(MENAFN- Trend News Agency) BAKU, Azerbaijan, March 19. France is once
again seeing history being written without it, reads the article by the editor-in-chief of the Paris-based La
Gazette du Caucase online newspaper, renowned French reporter
Jean-Michel Brun, Trend reports.
"Is there any real coherence in French foreign policy? It's very
convenient, this "at the same time" that Emmanuel macron has made
his profession of faith. It allows him to say everything and the
opposite of everything within the space of a few hours. It allows
him to talk incessantly, to show up everywhere, in a word to exist,
even if it means saying white on Monday and answering black on
Tuesday.
On 26 February, the Head of State took centre stage by declaring
that sending troops to Ukraine "could not be ruled out". It was a
thunderous statement that took the wind out of the sails of his
European counterparts, who immediately called him to order. But
this hardly moved Emmanuel Macron, who was satisfied with his move
and was able to rely on his favourite motto to maintain, on 12
March in the National Assembly, that "at the same time", "France is
a force for peace", and to swear that there was no disagreement
with his European allies. Even if this is forgetting that, whether
it be his participation in the Minsk group to resolve the conflict
in the Caucasus, his meeting with Vladimir Putin, or his hesitant
stance on the Gaza massacres, all France's attempts at arbitration
have ended in bitter failure," says Brun.
The author notes that once again, on 14 March, the
media-friendly head of state put on a show in a surreal television
interview in which he repeated that the military option "must not
be ruled out", because "Russia cannot and must not win this war",
which is "existential for Europe and for France".
"This stance, described by a large section of the political
class as a "war-mongering" Matamore speech, has been suggested by
some of Putin's military advisers, in the name of the theory of
"strategic ambiguity", which consists of maintaining a threatening
half-spoken vagueness about one's intentions in order to intimidate
the adversary and dissuade him from going any further. One imagines
that Putin is already trembling...
This "wet-finger" strategy is expressed in a masterly way in
relation to the Middle East conflict, where France immediately
aligned itself, as usual, with the American position, condemning
without qualification the Hamas attacks, which were immediately
described as "terrorist" by the French Presidency, and then finding
itself obliged to recognise the intolerable nature of the massacre
of Gazans. In an interview on 14 March, Emmanuel Macron defended
himself against any spirit of vassalage towards Netanyahu, saying:
"I never said that Israel had an absolute right to defend itself","
reads the article.
Brun points out that it has to be said that in time, under
pressure from the American people who - unlike France - see images
of the atrocities committed by Tsahal every day, Joe Biden changed
his tune, condemning Israeli repression and declaring that
"Netanyahu does more harm than good to Israel".
"Above all, he endorsed the figure of 30,000 Palestinians
killed, thereby thumbing his nose at those who had previously
disputed the figure, attributing it to Hamas propaganda. In the
absence of a clear vision of what the global balance and France's
geopolitical position should be, neither the French nor his allies
understand exactly where the Head of State wants to take his
country. Above all, this strategic wandering, combined with
Emmanuel Macron's other leitmotif, his famous "Whatever it takes",
is worrying the French, who are wondering whether they are not the
ones who will soon have to foot the bill.
When it comes to France's policy in the Caucasus, incoherence is
at its worst. France condemns Azerbaijan for freeing itself from a
28-year occupation, but "at the same time" supports Ukraine,
invaded and threatened with occupation by the Russians. It
participates in the sanctions imposed on Russia, but accepts that
these sanctions are diverted by its Armenian friend, which is
allied with Iran, one of France's favourite targets. What
gallimaufry!" reads the article.
He notes that yet there is a very good explanation for this
attitude.
"With no coherent foreign strategy, France is guided by domestic
political considerations. The power of the Armenian lobby in France
and its considerable electoral weight in France's three largest
cities largely explain France's official attitude. But this is not
the only reason. The right-wing drift of Macron's policy has led
him to rely on frivolous theories such as the "Christian roots of
France" to justify his unconditional support for Armenia, or at
least for its most nationalist branch, in the name of a supposed
"clash of civilisations", even though Azerbaijan should be seen as
a model of inclusive secularism. Emmanuel Macron's obsessive desire
to exist on the political stage has, here again, led him to
rhetorical excesses, by promising to deliver arms to Armenia. In
the meantime, however, the parties concerned have largely committed
themselves to the bilateral peace process, with no concern for the
French "gadfly". After the dismal result of its participation in
the Minsk Group, France is once again seeing history being written
without it," Brun concludes.
MENAFN19032024000187011040ID1107993916
Legal Disclaimer:
MENAFN provides the information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.