Some have interpreted Macron’s appeal – which was first delivered in a speech to the European Parliament and repeated in a recent interview with French media – as implying that Ukraine should be pushed to a ceasefire and territorial concessions. But if Russia is in danger of being humiliated, the opposite conclusion could be drawn. “The wording is that Russia will lose somehow,” said Michel Duclos, a consultant at the Institut Montaigne in Paris. A nice interpretation of Macron’s statements is that he plans for “the next day,” said Marie Dumoulin, director of the Wider Europe program at the European Council on External Relations. He suggested in Strasbourg that he had in mind the post-conflict settlement when he said “humiliation” and “revenge” had “wreaked havoc on the roads to peace”, a reference to Europe’s war-torn history and the controversial Treaty of Versailles in 1919. He also reminded NATO allies that while supporting Ukraine, they have ruled out a direct military confrontation with its nuclear-armed attacker and will have to find a way to coexist with Moscow when the conflict is over. On Friday, the Elysée insisted that France wanted Ukraine to emerge “victorious”. “The idea is: Moscow should not win, but in the long run, after the end of the war, a revanchist Russia is not in Europe’s interest,” Dumoulin said. Until then, Macron wants to maintain a line of communication with the Kremlin – which he insists is a request from Kiev – even if only to help prevent escalation. “You can not rule out an accident. “Many can not talk to Putin and Macron is trying to minimize the nuclear threat,” said Alexandra Martin of the Globsec Policy Institute in Bratislava. Critics who accuse Macron of working against Ukraine’s interests also unequivocally ignore Paris’s involvement in the West’s efforts to help Kyiv. It sends heavy artillery systems, has sent officers to assist in the investigation of war crimes, and has also sent troops to Romania as part of strengthening NATO’s east side. In Brussels, it has pushed for an oil embargo across the EU and backed each of the six EU economic sanctions packages against Moscow. Newly appointed Foreign Minister Catherine Colonna traveled to Kyiv last month. However, the ambiguity of Macron’s statements about Russia has obscured all this, leading to surprise not only in Kyiv, but also in Warsaw and the Baltic states, just as Ukrainian forces repel the Russian attack in the eastern Donbass region. . “Imagine someone in France saying ‘Let’ s not humiliate Kaiser ‘in the middle of the Verdun battle,” Duclos said. The debate over humiliation is “unfortunate,” Dumoulin notes, because it echoes the Kremlin’s story about how Russia was treated by the West after the collapse of the Soviet Union. And these mistakes are exacerbated, he adds, by a “pre-existing. . . suspicion “of the old Gaulian tradition of cooperation with Russia, which Macron revived in his efforts to establish a relationship with Putin. That now affects Macron’s leadership in Europe, Duclos said. The French president is deluding himself, he argues, if he believes a long-term peaceful settlement is possible as long as Putin is in power. “This position makes it harder to achieve its security and integration agenda,” he said. Martin says the “huge” cost of Macron’s reputation comes as the war undermines his plans for a more autonomous European defense policy. “Europe’s dependence on the United States will increase [and] “NATO will remain the main framework of European security for a while.” A resumption of foreign policy is needed, Duklos said, starting with Macron making a clear commitment to NATO and outlining a path to Ukraine’s accession to the EU. Why not travel to Odessa, he suggests? The blockaded Black Sea port is at the heart of UN-led talks to allow Ukrainian grain to be shipped out of the country. The French president, who traveled to Kyiv before the war, has been criticized for not returning to Ukraine since. “He needs to make some gestures to regain a central position in Europe,” says Duclos.
