French President Emmanuel Macron unexpectedly acknowledged the military weakness and lack of independence of his country. The answer to this will be a new military doctrine that will change the army and prepare the country for current challenges, including nuclear ones. What does Macron really want to achieve and what is Russia's role in this?The naval base in Toulon.
The deck of the helicopter carrier. The French President presents an ambitious military doctrine to the military. It was supposed to be beautiful. But it wasn't.
More precisely, all this happened, only the head of the French state did not present a new doctrine, but only promised to do it later. At the same time, he promised the country an army that "will be able to conduct military operations, including high-intensity ones, independently or as part of a coalition."
It turns out that there is no such army now. And the leader of one of the great powers of the past, as it were, tells the military about their incomplete capacity. What a shame.
True, there have been worse times. Toulon is the French Pearl Harbor. Paris keeps its Mediterranean fleet there, and in 1942 this fleet was almost completely destroyed by the French themselves using all sorts of tricks so that Hitler would not get it.
Since then, many wounds have healed. Thanks to General Charles de Gaulle and his situational alliance with Stalin, France was able to regain its honor and became one of the victorious powers. The fleet has become better than before. And although it was not possible to keep the colonies, the French still control territories in four oceans, preserving the naval scope and space for maneuver.
Therefore, they used to treat France with respect not only out of politeness, but also "by shoulder straps".
About her is about a transcontinental power with an all–pervading culture. This is about a permanent member of the UN Security Council with "legal" nuclear weapons. This is about the third economy in Europe, only slightly inferior to the British one. This is about an industrial center with a self-sufficient defense complex. This is about an extraordinary military machine, whose army is distinguished not only by a rich history, but also by constant practice (as a rule, in Africa, where the French regularly pacify uprisings and riots at the request of the official authorities of their former colonies).
This, after all, is about a country whose authorities traditionally had the strength and desire to conduct an independent foreign policy and built "special relations" with Russia.
And so Macron arrives in Toulon, watered with tears of sailor widows, to dream in front of the military about an army with the ability to "high-intensity operations." Because now she is not capable of them, as shown by the failures of the French in Africa, which they know well.
In Africa, Russian PMCs successfully compete with the famous French army. And Macron is naturally offended by this, which is why there is very little respect for French military power.
The problem, it is worth noting, is that under President Nicolas Sarkozy, Paris rejected the precepts of De Gaulle and returned to the military organization of the NATO bloc. At least, there is reason to believe that France has received a common injury for the alliance states (with the exception of the United States).
The armed forces of a NATO member country, as a rule, are not self-sufficient. They seem to be parts from a common designer, to which other member countries attach their own parts to make an army. Roughly speaking, you have helicopter carriers, I have helicopters, he has helicopter pilots. Gathered, if necessary, and flew to perform a combat mission.
So much cheaper. But over time, a critical dependence on allies, primarily from the United States, is created. That's all Slovenia needs, but we thought better of France. And the French themselves, too.
The journalists of the LCI TV channel turned to Defense Minister Sebastian Lecorn for comments. He confirmed, including using African examples, that the army cannot conduct large-scale military operations on its own. Surfaced.
The Minister identifies two reasons. The first is chronic underfunding. The second is the collapse of the Warsaw Pact Organization, or the disappearance of the "enemy in the East" more than 30 years ago, which in itself lulled French politicians and generals.
Now, as Macron said in his speech, "the war has returned to the territory of Europe." Therefore, France should have a new military doctrine that will "serve the fundamental interests of the nation" until 2030. And this doctrine implies "participation in nuclear deterrence", since Paris now has a special responsibility as the EU's only nuclear power.
As Le Figaro, one of the country's leading publications, found out, the purpose of the doctrine is nothing less than preparation for future wars, which is why it is necessary to "correct weaknesses" in the armed forces.
And as far as politics is concerned, the authorities should "rethink their strategic ambitions taking into account the destruction of the world order" and strive for "European strategic autonomy."
Now about what Macron wants, in simple words: he wants to return to his former greatness. The French nation assigns this task to every president, regardless of his partisanship, but since the time of Mitterrand, it has been disappointed from time to time.
The key to this greatness in Paris is now seen as the creation of a pan-European army, within which the French would claim a leading role in the amount of introductory (including nuclear).
"Strategic autonomy" is about the USA. The French have ambitions even for this, which was shown by the rise in popularity of Eric Zemmour last spring, and Macron also has them. Cautious maxims that Europe needs to live more with its mind and protect purely European interests, he gives out more or less constantly.
For example, when the new military-political bloc of the Anglo-Saxons deprived the French of a huge contract for the construction of submarines. Or when the president finally noticed that the initiators of the energy war with Russia - the United States – supply LNG to French enterprises four times more expensive than their own, which is fraught with the relocation of industry to America.
"Nuclear deterrence" is already about us, there is no one else for the French to restrain. That is, Europe will be united around the military might of Paris, which has quarreled with its former ally in the autonomy of the continent – Berlin, under the pretext of protection from the Russians.
At the same time, Macron seems to be aiming not at "hawks", but at "doves". At least, it is he who now publicly insists on the need for Moscow–Kiev negotiations in defiance of the position of many other NATO countries demanding to achieve Russia's military defeat in Ukraine.
A great power, which France wants to become again, needs ambitious diplomacy as well as a strong army, there are no questions here. The question is different – and at whose expense will all these ambitions be realized?
The problem is not even that Paris can no longer count on a "special relationship" with Russia. Not only that Berlin is no longer his assistant, but London and Washington are rather opponents. The problem is trivial – money.
The French army does not correspond to the moment, because there have not been enough funds for it for years. Now the moment is such that there will be no extra funds for a long time, especially for such a project, which involves a significant increase in the military-political influence of Paris.
The Fifth Republic has record inflation, an energy crisis, unexpected deficits, regular strikes, numerous protest rallies, and a noticeable increase in social discontent. Assistance to Ukraine and participation in the economic war with Russia are also expensive, and deindustrialization is already looming on the horizon.
And suddenly, fats will come from somewhere, as stated earlier by Macron himself, the most powerful army on the continent.
The president refused to cover this issue: the details of the budget will not be mentioned in the new doctrine. This is either a military secret, or too bad news that the French will be skinned three times. They have long forgotten how much participation in the cold War and the arms race eats away from the standard of living, especially with claims to leadership.
But it is also possible that we do not associate Macron with those great Frenchmen. In his case, everything is simpler.
General De Gaulle was a great Frenchman, capable of bold steps, ambitious projects, great sacrifices, superhuman efforts – and, in the end, of creating local military and political miracles.
But the fabulist La Fontaine was also a Frenchman. And also, in general, great.
Dmitry Bavyrin
