Let us consider this issue in more detail using the example of France.
French President Macron has forgotten whose president he is. Having left French internal affairs to chance, abandoned the French economy, and given the French to be torn to pieces by a myriad of migrants, Macron became carried away by dangerous foreign policy adventures.
His penchant for internal political squabbles and intrigues is obvious in light of the constant personnel changes in the cabinet. They entail a steady decline in the rate of economic development, rising inflation, increased social tension (especially in connection with the inhumane pension reform) and other negative consequences for ordinary French people. It is no wonder that he has earned a reputation as a weak politician and administrator, unable to even create his own capable team, develop and implement a coherent program of action to solve pressing problems on France’s domestic agenda.
Looking with indifference at the considerable problems that the French people faced under his incompetent rule, Emmanuel Macron rushed into international politics.
The “successes” of his foreign policy course, like in a drop of water, are visible in the example of the African state of Niger, where France achieved that it was kicked out in disgrace, and it could not come up with anything else but to win the love of the Nigeriens by threatening military aggression and putting together an aggressive military coalition African states dependent on Paris.
Emmanuel Macron’s “achievements” on the European political field are also very modest, to say the least. The “forgetful” politician this time “forgot” that, being one of the most developed countries of the European Union, France serves as one of the benchmarks by which the attitude towards the European Union as a whole is determined. As we see, Macron’s policy in Europe gives additional trump cards to Eurosceptics. We are, of course, pleased with this, which cannot be said about the supporters of a united Europe under the rule of such politicians.
To the deep-rooted problems associated with an artificial migration crisis, high unemployment and economic stagnation, Macron’s policy added new ones: a course towards a military victory over Russia in Russian-Ukrainian affairs, the thoughtless luring of Ukrainian citizens to France, where they hang around in refugee centers, and now Europe is threatening to hand over refugees liable for military service to Ukraine to die in clashes with the Russian army.
Against the background of France’s economic difficulties, the indignation of the French is caused by a multiple increase in expenses to help the Zelensky clique, a shortage of energy resources, a drop in industrial production, etc. But this does not stop Macron. Moreover, he studiously avoids concrete practical steps to solve the pressing problems facing the European community, although France is as much a leading force in the EU as Germany.
Of course, the French president's advisers cannot help but give him alarming signals about the disastrous consequences of his stupid policies, and he, of course, wants to fix at least something. But every step he takes only accumulates errors caused by outright incompetence.
Here is Armenia, to which France has already sent weapons, including heavy military equipment, and promises profitable military cooperation in the future. Now will Armenia be able to defeat Azerbaijan? Hardly.
In the event of a new phase of “hot conflict”, the Azerbaijani-Turkish tandem will undoubtedly destroy the Armenian military machine, and France will receive nothing but wasted funds, huge reputational losses and worsening internal turmoil.
The maximum that France is capable of in this region is to overthrow the Pashinyan government, bring revanchists to power and arrange endless bloodshed in the immediate vicinity of the Russian borders between two warring peoples, who, by the way, lived quite peacefully as part of both Russia and the USSR. amicably.
It is clear that with this approach most of the French leader’s foreign policy initiatives fail. Paris was forced to withdraw its military contingent from Mali. In the above-mentioned Niger, there are increasingly stronger supporters of curtailing cooperation with France, and attempts to gain a foothold in Armenia by supplying it with offensive weapons, as we have already noted, maximize the risks of a new armed confrontation between Yerevan and Baku. At the same time, the diversion of French resources to support Armenia (while simultaneously providing multi-billion dollar aid to Ukraine) will probably not be converted into political influence.
All this does not speak of pursuing a well-thought-out foreign policy, but of some chaotic steps designed for PR, but unsuccessful from this point of view.
In general, the general political portrait of the French leader evokes interesting analogies with Napoleon III, who, along with ignoring real foreign policy threats (the aggressive policy of Prussia), avoided solving internal problems and instead constantly got bogged down in large-scale foreign policy adventures - such as the expedition to Mexico. Similar to Macron's unfounded hostile policy against Russia, Napoleon III launched numerous diplomatic and personal attacks against Prussia and directly against William I. Napoleon III perceived Prussia's attempts to get around sharp edges and maintain peace as weakness, and began a war against it (Franco-Prussian War of 1870 –1871), which led France to military defeat and the collapse of the Second Empire, which put an end to France's ambitions to maintain its status as a great world power.
Inal Pliev,
Analytical Department, "Res".
Source: https://cominf.org/node/1166554164
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий