Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-23 and Invasion

[Zoupa]

[Tamas]

BTW I have seen some claims in memes and such (no doubt coming from Russian sources) that France's newfound strong-talk is because of Russia collapsing their African secret colonial empire.

[Sheilbh]

Not sure Francafrique is entirely secret.

I think that's too cynical. But I do think it's part of it. I don't necessarily think Europe's interests and France's interests are the same - but I think the French state views them as identical. In that context you have the Russian mercenaries in the Sahel which is where France has been fighting their long war, you've got the Russians in Syria and you've got the Russians in Ukraine. I think France sees that all as a challenge to Europe at every point in its near neighbourhood.

I think they're right - I'm just not sure that French interests in Africa or the Mid East are necessarily something Europe should identify/pick up.

I think France gets it on Ukraine and has since the first few months after the invasion. But I also think this ties into their wider strategy - I think they're fundamentally right on European strategic autonomy. I think they're ahead of the rest of the Europe in trying to pre-plan for the possibility of a Trump presidency. And I think they've realised the way to achieve European strategic autonomy and defence may not necessarily involve Germany centrally (because they are dithering and a bit back and forth on this), but instead Poland and Eastern Europe. That means I think they're being more active and more public about it.

[Tamas]

Not sure Francafrique is entirely secret.

I think that's too cynical. But I do think it's part of it. I don't necessarily think Europe's interests and France's interests are the same - but I think the French state views them as identical. In that context you have the Russian mercenaries in the Sahel which is where France has been fighting their long war, you've got the Russians in Syria and you've got the Russians in Ukraine. I think France sees that all as a challenge to Europe at every point in its near neighbourhood.

I think they're right - I'm just not sure that French interests in Africa or the Mid East are necessarily something Europe should identify/pick up.

I think France gets it on Ukraine and has since the first few months after the invasion. But I also think this ties into their wider strategy - I think they're fundamentally right on European strategic autonomy. I think they're ahead of the rest of the Europe in trying to pre-plan for the possibility of a Trump presidency. And I think they've realised the way to achieve European strategic autonomy and defence may not necessarily involve Germany centrally (because they are dithering and a bit back and forth on this), but instead Poland and Eastern Europe. That means I think they're being more active and more public about it.

Yes. The problem is that France has always had this air about it like the French consider them leading Europe as the God-given natural order of things where in fact nobody apart from that thinks that (to put it mildly). They should look at the Germans. They burned the world twice trying to arrogantly overtake Europe. They switched to friendly "sorry for existing" mode and they have been allowed to achieve their goal without a shot fired. 

[Admiral Yi]

I've always viewed French involvement in the Sahel as very admirable.  It's a money pit, not a money maker.  Post colonial responsibility to prevent 3rd world shitholes from descending further into shit.  The same motivation that led the UK to intervene in Sierra Leone.

[Josquius]

I've always viewed French involvement in the Sahel as very admirable.  It's a money pit, not a money maker.  Post colonial responsibility to prevent 3rd world shitholes from descending further into shit.  The same motivation that led the UK to intervene in Sierra Leone.

That's not what is happening there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-u1Pjce4Lg

[Admiral Yi]

The first 1:13 of that clip was retarded.  I know what a currency peg is.

[Sheilbh]

I've always viewed French involvement in the Sahel as very admirable.  It's a money pit, not a money maker.  Post colonial responsibility to prevent 3rd world shitholes from descending further into shit.  The same motivation that led the UK to intervene in Sierra Leone.

It's the source of most of France's uranium and the reason Russia (and China) are scrambling into the region is to exploit the natural resources in the region which have previously been exploited by France.

I also think there's a wider around the CFA Francs - and to his credit Macron has acknowledged this and started unwinding these angles. But the key points are that France guarantees those Francs and it is freely convertible at a fixed rate into the Euro. There are potential benefits for those post-colonial states in that arrangement. However the big criticism is that the freely convertible, fixed exchange rate currency has actually just led to massive capital outflows from those countries into Europe - not least from rulers getting rents for the exploitation of resources and kleptocracy and then spending the money on villas and luxury goods in France (and, as with the UK, allowing looting is contributing to countries becoming poorer). Similarly until very recently countries using the currency had to deposit their foreign exchange reserves with the French Treasury which obviously gave France enormous coercive power over those states politically - this was reduced to 50% and either has been or is being phased out.

Increasingly it's also been a part of the EU's anti-immigration at source policies, but the French have struggled to convince European partners to contribute as much as they'd like. I think fundamentally they've not really convinced many other EU countries that it was in a wider European v French interest.

Sierra Leone was a six month intervention that happened and ended pretty rapidly. I don't think it's the right comparison with a multi-decade entanglement politically, militarily and economically. I think the nearest British equivalent to Francafrique is probably Britain's role with the Gulf monarchies. As everywhere we have largely been supplanted by the US but the UK state has very, very deep ties with Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman, UAE, Qatar. They're big arms importers, a lot of their elites comme tro British schools (and/or Sandhurst), there's UK bases and forces in the region, they're key suppliers of gas to the UK (Qatar is our supplier of last resort in the event of a crisis) and there's a fair bit of Gulf money sloshing round London. They're richer and more powerful than the states in the Sahel so are more independent, plus they have a relationship with the US and other European countries (Italy is very close to Qatar, for example) - so it's different but I think that's the nearest equivalent. Or possibly Kenya - but that's just one country not a region and I don't think is quite so deep/across so many layers.

[The Minsky Moment]

It's the source of most of France's uranium and the reason Russia (and China) are scrambling into the region is to exploit the natural resources in the region which have previously been exploited by France.

Niger has uranium but the other West African countries don't. Uranium isn't really that rare; I suspect access is an excuse for, not an explanation for, historical French involvement.

There are some other potential resource extraction opportunities, but also not sufficient to explain French commitments. Total is very busy in West Africa, but also in Angola, which is not a historical French colony. The DRC is the most mineral rich and their are plenty of opportunities for outsiders to meddle, but France has wisely steered clear.  IMO Francafrique is an historical relic, one arising from the manner of decolonization of the region and France's own peculiarities with respect to foreign policy.

[Sheilbh]

Sure - I agree with those reasons. I don't think it's economically motivated.

But I also think it's a nonsense to say it's basically just development aid - an admirable money pit that France benignly supports in without any economic or political interests. Or in some way a model of post-colonial responsibility. I think it's the opposite.

[Duque de Bragança]

(Italy is very close to Qatar, for example) - so it's different but I think that's the nearest equivalent. Or possibly Kenya - but that's just one country not a region and I don't think is quite so deep/across so many layers.

Qatar is also very close to France, with PSG-QSI being the most visible example. Dates from Sarko and both Flanby and Jupiter have been doing the same.

[Admiral Yi]

Sure - I agree with those reasons. I don't think it's economically motivated.

But I also think it's a nonsense to say it's basically just development aid - an admirable money pit that France benignly supports in without any economic or political interests. Or in some way a model of post-colonial responsibility. I think it's the opposite.

You just said in your post above that it is economically motivated.  France handles its relations with the region so that owners and builders of luxury villas have more buyers.

I think it's more responsible to kill members of Boko Harum.  I assume that is the preference of most inhabitants.  Please explain why you think not killing them is the responsible thing to do.

[Sheilbh]

You just said in your post above that it is economically motivated.  France handles its relations with the region so that owners and builders of luxury villas have more buyers.

No I didn't. I said there are economic benefits to France and that it's not simply a money pit. I also flagged coercive political control and anti-immigration projection of European power.

And the comparison with the UK I made was the Gulf: entrenched deep ties economically, militarily and politically. I don't think that post says anything about what motivated establishing or maintaining it.

I'm disputing admirable money pit-pouring post-colonial responsibility.

I think it's more responsible to kill members of Boko Harum.  I assume that is the preference of most inhabitants.  Please explain why you think not killing them is the responsible thing to do.

I don't think that's the dichotomy and I don't think France's 8 year operations in the Sahel against radical Islamists has much bearing on the 60 years of Francafrique since the 60s, except that it seems to provide the context for it ending.

[Admiral Yi]

I don't think that's the dichotomy and I don't think France's 8 year operations in the Sahel against radical Islamists has much bearing on the 60 years of Francafrique since the 60s, except that it seems to provide the context for it ending.

We've been talking about two different things then.  I was talking about military involvement.

[HVC]

Ukraine jerryriged a small plane into a drone, filled it with tnt, and flew it into a Russian drone factory. Modern warfare is weird.