior fellow at Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA), based in Washington D.C. He holds a strategy blog Tenzer Strategics read worldwide. He just published his new book "Notre Guerre. Le crime et l’Oubli, Editions de l’Observatoire" ("Our War. Crime and Oblivion", to be translated into Ukrainian by the end of this year).

No "red lines"

— Recently, many have been surprised by the change in French President Emmanuel Macron's rhetoric — he is making really bolder statements regarding assistance to Ukraine. What are the reasons behind this?

— The first point of Macron’s U-turn was in Bratislava. I don't know if you heard his speech before the GLOBSEC summit on May 31st, 2023, but I was there. And for the first time, he said something very tough against Russia. He considered that basically France and Germany made a mistake by not supporting the NATO membership action plan for Ukraine and Georgia at the Bucharest Summit in April 2008. Macron considered that we were not listening enough to what the Baltic states and the Central European countries in general had to say about Russia and that we didn't want to pay attention to the lessons of the past.

He was completely changing his view. It was no longer about "not humiliating Russia" or providing security guarantees to Russia or any blunder he made before Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine and at the very beginning of it. Firstly, Macron understood that there are no negotiations possible with Russia. Russia is a threat not only to Ukraine, Georgia, Syria, etc. but also to the whole of Europe. There is an understanding that Putin will go to the end if we allow him to. If he captures or defeats Ukraine, then he will certainly go further attacking the Baltic states, other European countries, maybe Poland, and the Czech Republic. Of course, France, Germany, and other states could be also endangered by Russian actions.

The second thing is that we are witnessing many Russian cyber attacks and also interferences in domestic politics with Moscow supporting not only the far-right or radical left movement but also all the conspiracy theorists trying to sabotage the support to Ukraine and also to put dust on Macron and other leaders as well governments in Europe. We are facing a kind of accentuation of the threats coming from Russia. For me, it's not a surprise because I have been warning about Russia's threats since the midst of the 2000s, especially in 2008 and 2014, but for Macron, it's something rather new.

The third thing is that the French President finally understood that if he wants to be the true leader of Europe, that is still his intention, then he has to embrace a tougher stance towards Russia and be at the forefront of the fight for Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity, and that there is absolutely no compromise that we can make.

We see a rapprochement between, for instance, France, the Baltic states and Ukraine. Recently there was the first meeting in the new format of the ministers of foreign affairs of France, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania. France is also supporting what Kaja Kallas, the Prime Minister of Estonia, is saying about not only the Eurobonds for Ukraine, but also the new stance of partner countries (she suggested that the European Union should work on a plan to issue €100 billion in Eurobonds to boost the continent’s defense industry, and in the meantime do more to get weapons to Ukraine — ed.).

And the fourth thing, which may be the most important, is that Macron considers that there must be absolutely no "red lines". For the moment, we were still buying into the alleged "red lines" defined by Russia. We let Moscow be the agenda-setter. But we must become the agenda-setter. We should envision all the possibilities to support Ukraine without any taboos. We have to make some progress in terms of the delivery of ammunition and weapons. Certainly, we must allow Ukraine to strike outside the Ukrainian territory. That's something that we were very reluctant to accept before.

But there must also be some qualitative moves. The delivery of weapons at the end of the day won't be sufficient, and maybe we have to take part. So Emmanuel Macron is considering the hypothesis to send troops to Ukraine. By the way, that's an idea that I expressed more than one year ago and was advocating for both privately and publicly in many pieces, TV talk shows, and in my latest book "Notre Guerre".

We cannot consider the war in Ukraine as something external to us. It's not only the Ukrainians’ war. It's our war. I was very happy that the other day Macron was quoting my book, saying that then we cannot fight and lead from behind. There could be one day when we will be truly engaged in the war. Afterwards, Macron as well as the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister of the Armed Forces said that for the moment it's not about sending combat troops to Ukraine. In the interview with the French press, President Volodymyr Zelensky stressed that you are certainly not asking the French youngsters to die for Ukraine, because then the public will be very afraid of that. Already, on the French TV programs we had some people saying, "We do not want to die for Donbas", which was a very misleading phrase since it was referring to "We must not die for Dantzig", a phrase coined in 1939 by the French political Marcel Déat who eventually collaborated with the Nazi occupiers, but you understand that we have to be very cautious with public opinion.

Macron considers two things

— But after all, what can the mission of the French troops in Ukraine look like?

— From my point of view, there are two things that Macron is considering. First of all, things that he and the ministers said explicitly, which is basically to send some missions of assistance to Ukraine like training or demining troops or forces to improve the cyber defense. When you’ll have the F-16 fighter jets, the foreign troops also can help with some maintenance for the fighter jets and the weapons they are carrying.

The second thing is something that Macron is not very much talking about but has in his mind, which is to send troops to the liberated territories of Ukraine to prevent Russia from making further advances and offensive and also to protect the civilians there. Because if we have some of the NATO country's troops there, and one of the soldiers is killed or wounded by the Russian airstrike, then it can be considered a direct attack against us. According to the NATO Treaty, then the country to which the troops belong could activate Article 5 (if a NATO Ally is the victim of an armed attack, each and every other member of the Alliance will consider this act of violence as an armed attack against all members and will take the actions — ed.). And that's a way to deter Russia.

Of course, that is not something he mentioned explicitly, and we understand that he cannot say everything right now because of public opinion. Macron wants to maintain what he called "strategic ambiguity".

"Marine Le Pen has not changed"

— How have the latest statements of President Macron been received by the French far-right and far-left political parties?

— The far-right and the radical left parties are opposed to that. Because we perfectly know that far-right politics have very ancient links with the Russian Federation and were supporting Russia at the beginning of the full-scale invasion. Now, of course, they are not backing the massacres that Russia is perpetrating in Ukraine. But still, the French radical right MPs never vote either in France or in the European Parliament for any budgetary support or any form of weapons delivery to Ukraine. They were not also embracing the fight against foreign propaganda. Even on March 12th, when there was a vote in the French National Assembly on the strategy to support Ukraine, they were abstaining. In fact, they are very much against it.

They are supported by Russian propagandists in France, Germany or elsewhere. For instance, when I was supporting President Macron, on social media I received thousands of insults, troll attacks, and threats. That's a very classical stance from the far-right.

When it comes to the far-left, they consider that the only imperialism is coming from the U.S. and the West, and they do not admit that the more dangerous neo-imperialism or neo-colonialism is coming from Russia right now. That's what we call a very old "tankist" stance that we also have on the example of President Lula da Silva in Brazil or Jeremy Corbin in the U.K. or the "Die Linke" party in Germany.

If you take a look at the vote in the National Assembly regarding Ukraine, you see that not only Macron's party supports the president, but also the Socialists and the Republicans, which is the classical conservative party in France. It is a good sign.

— I was really surprised to hear from the leader of the far-right "National Rally" Marine Le Pen that they "respect and support Ukraine". Did she also change her rhetoric, or what do her latest statements indicate?

— She has not changed. Everything the members of Marine Le Pen's party are doing is basically undermining Ukraine's security. The votes of her party in the European Parliament testify very clearly that there is absolutely no support for Ukraine, and they are still spreading a lot of Russian narratives. The far-right leader who will be the head of the list for the European elections in France, Jordan Bardella, is also very close to Russia. But Le Pen knows that a majority of the public in France supports Ukraine and considers Russia a threat to security in Europe. There was an opinion survey recently in France that has shown that even her voters support Ukraine and consider Russia as a true danger.

— So she has to say something like that.

— Yes, she has to adapt. But she also perfectly knows that the voters will support the representative of her party for other reasons. They will not vote having Ukraine and Russia in mind, but they will vote because of many other domestic issues like migration policy, for instance. Many of her voters are feeling a kind of hatred against Macron.

Competition between Scholz and Macron

— Coming back to the topic of the foreign troops in Ukraine. Why aren't other countries excited about this idea? Germany, Great Britain, and Italy have already rejected this possibility. Is this an attempt to maintain a restrained line in foreign policy that will not affect the political situation inside the countries?

— You mentioned three countries — Germany, the U.K., and Italy — and the reasons are completely different for each. Let's take a look at the U.K. Britain is very much aligned with the USA. And the U.S. doesn't want to send troops because then they will be very much engaged in the conflict. Joe Biden had already declared in March 2022, at the very beginning of the Russian invasion, that there should be no American boots on the ground, because they fear that if we activate NATO Article 5, the main burden and risk would be on the shoulders of the U.S. And I think that Britain, because of its very specific alliance with the Americans, is embracing the same stance.

When it comes to Italy, Mrs. Meloni knows that there is certainly no support for such an idea in her country. She's the leader of an alliance with some far-right parties which in Italy are not pro-Ukraine, but very much pro-Russia. So she has to take care. The European Parliament elections in Italy as well as in France are coming which makes it very difficult to consider this kind of idea. Maybe it will be easier after the elections, I don’t know.

And the last country is Germany. Scholz and his Social Democratic Party (SPD) are in a very difficult position. The party carries the burden of the heritage of the very old Ostpolitik (the normalization of relations between the Federal Republic of Germany and Eastern Europe beginning in 1969 — ed.), with a lot of pacifists within it. There are also a few Scholz advisors, who are very much against the support to Ukraine and one day want to resume the relationship with Russia. We see that with the issue of sending Taurus missiles to Ukraine. I think there is a very old pacifist stance in Germany.

— As we’ve mentioned Scholz, recently some media began to report on the alleged conflict between him and Macron. In your opinion, what caused this, and how did the French President's latest statements on Ukraine affect it?

— I think, the personal relationships between Emmanuel Macron and Olaf Scholz, let's say, are not at their height. There is no true understanding, even though they have to cooperate. It is important to maintain a kind of German-French alliance. But still, there are many discrepancies and disputes between them, not only on Ukraine and Russia but also on many other issues. France has the lead in the coalition of artillery, and also the coalition of long-range capabilities. That's a kind of challenge posed to Scholz, who doesn't want to hear about that, especially the long-range missiles.

And there is also an opposition in terms of leadership in Europe, a kind of competition between Germany and France.

Germany is not considering compromises, it's their common attitude even in the EU Council, for instance. Scholz himself is very stubborn, having a "No is a no" position. And when Macron is trying to change him, the German Chancellor is blocking probably even more. That is the reality of their relationship right now.

To support countries that Russia threatens

— As you said before, France is deepening cooperation with the Baltic countries, but also we see how Paris is building security bridges with countries like Moldova or Armenia. The other day, the President of Moldova, Maya Sandu, and Macron signed a cooperation agreement. What do these new alliances indicate?

— First of all, it means that there is a true concern from France. Certainly, we know that Moldova is at risk. With the new resolution of the so-called Parliament of Transnistria, asking Russia for "protection", there is a lot of destabilization action in the country.

An agreement between Maya Sandu and Emmanuel Macron was signed to send a concrete signal that France is supporting Moldova. And also aiming at deterring Russia, saying, "Do not do anything because we will be there." Even if Moldova is not right now an EU or NATO member, there is a true concern, because we perfectly know that before the Baltic states, Moldova could be in the list of the targets. If there are a lot of new Russian troops coming to Transnistria, it could be a threat to the West of Ukraine which is also a very immediate concern. There is a kind of new politics from Emmanuel Macron, which consists of supporting Eastern and Central European countries that Russia threatens.

When it comes to Armenia, it's a little bit more complicated. France is a long-standing supporter of this country. There is also a very big Armenian community or diaspora, if you prefer, in France. Now we are witnessing the courageous efforts of Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan who tries to distance himself from Russia. He considers that Russia is not an ally, which is true, and all the Armenians are aware that the Russian Federation is not a protection. Prime Minister Pashinyan also decided, and there was a vote of the Parliament, for Armenia to be a part of the Rome treaty and basically a member of the International Criminal Court, where Russia’s leader is indicted for war crimes.

Armenia is trying to rejoin the EU community of values. And that's also the will of the Armenian people. France has a lot of concerns from Armenia and wants to attract the country to Europe. But the other EU member states probably are not very much engaged nor is the U.S. For instance, I remember in 2022 (during Armenia-Azerbaijan clashes — ed.), France was maybe the only country that supported Armenia. And the EU member states, notably Germany, and even Poland, didn't do anything. And also in 2023, France was very active in trying to protect Armenia.

Armenia is in a very difficult situation now because, for instance, there are even Russian border guards in the Zvartnots airport in Yerevan. The Russians have a military base in the country which is a big threat.