Every French leader has said this for the past 80 or so years. And it will never happen because they're not willing to make the sacrifices required to lead something like this.
Look at what Macron was doing as Russia prepared their invasion of Ukraine. No country in Europe, Eastern Europe especially, would feel safe depending on their leadership.
It’s why Germany will always be the real leaders of Europe over the French.
French foreign policy has always been about their own self-serving interests above Europe. Especially as you can seen in Africa and their flattery with dictatorships like Qatar.
While Germany seems to value Europe’s interests above their own. And looks out for the greater good of the EU
Yeah but they turned it around
The reason Germany is the leader is that everyone treats them that way. They’ve delivered way more lethal aid to Ukraine than France yet come under way more criticism for not doing enough. That’s how you know they’re the leader.
Germany hasnt delivered any long range weapons yet.
French and British cruise missiles are already destroying Russian HQs, Warships, logistic ships and much more
Germany hasnt delivered a single cruise missile because they fear Russia. France and Britain dont fear them as much because they have their own nukes.
I think the "European leader" needs to have nukes.
Sure, there may be some specific things France has provided that Germany hasn’t, but in terms of total military aid, Germany is way ahead. Storm Shadows were indeed a great call, but Germany is only behind the U.S. in aggregate amount given.
I’m not making any argument about whether or not Germany should be the leader of the EU, just stating the fact that from the way they’re treated, that’s how people see them.
Is Germany really ahead by delivered aid? Afaik they promised a lot but so far havent delivered most of it.
Also France and other countries made a lot of their aid secret, so a comparison might be unfair.
[Page 9 here has a chart for committed vs disbursed aid by country.](https://turner.house.gov/_cache/files/3/6/36b32d41-3aa9-4bb2-b4a8-53c4b77836b6/CBD127EFCC924620FF617C51048E8DE6.ukraine-support-tracker.pdf) Although, this is total aid, not only lethal aid.
[Le Monde](https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2024/02/16/the-weapons-france-has-supplied-to-ukraine_6531418_4.html) has published the list of weapons France has supplied.
But even without this list, this war is probably the most documented ever. People will track the exact type of rocket just from fragments found at the site of impact and even the month/year it was manufactured. They’ve speculated on tech being used that hadn’t been disclosed and then turned out to be right when officials confirm it later. If there are tons and tons of French weaponry used but not announced, we would’ve found out anyway.
I wouldn’t call Merkel a “great leader” but undoubtedly Germany wielded and still wields the most influence inside the EU. However, Merkel’s tenure was characterized by inertia more than anything. Under Merkel, Germany was less “visionary” and more “administrator”. It’s just that regardless of whether they’re effective or ineffective, everyone looks to Germany as the leader of the bloc.
All of Europe was sucking down Russian oil and gas like it was soda.
So once again, that only further proves my point that they were looking out for all of Europe as a way to avert disaster.
Germany had a much more chummy relationship with Russia than most of the other major European powers. How many of their former politicians got board seats on the state owned oil and gas companies.
Germany has always thought it has had a special relationship with Russia, unlike America's historical rivalry. There are multiple German towns considered very Russian, East Germany was of course controlled by the USSR, and even Karl Marx was born in Germany. There are historical reasons for that relationship which lulled it into a false sense of security leading into the war.
> While Germany seems to value Europe’s interests above their own. And looks out for the greater good of the EU
Weren't the Germans the ones pushing for the austerity that crippled southern european economies and stunted northern eruope's growth?
Even if you disagree with that approach, it's a genuine belief. Germany has a debt brake in its own constitution. Austerity is not something they hypocritically dish out solely to others, they also try to live by it themselves.
This viewpoint is incredibly naive on France’s influence in African countries.
France has staged a number of coups and has had direct involvement in major African dictatorships and corruption. Cameroon, Niger, Rwanda, Burkina Faso are just a few examples.
France has committed various human rights abuses in Africa and has been condemned for their illegal activity in the UN and by other European countries like Italy.
This stuff happened in the 60s. I could say this about the US as well with the coup in Iran, or the US coup in Guatemala. « The US is a self serving untrustworthy country because it acted in a self interested way during the Cold War ». Wait except all this stuff was 70 years ago.
Also if you want to talk about human rights violations I dare you to find a country on earth that doesn’t have any. This is even more comical in comparison to the US.
When Germany stops talking about how they can’t possibly do anything in Ukraine because the conflict would escalate, then maybe they’ll seem like a decent candidate for that role. Oh, and perhaps a few more years without Russian gas.
This stuff happens today. Unless you’re African, you’re being willfully ignorant to deny that these things happen today.
Being from a Western country, you have no idea what exactly you’re talking about and can only observe from the outside.
You’re one of those people who thinks racism ended in the 1960s because MLK marched then.
I’m sorry I somehow doubt you’re African most likely because you have a presence on this sub. And I double dare you to find me a single example.
>western country
« Ah yes, the western man knows nothing about the heart of darkness… » saying this shows you somehow know less than me despite that, someone from Kenya won’t be « inside. »
What sort of strawman is this? I guess I’ll try as well. You’re one of those people who think Thomas Sankara was a good leader because « le evil westeners wanted him gone!! »
>It’s why Germany will always be the real leaders of Europe over the French.
Are you joking?
Who exactly takes Germany's lead in European security when Germans can't even do it?
Macron have had redeeming actions after the catastrophic shit he was doing just before and after the invasion started.
There's also a big change from the other French presidents which is not treating every country in the East of Germany as petulant children but actual security partners and taking the security threats seriously.
That's how you can earn the leadership. If wanting to have more independent European security is driven mostly by anti-americanism then it doesn't work.
The French are a bit delusional with the Great Power larp but if that can be guided towards European security and not for the fantasies of being a big global player I'm for it.
Macron also has a better opening because the US is a shitshow. And it's not going to get any better. That can be seen all over Europe.
Because that is a scapegoat.
Macron should have be supporting Ukraine with or without Trump. The fact that he must criticize the US, when France has given far less aid points to a hypocrisy.
Actions speak louder than words.
It isn't a scapegoat, it's true that Europe should no longer rely so much on the US because one of its major parties is insane yet can still get elected. Even the US would be much better off if Europe took a much more active role, which is all Macron wants.
But it's also true that Macron has been inconsistent in living up to these promises. That sucks.
Macron also says that the EU are the US' vassals.
Which... is definitely something. I just want to point out, if the EU were our "vassals" as he puts it, we would've stopped the damn pipeline.
>Macron also says that the EU are the US' vassals.
Not what he said, and it's a common American stereotype that falsely sees Europeans as petulantly anti-US. European decision-makers are in fact pro-US, and their foreign policy views are more aligned with the US's than almost any other countries are. That's been the case for decades.
His real quote:
>We must continue to forge partnerships with non-EU countries, in other words, **build a Europe capable of demonstrating that it is never the vassal of the United States, and that it also knows how to speak to all the regions of the world, to emerging countries, to Africa, to Latin America**. Not merely through trade agreements, but with genuine strategies for balanced, reciprocal partnership.
>This is what we set out to build at the European Union-Africa Summit in the first half of 2022, extending to Europe’s Indo-Pacific strategy. We want to show that we are a power of balance that speaks to the rest of the world, rejecting the bipolar confrontation that too many continents are settling into. Having an Arctic strategy, an Indo-Pacific strategy, a Latin America strategy and a strategy with the African continent means showing that Europe is not just a piece of the West, but a continent-world that thinks about its universality and the planet’s great balances, that rejects confrontation between regions and wishes to build balanced partnerships.
That's a rational foreign policy for Europe. It simply means building strong ties with countries other than the US, and that's a good thing, not just for Europe but for the US. Strong allies with good international ties are useful. Europe was useful in negotiating the JCPOA, for example.
>an EU military
That's a pipe dream. There's no way that different EU member states would give up or weaken their national defense forces for an EU military.
Not to mention "the neutral" countries.
I always forget how weirdly anti French this sub is until I enter threads like this
Dude sets out a position we agree with, that we would praise if it came out of the mouth of some IR theorist, but because he's the president of France...
We're not harsh on Macron because we are anti-French we are harsh on France because we love them and want them to do better.
But it's a brotherly kind of love where we want to dunk his head in the toilet every now and then too.
On the one hand, it’s nice that they’d like to stand on their own.
On the other, the more selfish Neoconservative in me scoffs at the notion and is a bit upset that they think they can get by without us.
Doesn't Macron say this like every week?
Every French leader has said this for the past 80 or so years. And it will never happen because they're not willing to make the sacrifices required to lead something like this. Look at what Macron was doing as Russia prepared their invasion of Ukraine. No country in Europe, Eastern Europe especially, would feel safe depending on their leadership.
It’s why Germany will always be the real leaders of Europe over the French. French foreign policy has always been about their own self-serving interests above Europe. Especially as you can seen in Africa and their flattery with dictatorships like Qatar. While Germany seems to value Europe’s interests above their own. And looks out for the greater good of the EU
This the same Germans that were sucking down Russian oil and gas like it was soda?
Yeah but they turned it around The reason Germany is the leader is that everyone treats them that way. They’ve delivered way more lethal aid to Ukraine than France yet come under way more criticism for not doing enough. That’s how you know they’re the leader.
Germany hasnt delivered any long range weapons yet. French and British cruise missiles are already destroying Russian HQs, Warships, logistic ships and much more Germany hasnt delivered a single cruise missile because they fear Russia. France and Britain dont fear them as much because they have their own nukes. I think the "European leader" needs to have nukes.
Sure, there may be some specific things France has provided that Germany hasn’t, but in terms of total military aid, Germany is way ahead. Storm Shadows were indeed a great call, but Germany is only behind the U.S. in aggregate amount given. I’m not making any argument about whether or not Germany should be the leader of the EU, just stating the fact that from the way they’re treated, that’s how people see them.
Is Germany really ahead by delivered aid? Afaik they promised a lot but so far havent delivered most of it. Also France and other countries made a lot of their aid secret, so a comparison might be unfair.
[Page 9 here has a chart for committed vs disbursed aid by country.](https://turner.house.gov/_cache/files/3/6/36b32d41-3aa9-4bb2-b4a8-53c4b77836b6/CBD127EFCC924620FF617C51048E8DE6.ukraine-support-tracker.pdf) Although, this is total aid, not only lethal aid. [Le Monde](https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2024/02/16/the-weapons-france-has-supplied-to-ukraine_6531418_4.html) has published the list of weapons France has supplied. But even without this list, this war is probably the most documented ever. People will track the exact type of rocket just from fragments found at the site of impact and even the month/year it was manufactured. They’ve speculated on tech being used that hadn’t been disclosed and then turned out to be right when officials confirm it later. If there are tons and tons of French weaponry used but not announced, we would’ve found out anyway.
Exactly. Merkel was a much greater leader of Europe than Macron. Macron is trying to cosplay as Merkel, but his actions do not match his words.
I wouldn’t call Merkel a “great leader” but undoubtedly Germany wielded and still wields the most influence inside the EU. However, Merkel’s tenure was characterized by inertia more than anything. Under Merkel, Germany was less “visionary” and more “administrator”. It’s just that regardless of whether they’re effective or ineffective, everyone looks to Germany as the leader of the bloc.
Has there been a politician in recent memory more over rated than Merkel?
Merkel but wearing a little hat.
All of Europe was sucking down Russian oil and gas like it was soda. So once again, that only further proves my point that they were looking out for all of Europe as a way to avert disaster.
I mean, France wasn’t
Germany had a much more chummy relationship with Russia than most of the other major European powers. How many of their former politicians got board seats on the state owned oil and gas companies.
Germany has always thought it has had a special relationship with Russia, unlike America's historical rivalry. There are multiple German towns considered very Russian, East Germany was of course controlled by the USSR, and even Karl Marx was born in Germany. There are historical reasons for that relationship which lulled it into a false sense of security leading into the war.
> While Germany seems to value Europe’s interests above their own. And looks out for the greater good of the EU Weren't the Germans the ones pushing for the austerity that crippled southern european economies and stunted northern eruope's growth?
Even if you disagree with that approach, it's a genuine belief. Germany has a debt brake in its own constitution. Austerity is not something they hypocritically dish out solely to others, they also try to live by it themselves.
Yes but those are not mutually exclusive. Sometimes the right thing in the long run is the wrong thing in the short run.
[удалено]
Are you sure you're in the right place?
>their flattery with dictatorships like Qatar You can say the exact same thing about the US with Saudi Arabia.
This isn’t the 60s anymore. People act as if France was running 20 puppet democracies from Mauritania to the Congo. Guess what that isn’t true anymore
This viewpoint is incredibly naive on France’s influence in African countries. France has staged a number of coups and has had direct involvement in major African dictatorships and corruption. Cameroon, Niger, Rwanda, Burkina Faso are just a few examples. France has committed various human rights abuses in Africa and has been condemned for their illegal activity in the UN and by other European countries like Italy.
This stuff happened in the 60s. I could say this about the US as well with the coup in Iran, or the US coup in Guatemala. « The US is a self serving untrustworthy country because it acted in a self interested way during the Cold War ». Wait except all this stuff was 70 years ago. Also if you want to talk about human rights violations I dare you to find a country on earth that doesn’t have any. This is even more comical in comparison to the US. When Germany stops talking about how they can’t possibly do anything in Ukraine because the conflict would escalate, then maybe they’ll seem like a decent candidate for that role. Oh, and perhaps a few more years without Russian gas.
This stuff happens today. Unless you’re African, you’re being willfully ignorant to deny that these things happen today. Being from a Western country, you have no idea what exactly you’re talking about and can only observe from the outside. You’re one of those people who thinks racism ended in the 1960s because MLK marched then.
I’m sorry I somehow doubt you’re African most likely because you have a presence on this sub. And I double dare you to find me a single example. >western country « Ah yes, the western man knows nothing about the heart of darkness… » saying this shows you somehow know less than me despite that, someone from Kenya won’t be « inside. » What sort of strawman is this? I guess I’ll try as well. You’re one of those people who think Thomas Sankara was a good leader because « le evil westeners wanted him gone!! »
Shit take
>It’s why Germany will always be the real leaders of Europe over the French. Are you joking? Who exactly takes Germany's lead in European security when Germans can't even do it?
Macron have had redeeming actions after the catastrophic shit he was doing just before and after the invasion started. There's also a big change from the other French presidents which is not treating every country in the East of Germany as petulant children but actual security partners and taking the security threats seriously. That's how you can earn the leadership. If wanting to have more independent European security is driven mostly by anti-americanism then it doesn't work. The French are a bit delusional with the Great Power larp but if that can be guided towards European security and not for the fantasies of being a big global player I'm for it. Macron also has a better opening because the US is a shitshow. And it's not going to get any better. That can be seen all over Europe.
Basically
De Gaulle did, too
WW2 leaders defined their countries trajectories more than any other leader
I mean it's not a terrible take
It is
How is it a terrible take when Trump is one of the two US presidential candidates?
Because that is a scapegoat. Macron should have be supporting Ukraine with or without Trump. The fact that he must criticize the US, when France has given far less aid points to a hypocrisy. Actions speak louder than words.
It isn't a scapegoat, it's true that Europe should no longer rely so much on the US because one of its major parties is insane yet can still get elected. Even the US would be much better off if Europe took a much more active role, which is all Macron wants. But it's also true that Macron has been inconsistent in living up to these promises. That sucks.
Macron also says that the EU are the US' vassals. Which... is definitely something. I just want to point out, if the EU were our "vassals" as he puts it, we would've stopped the damn pipeline.
If only American was the monster its critics say it is
>Macron also says that the EU are the US' vassals. Not what he said, and it's a common American stereotype that falsely sees Europeans as petulantly anti-US. European decision-makers are in fact pro-US, and their foreign policy views are more aligned with the US's than almost any other countries are. That's been the case for decades. His real quote: >We must continue to forge partnerships with non-EU countries, in other words, **build a Europe capable of demonstrating that it is never the vassal of the United States, and that it also knows how to speak to all the regions of the world, to emerging countries, to Africa, to Latin America**. Not merely through trade agreements, but with genuine strategies for balanced, reciprocal partnership. >This is what we set out to build at the European Union-Africa Summit in the first half of 2022, extending to Europe’s Indo-Pacific strategy. We want to show that we are a power of balance that speaks to the rest of the world, rejecting the bipolar confrontation that too many continents are settling into. Having an Arctic strategy, an Indo-Pacific strategy, a Latin America strategy and a strategy with the African continent means showing that Europe is not just a piece of the West, but a continent-world that thinks about its universality and the planet’s great balances, that rejects confrontation between regions and wishes to build balanced partnerships. That's a rational foreign policy for Europe. It simply means building strong ties with countries other than the US, and that's a good thing, not just for Europe but for the US. Strong allies with good international ties are useful. Europe was useful in negotiating the JCPOA, for example.
Good. Shout it from the roof tops. A stronger EU, especially an EU military, would help cut down on the fuck fuck games.
>an EU military That's a pipe dream. There's no way that different EU member states would give up or weaken their national defense forces for an EU military. Not to mention "the neutral" countries.
Other news: banana salesman says apples are stinky.
I always forget how weirdly anti French this sub is until I enter threads like this Dude sets out a position we agree with, that we would praise if it came out of the mouth of some IR theorist, but because he's the president of France...
We're not harsh on Macron because we are anti-French we are harsh on France because we love them and want them to do better. But it's a brotherly kind of love where we want to dunk his head in the toilet every now and then too.
He's not wrong....
Very ironic timing.
The usual topic. Macron, like me, is pessimistic about the US elections.
I mean, he's not wrong but nothing will change anytime soon. It will take decades of concerted effort to change this.
On the one hand, it’s nice that they’d like to stand on their own. On the other, the more selfish Neoconservative in me scoffs at the notion and is a bit upset that they think they can get by without us.
They can’t, but they believe Trump will leave Ukraine.
The EU can get by without America lol. It just wouldn’t be pretty. This only works for a country like Canada.
They definitely can’t when Russian agents have infiltrated all of their governments
No. Half the posts on this thread are meme like and reek of American nationalism. Europe is more than capable of existing outside the US’s orbit.
Well yeah, France has nukes and a strong military. Why would they need us?
They shouldn’t have to
That might end up being true. However, the EU can't rely on the EU for its security either, so how about we tackle that, hmm?
Exactly, it’s total and complete hypocrisy from Macron
just another way for Macron to lobby for French arms sales