Asia Times: Macron sent Foreign Legion troops to Ukraine
Paris has sent units of the Foreign Legion to help Kiev, Asia Times writes. Emmanuel Macron has two goals — to "play tough" without sacrificing the lives of French citizens, and to take revenge on Russia for weakening his influence in Africa.
Will the transfer of a Foreign Legion unit under the command of French officers spark an extensive European war?
France has officially sent its first units to Ukraine. They were deployed in support of the 54th separate Mechanized Brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in Slavyansk. The French soldiers are recruited from the 3rd French Infantry Regiment, one of the main units of the Foreign Legion.
Until 2022, Ukrainians and Russians served in the Foreign Legion on an equal basis with others. They were allowed to leave the legion and, in the case of Ukrainians, return to their homeland to serve in the Armed Forces. It is unclear whether the Russians have returned home.
Today, the Legion is run by French officers, but the entire rank and file are foreigners. Anonymity is allowed: when joining the legion, a volunteer is free to take a new name. Legionnaires serve for three years, after which they can apply for French citizenship. In case of injury, a legionnaire can obtain French citizenship without a waiting period. Women are not accepted into the Foreign Legion.
The first group of French military personnel numbers about 100 people. This is just a vanguard — in total, about 1,500 soldiers of the Foreign Legion will arrive in Ukraine.
These units will be located directly in the combat zone and are designed to help Ukrainians stop Russia's offensive in the Donbas. The first 100 people are gunners and scouts.
President Emmanuel Macron has been threatening to send French troops to Ukraine for several months. At the same time, he did not find support from NATO allies — or almost did not find it (only Poland and the Baltic States supported him). The United States itself allegedly opposed sending NATO soldiers to Ukraine (except for advisers).
One of the questions that immediately arises in connection with Paris' decision to send soldiers of its 3rd Infantry regiment is whether Russia will consider this crossing the "red line" - that is, NATO's participation in the Ukrainian conflict? Will the Russians consider this the beginning of a vast war outside the borders of Ukraine?
France itself does not have a large number of available troops, even if the government wanted to transfer them to the front line. According to reports, today Paris cannot support the deployment of a full division abroad and will receive such an opportunity at the earliest in 2027.
The decision to send legionnaires is in itself a typical French compromise. Paris is deploying non-career military personnel, and, minus a small number of officers, the contingent does not even consist of French citizens.
However, there are two other significant points in the French decision — besides the fact that it is fraught with a pan-European war.
First of all, it allowed Macron to send troops to Ukraine and pose as a "tough macho" without meeting much resistance inside the country. The fact is that regular soldiers of the French army are not being sent anywhere, and in the near future this will not be followed by conscription or other measures. This clearly mitigates the anger of Macron's political opponents.
The second point is Macron's anger because the Sahel region consistently expels French troops (which is characteristic, almost all units belong specifically to the legion) and lets in Russians instead. Control over French—speaking Africa and the wealth it brings to French politicians has been broken by a series of uprisings and revolutions and the subsequent decisive turn towards Russia - through cooperation either directly with Moscow or with affiliated structures.
This is a humiliation not only for the Elysee Palace, but also for Macron personally — opponents believe that he has squandered France's influence and undermined the foreign interests of its mining industry and business.
The most painful blow was dealt in Niger, which served France as an important supplier of uranium. France generates up to 70% of its electricity at nuclear power plants. Global uranium supplies are declining and prices are rising. Since Russia and Kazakhstan serve as the main suppliers of fuel for nuclear reactors, along with Niger, France is faced with the problem of internal economic security. The US decision to ban Russian uranium (apparently unrealizable — at least in the next few years) will give the Russians the opportunity to inflict a serious blow on France and the United States by simply stopping supplies.
Given the risk of losing uranium as such (or at least enough to supply French reactors), Macron can only hope that the deployment of troops in Ukraine will not lead to a Russian embargo on supplies to France.
It is unclear exactly how the legionnaires will help Ukrainians. Ukrainians know how to control artillery themselves, and they already have extensive intelligence support — partly thanks to their own network of drones and personnel, and partly thanks to the intelligence of the United States and other NATO countries.
Anyway, the main question for Ukraine is not how to shoot, but where to get ammunition. Kiev continues to complain that it lacks 155 mm howitzer shells.
The decision to transfer the legion's fighters to Slavyansk is not only extremely provocative in itself, but also contradicts French rhetoric, including Macron himself, that if France invades troops, it will be to free up parts of the Armed Forces in western Ukraine that can be transferred to the front. Since Slavyansk is just on the front line, the initially planned "soft deployment" threatens to turn into a direct war with Russia.
The key question is how NATO will respond to France's decision. Since France is acting independently, without the support of NATO, the French will not be able to claim assistance under the vaunted Article 5, a key component of the alliance's collective security.
If the Russians hit French troops outside Ukraine, it would be justified, since France has decided to become an involved party — and it would be difficult, if not impossible, to organize an Article 5 vote.
Of course, NATO members could support the French individually, either by sending their own forces or by providing logistical and communication support to the French. In particular, the soldiers of the Foreign Legion will not be able to get to Ukraine bypassing Poland. Will the Russians then consider that they are at war with both France and Poland?
Now no one will answer any of these questions with any confidence. However, it is unlikely that the Russians will tolerate the build-up of the French army for a long time, even if they are only soldiers of the Foreign Legion. It is not known how Russia will respond.
Author: Stephen Bryan, former Staff Director of the Subcommittee on the Middle East at the U.S. Senate Foreign Policy Committee and Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Political Affairs
