The EU thread

[Jacob]

A few different thoughts on the current conversation re: France, the EU, Germany etc.

1) I have heard it claimed that both Scholz and Macron are co-ordinating their Putin conversations with Zelenskyy. I have seen no evidence of this, but I will note that Zelenskyy is not shy about calling out perceived shortcomings in his European allies, and IIRC he hasn't complained about the calls.

2) Denmark (post WWII) has never ever been in doubt that our security hinges on our relationship with the US via NATO. It is clearly and repeatedly stated across the political spectrum, and there is basically zero appetite to shift that to the EU in any shape or form.

3) You're right Yi, and good on you. I think when it comes to as ratio of GDP you may have competition, but in absolute terms no one else is near. I think the US will reap soft power (and thus economic) benefits from this for a long time to come.

[Zoupa]

Macron has been really off the mark.

Even if Zelensky is using him to get messages or a read on Putin, I don't understand how his public remarks are so off.

The Italians are also wildly wrong. I don't expect anything from Germany so I'm not surprised.

But this "off-ramp" BS from Macron is baffling. In the end it doesn't matter for Ukraine, as they're the ones who'll decide how best to end this war, but this is a GOLDEN opportunity for France to achieve huge, transformative changes in line with what we've always wanted for the EU, and Macron is fumbling continuously. Thoroughly disappointed.

[Sheilbh]

A few different thoughts on the current conversation re: France, the EU, Germany etc.

1) I have heard it claimed that both Scholz and Macron are co-ordinating their Putin conversations with Zelenskyy. I have seen no evidence of this, but I will note that Zelenskyy is not shy about calling out perceived shortcomings in his European allies, and IIRC he hasn't complained about the calls.

I think that was true. I think there's been a shift in the last week or so. Zelensky did an interview with RAI and was asked about Macron's calls with Putin - and Zelensky later shared this clip on his Telegram account:

"We must not look for a way out for Russia, and Macron is doing it in vain," Zelensky told Italian television Rai 1, according to the Ukrainian president's Telegram channel.

"I know he wanted to get results from mediation between Russia and Ukraine, but he didn't get any," Zelensky said.

[...]

Zelensky said that "some European leaders think we need to find a way of talking with Putin".

"We have been looking for them for years. And today, these routes are littered with bodies, bodies of our people," the Ukrainian leader added.

Zelensky however repeated his offer to speak with Putin directly but described talks with Russian as "no longer possible".

"Today, the stage when we could sit down with Russia has passed."

The Elysee have denied that they have pressure Ukraine to make territorial concessions and said all calls have been in coordination with Zelensky. I think on around the same day Scholz spoke with Putin and called for an immediate ceasefire - the issue is that an immediate ceasefire now benefits Russia.

I've thought the calls were justified for a few reasons - I'm less sure they are now. I basically agree with the Estonian PM that after Bucha and Irpin for Putin to feel isolated because of what the West are calling war crimes, he needs to be isolated.

Obviously I think France and Germany have the right policy and are supporting Ukraine. I think France is doing far more we don't know about, just not transparently. But I think they are back in the Normandy/Minsk mindset of wanting peace more than they care about the actual terms of that peace - I think Putin with Minsk took advantage of that appetite for peace and I think he'd do the same again.

3) You're right Yi, and good on you. I think when it comes to as ratio of GDP you may have competition, but in absolute terms no one else is near. I think the US will reap soft power (and thus economic) benefits from this for a long time to come.

Yeah - unsurprisingly as a % of GDP Eastern Europe is generally ahead (again with the caveat that France's numbers are far too low):


I think the US has reaped huge soft power benefits in Eastern Europe - but Europe more widely and obviously Ukraine. Weirdly in Ukraine itself I was listening to a Ukrainian MP who said that the US and Biden have received less credit than the UK or Poland, even though it's the most important country - she put it down to Biden not having visited Kyiv yet but US visits have been escalating (Secretaries of State and Defence, Speaker, Senate Majority Leader etc) so I expect Biden will at some point.

The Italians are also wildly wrong. I don't expect anything from Germany so I'm not surprised.

Just on this - and linked to that point - I think the visit is also relevant. Yesterday Portugal's PM was in Kyiv. In addition to him, the President of the Commission (who I think has been impressive in this crisis) and Council (who hasn't), the PMs of Spain, Denmark, all the Baltics, the UK, Poland and the UN SecGen have all been to Kyiv in recent weeks. It is striking that the leaders of France, Germany and Italy as the core big European countries haven't been yet.

From what I've read Macron doesn't think it would achieve anything. Again I can't quite understand it because I think Macron is generally really good at the politics of symbols and how symbolism/gestures matter in politics.

But this "off-ramp" BS from Macron is baffling. In the end it doesn't matter for Ukraine, as they're the ones who'll decide how best to end this war, but this is a GOLDEN opportunity for France to achieve huge, transformative changes in line with what we've always wanted for the EU, and Macron is fumbling continuously. Thoroughly disappointed.

Yes. That's the thing I really don't understand. This was an incredible chance for France to advance its agenda and build trust in the Nordics and Eastern Europe that Europe is a route for their security. From everything I've read I think on substantive policy Macron is doing the right stuff - but it's the symbolic side of things and the way he talks about the issue that undermines all of that. It's crazy.

[Zoupa]

To add to the general French foot in mouth, today the minister for European Affairs said it'll take 15-20 years for Ukraine to join the EU.

Even if true, what's the added value of making this statement? It's crazy how disconnected it feels from the new realpolitik developing in eastern Europe.

No wonder the Balts and Poland look to Washington for defense guarantees.

France is scoring own goals after own goals. It's especially baffling as we're usually so good at the optics and symbolism. I think we haven't processed that Russia is an enemy, not an interlocutor.

[Josquius]

I'm not sure I understand the problem there?
15-20 years does sound like a reasonable estimate all being well.

[Zoupa]

Yes but why say it now? Just shut up about it, and play up the hopes of Ukrainians. They're fighting for survival.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Yes but why say it now? Just shut up about it, and play up the hopes of Ukrainians. They're fighting for survival.

Indeed, and even then some sort of protectorate status could be invented.

But first Paris needs to internalize that the Era of napoleon is over and that most people didn't really like it

[Josquius]

Yes but why say it now? Just shut up about it, and play up the hopes of Ukrainians. They're fighting for survival.

As soon as the talk of EU joining started up at the start of the invasion wasn't it said they would have to meet the criteria and there's no reward for fighting Russia and the like?
Within 2 decades you'll be part of the EU sounds quite good to me.

[Tamas]

Yes but why say it now? Just shut up about it, and play up the hopes of Ukrainians. They're fighting for survival.

As soon as the talk of EU joining started up at the start of the invasion wasn't it said they would have to meet the criteria and there's no reward for fighting Russia and the like?
Within 2 decades you'll be part of the EU sounds quite good to me.

I don't think it is helpful for keeping Ukrainian spirits up to tell them most of their lives will be over by the time they might join the EU. I don't think that's the timeline they had in mind when welcoming the news of submitting their request to join.

And there is a lot that can be done and granted to Ukraine to make them benefit from the EU without becoming members. If you remind them that despite their suffering and dying protecting the EU (as well as themselves) they'll be found wanting to join for a LONG time, perhaps it would be more constructive to also mention there are ways to help them in the meantime.

It's just optics and symbolism. Crucial things when you are asking people to die.

[Sheilbh]

I think on symbolism and optics there is also something of a re-founding of Europe going on. Just looking at the clip of Duda's second visit to Kyiv where he addressed the Rada in person - it's highly charged.

If Europe generation 1 was a peace project symbolised by Franco-German reconciliation, I think there is something in Ukraine's fight (and support for it) that is symbolising the independence and freedom of Central and Eastern Europe within Europe. Both, in their way, a rejection of European history and determination for something new - it's just different depending on where you are and what your post-war looks like.

I don't think that's something that is exclusive of "old Europe" but I think they've perhaps underestimated it. There is something of Kohl and Mitterrand Verdun moment on the symbolic level, I think, happening in Eastern Europe now.

On timescales - Austria has said Ukraine shouldn't join the EU, the Netherlands have made clear it will take a long time. On a symbolic level I think Macron - a profoundly European politician - should be positioning France as Ukraine's champion (while practically knowing other countries have a veto and will slow it down). But again I think there's a large dependency of traditional French policy - he vetoed North Macedonia, France is always wary of expansion as it reduces French influence (which could be changed by engaging as equals with new members) and he seems trapped on that approach. Same as he can't escape French President saying French things about Russia.

[Zanza]

Why would it take two decades? Is there anything in the Copenhagen criteria that says "this and that condition must be fulfilled for ten years in a row" or so? Other countries joined faster. The 2004 enlargement was 14 years after the Soviet bloc fell...

[Threviel]

Yeah, but the 2004 enlargement was problematic. Perhaps more time should have been spent fighting corruption and establishing stable rule of law and democracy in a few of those countries, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria in particular.

Lesson learned, let's not forget that Ukraine is extremely corrupt, far more than what the 2004 group were.

[The Minsky Moment]

In a symbolic level I think Macron - a profoundly European politician - should be positioning France as Ukraine's champion (while practically knowing other countries have a veto and will slow it down). But again I think there's a large dependency of traditional French policy - he vetoed North Macedonia, France is always wary of expansion as it reduces French influence (which could be changed by engaging as equals with new members) and he seems trapped on that approach.

In the specific case of Ukraine, I believe that France is justifiably wary that Ukraine - a relatively largish country in the EU membership context - inevitably will be drawn into the German orbit of influence, thus upsetting from France's POV the balance of power within the EU.

[celedhring]

In a symbolic level I think Macron - a profoundly European politician - should be positioning France as Ukraine's champion (while practically knowing other countries have a veto and will slow it down). But again I think there's a large dependency of traditional French policy - he vetoed North Macedonia, France is always wary of expansion as it reduces French influence (which could be changed by engaging as equals with new members) and he seems trapped on that approach.

In the specific case of Ukraine, I believe that France is justifiably wary that Ukraine - a relatively largish country in the EU membership context - inevitably will be drawn into the German orbit of influence, thus upsetting from France's POV the balance of power within the EU.

Yeah, a country of the size of Ukraine would be a significant voting bloc inside the EU. I suspect France is wary of the balance of power inside the EU tilting too much towards the East.

[Sheilbh]

In the specific case of Ukraine, I believe that France is justifiably wary that Ukraine - a relatively largish country in the EU membership context - inevitably will be drawn into the German orbit of influence, thus upsetting from France's POV the balance of power within the EU.

I agree. I think France's concern around expansion is broadly true - I saw Gerard Araud today describing it as France wanted an effective and decisive EU so was reluctant on expansion; the British wanted the opposite so always backed it but the British won

But I also think France maybe needs to take a look at why its voice doesn't maybe carry the weight it would like with new members and if the two issues could be linked.

In this case France has reasonable concerns and there are good reasons why it will take a long time for Ukraine to enter the EU (once it is at peace) - given that the Austrians and Dutch have loudly sounded off on that, I'm not sure there's any necessary reason for France to join in. The better response, which might earn a bit of goodwill and is probably as accurate, is that France supports Ukraine joining, they're helping Ukraine now and once there is peace they will help Ukraine to join as fast as they can.

Yeah, a country of the size of Ukraine would be a significant voting bloc inside the EU. I suspect France is wary of the balance of power inside the EU tilting too much towards the East.

Yes - although a German think-tanker did note that France had either blocked or caused issues with accession of every big new country. It happened with the UK, with Spain (there was a risk of veto over agriculture/farmers), Poland etc

It's not just tilting East it's just that it might tilt anywhere away from France and the country isn't so small that they should do what they're told