Results 1 to 30 of 56

Thread: French foreign policy in the EE - a real change or an illusion ?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Crusading historian Member cegorach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    2,523

    Default French foreign policy in the EE - a real change or an illusion ?

    According to Le Monde the French government is trying to rebuilt or infact built a new web of contacts with almost all 'eastern european' (central, eastern, baltic and balcan states).

    It could explain why the French delegation in the official visit of Mr. Sarkozy to Poland this month is supposed to be so large (as much as half of the government) - I doubt they are all travelling just to see the birthplace of Chopin or Maria Curie-Skłodowska...

    As much as I see Polish-French political and military relatiosnhip after Napoleon as a complete waste of time and effort I can not ignore this change of direction. After 'EE will join the EU only if Russia does' Mitterrand and 'shut up and do as we want' Chirac it almost a ground breaking move.

    I was always in favour of having a better understanding between members in the EU and certainly that initiative could help.

    THe question is if it is entirely serious.

    It is a question mainly to the French members.

    So:

    Do you think it is a French answer to latest German move which 'employed' EE members, especially Poland and Bulgaria to counter Sarkozy's idea of this 'Mediterrean Union' ?

    Is it an initiative to bring support for the idea from this part of Europe and the EU especially ?

    Is that a part of a new French strategy in the EU with features such as the '6 state EU conclave' (France, the UK, Germany, Italy, Spain, Poland) ?
    This would most likely have something to do with France coming back to military structures of the NATO too.

    Or is it just a move to forge strong relationship in the area where only Germany (from EU 'big' or rather 'largest boys') was interested before so in fact a French reaction not a part of a bigger plan ? IN other words something rather temporary and without much possible impact in the future.

    Personally I have nothing against any of those possibilities as long as it will serve in bringing Ukraine, Belorus and some others to the NATO and the EU in the future so helping our own plans in this area of Europe.



    Any thoughts ? Louis, Brenus perhaps ?




    BTW If I understood correctly Nordic states are apparently gaining influence along with Germany. It puzzles me a bit because I havn't heard about anything important coming from for example Sweden and directed towards the group of states named in the text - Poland, Ukraine, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Romania and Lithuania.




    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    A l'approche de la présidence française de l'Union européenne (UE), l'équipe de Nicolas Sarkozy a lancé une initiative diplomatique pour l'Ukraine. Paris courtise parallèlement les pays d'Europe centrale et orientale, auxquels il a proposé des "partenariats stratégiques".

    Alors que la diplomatie de Jacques Chirac avait tendance à négliger – parfois avec une pointe de mépris – les pays de l'Est européen, et à freiner tout rapprochement de l'Ukraine avec l'UE par souci de ménager la relation avec la Russie, une approche nouvelle a été décidée.

    Les responsables français ont récemment transmis aux pays membres de l'UE et aux dirigeants ukrainiens un document ("non-papier") contenant une série de propositions visant à renforcer le partenariat entre l'Ukraine et l'UE. Il s'agit de "faire passer à un niveau nouveau la politique de voisinage" que Bruxelles a mise en place, explique-t-on de source française. A l'occasion du sommet UE-Ukraine prévu en septembre à Paris, M. Sarkozy voudrait pouvoir afficher des résultats dans ce sens.

    L'initiative est saluée en particulier par la Pologne, qui plaide depuis longtemps pour qu'une perspective européenne soit offerte à l'Ukraine. Les Polonais ont en outre fait passer le message qu'il leur serait plus facile d'accepter le projet français d'Union de la Méditerranée si l'Europe faisait, par ailleurs, un geste envers ses voisins de l'Est : pour eux, l'axe "méridional" de la politique européenne ne doit pas se faire au détriment de l'axe "oriental". Varsovie a d'ailleurs dans ses cartons un projet équivalent à l'Union de la Méditerranée, mais en direction des voisins orientaux de l'UE...

    L'activisme français au profit de l'Ukraine satisfait les pays d'Europe centrale, tout en étant accueilli avec scepticisme par d'autres partenaires, comme les Pays-Bas, rétifs à toute notion d'élargissement ultérieur de l'UE. Les partisans en Europe d'une adhésion turque se demandent si l'équipe de M. Sarkozy ne cherche pas à enfoncer un clou, en démontrant à quel point les Ukrainiens, contrairement aux Turcs, ont une légitimité européenne.

    A Bruxelles, certains s'interrogent : "La France est saisie d'un amour soudain pour l'Ukraine, alors que d'autres dossiers sont plus brûlants pour l'Europe : les relations avec la Serbie, les Balkans, et la nécessité d'avoir une politique avec la Russie." Moscou a déjà fait connaître son hostilité à la démarche française visant à arrimer l'Ukraine à l'Europe. C'est sans doute l'une des raisons pour lesquelles la tentative de l'Elysée n'a fait l'objet d'aucune annonce publique.

    Paris avance avec une certaine précaution. La diplomatie française reste en deçà des souhaits exprimés par Kiev : elle ne prône pas explicitement, dans le document qu'elle a fait circuler, l'idée que l'Ukraine soit amenée un jour à devenir membre de l'UE. "Mais on ne dit plus que la porte est fermée. Elle est entrouverte. Rien n'est exclu pour l'Ukraine, et c'est une nouveauté", commente-t-on côté français. "Après avoir longtemps été réticente, la France dépasse maintenant les plus fervents défenseurs de l'Ukraine que sont les Polonais ou les Autrichiens !"

    Le geste envers Kiev est d'autant plus marquant que, lors du récent sommet de l'OTAN à Bucarest, la France était en phase avec l'Allemagne, qui s'opposait à l'inclusion de Kiev dans le "plan d'action pour l'adhésion". Mais la nouvelle politique est-européenne répond à une volonté de M. Sarkozy de se montrer attentif aux dirigeants ukrainiens pro-occidentaux issus de la "révolution orange" de 2004, qu'il a rencontrés à plusieurs reprises.

    Elle traduit aussi le souci constant du président français, depuis son élection, de réparer les dégâts causés par la crise de 2003 entre M. Chirac et un certain nombre de capitales d'Europe orientale qui avaient exprimé leurs vues atlantistes et leur soutien à Washington à propos de l'Irak. L'ambiance a assurément changé. L'appui de la Pologne a ainsi été sollicité - et obtenu - par Paris en 2007 pour l'opération militaire de l'Eufor au Tchad, par exemple.

    Le réchauffement des relations avec la "nouvelle Europe" doit être symboliquement scellé par la signature de "partenariats stratégiques" bilatéraux entre la France et sept de ces pays. Celui avec la Roumanie a déjà été conclu lors de la visite de M. Sarkozy à Bucarest en février. En mai et en juin, d'autres doivent suivre, avec la Pologne, la Hongrie, la République tchèque, la Slovaquie, la Bulgarie et la Lituanie. Le secrétaire d'Etat aux affaires européennes, Jean-Pierre Jouyet, a été chargé de les préparer.

    Il s'agit, dit-on à Paris, de marquer "le retour de la France dans ces pays". Comme pour l'Ukraine, Paris veut signifier que l'Europe orientale et son potentiel ne doivent pas être "laissés" à l'Allemagne et aux pays nordiques. Les Français cherchent aussi à rallier le plus de soutiens possibles aux priorités de leur présidence de l'UE, comme la promotion d'une Europe de la défense.
    Natalie Nougayrède
    Last edited by cegorach; 04-30-2008 at 14:12.

  2. #2
    A very, very Senior Member Adrian II's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    9,748

    Default Re: French foreign policy in the EE - a real change or an illusion ?

    Quote Originally Posted by cegorach
    As much as I see Polish-French political and military relatiosnhip after Napoleon as a complete waste of time and effort [..]
    Sure. All they did was go to war with Germany on your account in 1939. A negligible detail, no doubt?
    Last edited by Adrian II; 04-30-2008 at 14:30.
    The bloody trouble is we are only alive when we’re half dead trying to get a paragraph right. - Paul Scott

  3. #3
    Crusading historian Member cegorach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    2,523

    Default Re: French foreign policy in the EE - a real change or an illusion ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Adrian II
    Sure. All they did was go to war with Germany on your account in 1939. A negligible detail, no doubt?
    ignored as everything and as always since one certain day.




    Hmmm perhaps I could avoid mentioning that, but on the other had it hives me some pleasure so what the hell.

    I will send a PM to Louis perhaps he will find some time as usual to explain the details of French politics.
    Last edited by cegorach; 04-30-2008 at 14:44.

  4. #4
    A very, very Senior Member Adrian II's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    9,748

    Default Re: French foreign policy in the EE - a real change or an illusion ?

    Quote Originally Posted by cegorach
    ignored as always since one certain day.
    As if I care.

    And do you remember why this French alliance with Poland came into being? Because France was the only power to come to Poland's aid in its war against the Soviets in 1920, wasn't it?

    Apart from other sorts of aid, like facilitating and transporting the so-called Blue Army of Polish exiles to the Polish battlefield, the French also sent four hundred military advisors of their own. Among them a certain Charles de Gaulle who was awarded Poland's highest military order for his role in the fighting near the Zbrucz river and was subsequently offered a military career in Poland.

    An episode that resulted in the formal French-Polish Alliance of 21 February 1921, an alliance that was of vital interest to Poland in its negiotiations with Soviet Russia.

    Just details, I know...

    Speaking of which, that Polish ‘Blue Army’ I mentioned above wasn’t really Polish, was it? It was .. (drumroll) .. French!

    In the last years of WWI the French recruited Polish exiles (many coming from America) into brigades and finally formed them into a 10,000-strong Polish Division within the French army, with an eye to creating the future armed forces of an independent Poland. This move proved to be of mutual benefit for both parties. Other countries beside France favoured a Polish right to independence, but these Polish soldiers knew darn well that their armed participation on the French side would be their only realistic ticket to de facto independence. So they fought like lions on the river Marne, for which they were amply decorated.

    After the war they were merged with other Polish military elements in France (such as the Foreign Legion’s ‘Bayonne Legion’) into one army. This ‘Polish Army in France’, trained and outfitted by the French, was transported to Poland in 1919 together with their French weapons, horses, food and supplies as well as the four hundred French instructors. Being the only armed unit that was up to WWI standards, they became the backbone of the fledgling state. It is safe to say that without them the Red Army would have had its way and Poland would not have existed as a truly independent state (indeed, if at all) for very long.



    I know these are the smallest of minute details and we really, really shouldn’t bother with them, if only you would alter your post ever so slightly to take them into account.

    Instead of calling Franco-Polish relations since Napoleon a waste of time and effort, I suggest you could say (and note how carefully I manage to avoid the word ’vital’ here) that these relations were rather important to Poland.

    It has the added benefit of avoiding questions such as exactly whose time and effort were wasted on whom. Of course, if you insist you can always try to answer that question.
    Last edited by Adrian II; 04-30-2008 at 17:09.
    The bloody trouble is we are only alive when we’re half dead trying to get a paragraph right. - Paul Scott

  5. #5
    Incorruptible Forest Manager Member Tristuskhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Oaks and Menhirs, Brittany
    Posts
    808

    Default Re: French foreign policy in the EE - a real change or an illusion ?

    Illusion...
    "Les Cons ça ose tout, c'est même à ça qu'on les reconnait"

    Kentoc'h Mervel Eget Bezañ Saotret - Death feels better than stain, motto of the Breton People. Emgann!

  6. #6
    Crusading historian Member cegorach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    2,523

    Default Re: French foreign policy in the EE - a real change or an illusion ?

    Can you expand that a bit ?

    One word statement hardly gives anything to think about.

    Why do you think so ?

    For one it is a waste of resources to create a network of contacts with several states with at least a number of high rank governmental visits so it has to be justified if it is only an illusion, a smokecourtain for something more important.
    Last edited by cegorach; 04-30-2008 at 19:36.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO