So the East-West differences on EU ‘strategic autonomy/European sovereignty’ which emerged after #Macron’s recent comments are neither new nor completely eclipsed by the newfound unity on #Ukraine. /2
The problem with the 🇫🇷 concept goes beyond Macron & his ‘provocative’ rhetoric. While there’s nothing wrong with #SupplyChain resilience & shouldering more of the joint defence burden (both are actually dire necessities), creating an ‘independent’ 🇪🇺 defence is /3
neither possible nor desirable. The purpose of better 🇪🇺 efforts & more spending on defence is to keep 🇺🇸 engaged in European security, not replace it. The determinism of seeing 🇺🇸 pivoting away from 🇪🇺 is mistaken, even if #Trump or a Trumpist Republican wins in 2024 /4
Provided that 🇪🇺 becomes & remains a constructive & reliable partner that emphasises things we have in common across the pond, not what divides us, especially on 🇨🇳. That’s what most #CEE have been rightfully pointing out for years. It’s not ‘vassalism’ but responsibility. /END
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In yesterday’s #Bundestag debate on 🇩🇪 #tanks (MBTs & IFVs) to 🇺🇦, @OlafScholz defended the indefensible. If he & his party #SPD spent more energy on supporting 🇺🇦 than on finding excuses, the war would look better for 🇺🇦.Let’s parse the excuses 🧵 1/7 politico.eu/article/german…
‘WW3 looming’: it should by now be abundantly clear that #Putin doesn’t need Leopard MBT & Marder IFV deliveries to 🇺🇦 to escalate the war. And, honestly, if we adapt our behaviour after every nuclear threat from the #Kremlin, we should get the white flag ready ASAP. 2/7
‘Coordination w allies; 🇺🇸 also don’t deliver tanks’: 🇺🇸 repeatedly clarified 🇩🇪 should do more & nothing wrong w 🇩🇪 tanks to 🇺🇦. 🇪🇸 wanted to deliver #Leopard2 & was prevented by 🇩🇪. I could imagine no better proof of 🇩🇪 leadership than this project: 3/7 ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/357…
If #EU security policy is going through a watershed moment, then this should show in our language. Let’s spell it out: We don’t need ‘strategic autonomy’. What EU needs now is strategic responsibility. THREAD 1/7
‘Strategic autonomy’ has always been toxic in most places in #CentralEurope because it smacks of decoupling from the #US. Defenders of SA can claim ‘til they’re blue in the face that decoupling is happening anyway & that autonomy refers also to tech, energy & supply chains. 2/7
The term is tainted, especially in light of #Russia aggression. #US is actually re-pivoting to #EU, & EU is shouldering much more of the defence burden. Any future US administration would have a hard time returning to #Trump 2017. 3/7
.@GerardAraud I have no problem with analysis. I have a problem w treating geopolitics like a natural science (I understand you even have an ‘observatoire géopolitique’ in 🇫🇷, very telling) as if there was some kind of gravity law about what Russia’s neighbours can & cannot do./2
And I have an even bigger problem with your separation of the analytical from the normative, as if these were 2 equal parts of an equation. The solidarity of democrats is part of real life, for me and apparently a whole lot of other people. /3
As to concrete policies, there are lots of things we can & should do: delegitimise Lukashenka, prepare observation mission for new elections, tougher sanctions, support BY civil society etc. And THEN we can talk to Putin, firmly putting ourselves on the side of Free Belarus /4
Monsieur Araud. There is a question I’ve been meaning to ask you (and, admittedly, many other French people) for a long time. What exactly do you mean by ‘geopolitical constraints’? That Belarusians (or Ukrainians, Georgians etc.) have less of a right to determine their future /2
...because their country is neighbouring Russia? That they must somehow accept living in a kleptocratic authoritarianism because NATO would risk war with Putin was f push came to shove? Is that what we’re going to ‘discuss with Russia’? Give them a little bit of freedom /3
but let the Kremlin decide their future ‘parce que la géographie, c’est le destin des peuples’, as your ingenious compatriot Napoléon put it? I tell you, If that were true, 1989 would not have happened. If that were true, we would live indeed live in the deterministic world