NATO and the ‘Disruptive’ French President
The contemptuous reactions from seasonsed analysts to Emmanuel Macron’s NATO comments actually reinforce the French president’s argument.
We need to face the question of how to keep NATO relevant in today’s complex security environment. The vehemence of some reactions to Emmanuel Macron’s interview in The Economist is striking. Yes, the French president obviously wanted to shake the tree, but the anger and contempt that this has provoked are symptoms of something deeply disturbing. It says a lot about how emotion can prevent a much-needed debate from happening.
Indeed, without reusing Macron’s provocative expression of ‘brain death’, it is worrisome that strategic thinking seems frozen in the minds of some experts. They seem reluctant to fully consider the fundamental changes the world is experiencing, and the consequences these will have on Europe and the transatlantic bond.
Like it or not, the harshness of President Macron’s words reflects the magnitude of France’s frustration vis-à-vis an organisation whose vision and priorities have become incomprehensible for many, especially in the last three years. For the ‘Atlanticists’, this should ring alarms bells instead of deserving anathema and insults.
As the third-highest contributor to NATO’s common-funded budgets and with hundreds of officers posted in the integrated military structures, France would like to be sure that such investments are still underpinned by solidarity between all members. Unlike most of its NATO partners, France maintains a full and expensive set of military capabilities, including independent nuclear forces. The country also deploys thousands of troops and assets in areas of conflict in Europe’s southern and south-eastern flanks in order to address another key part of French – and wider European – security interests.
What we are talking about is, in fact, quite simple: how states, individually and collectively, assess and address the multifaceted security of their citizens. From this perspective, is it really outrageous, in the world of Trump and Erdogan, to consider that the Alliance is running the risk of losing both its values and its strategic compass? Can we say that NATO is truly healthy when the US president questions the very principle of collective defence, which is at the core of NATO’s raison d’être?
Likewise, is it acceptable that during the most recent developments in the Syrian crisis, two members of the club – including the US, the most powerful of all – took actions that seriously put the fundamental security of others at stake? And what about Hungary’s recent veto of a NATO declaration supporting Ukraine, when Putin was visiting Budapest that same day?
There might be some legitimacy in highlighting the inconsistencies of an international defence organisation which buries its head in the sand when the core security interests of its members are directly impacted by the behaviour and decisions taken by other members. Why should we pretend that all of these strategic ‘misbehaviours’ do not constitute a lethal threat to the Alliance, now 70 years old? Of course, some can live in the fantasy that these are not the signs of widening strategic divergences, but this is very much wishful thinking.
Make no mistake: France is and will stay committed to NATO as one of its major players. For example, its armed forces are deployed from the Barents Sea to the Baltic States and the Black Sea, and directly contribute to the credibility of the Alliance at a level only matched by a few of its partners. These are verifiable facts, not rhetoric.
The words used by President Macron harm nothing but the certainties and the comfort of strategic thinking that is disconnected from the realities of the modern world.
Above all, his words are a wake-up call.
The views expressed in this Commentary are the author’s, and do not represent those of RUSI or any other organisation.
Latest News from
Chief of the Defence Staff, General Sir Nick Carter's annual RUSI speech - 5th December 201906/12/2019 12:20:00
CDS' annual speech at the Royal United Services Institute, on the current state of Defence.
We Need to Relearn How to do Deterrence06/12/2019 11:20:00
Governments and military planners are obsessed with how much leverage adversaries can exert with coercive measures that don’t risk all-out war. But to win in the ‘grey zone’ requires being proactive, and defining its limits.
NATO Engages Press Release05/12/2019 16:05:00
Held in NATO’s inaugural home of London, and ahead of the NATO Leaders Meeting, ‘NATO Engages: Innovating the Alliance’ brought together some 1600 policy makers, officials from think tanks and universities, and members of the public – over 50% of whom were under 30 – at Westminster Central Hall.
The British Public Still Believes in NATO – Even if Most Cannot Say What It Does05/12/2019 12:20:00
New YouGov/RUSI polling portrays a kind of ignorant faith in NATO but also significant doubts that UK defence capability is fit for modern purpose.
Britain, Estonia and the Wider North28/11/2019 11:20:00
The UK is at the forefront of NATO’s efforts to secure its Baltic members.
Securing the Integrity of the EU’s Financial System is Overdue – Why is Progress so Slow?26/11/2019 14:15:00
Like the proverbial frog in boiling water, the EU knows something is wrong; it just can’t decide what to do.
A New Direction for EU Sanctions: The New Commission and the Use of Sanctions21/11/2019 15:15:15
As the new EU Commission takes office, responsibility for the EU’s sanctions portfolio appears to have moved between commissioners.
RUSI Receives Largest Philanthropic Donations To Date In Support Of Historic Headquarter Redevelopment18/11/2019 11:05:00
RUSI is delighted to announce two substantial donations towards its appeal for 61 Whitehall, the Institute’s iconic home opposite Downing Street, in the heart of the capital.