This is not inconsistent with France's foreign and defense policies in the post-World War II era - and really even before it. In effect, a European defense would make France the principle power on the continent and allow it to secure its' position in those cases where it differs from the United States.
To start, see also the decision of France, Italy and several other NATO members not to participate in American (and British) military operations in the Red Sea. France - and I am bound to add in this case, not without reason - does not trust what has been a not entirely consistent American response to the Gaza situation and its' expansion into the Red Sea and other adjacent areas.
By having an independent military capacity, France can stand aloof from an American policy in which it does not fully trust and yet still protect its' specific national interests. France gives this military policy a European character because it magnifies France specifically national capabilities.
Indeed, as the dominant military power on the continent, a European defense would tend to revolve around France and magnify her influence on the continent. In effect, a European military - and the foreign policies that flow from it - would tend to reflect and magnify France's position on the continent.
This is not unlike the rationale within the European Union overall. Although expressed in multinational terms, Germany and France each found a way to secure their specific national interests in a diplomatic context that otherwise tied each to its' historic rivals. (Not for nothing did France and Germany fight two world wars against each other.)
For Germany, as the continent's largest economy, a European defense magnifies its importance by its contribution to the funding of that defense For France, its' position is naturally enhanced as it is the continent's biggest military power. A European defense absent France would be hollow and therefore France gains diplomatic weight by supporting that defense capability.
Suffice to say, on top of all this, a European defense allows Europe generally - and France in particular - to act independently of the USA (and the UK) when its interests diverge from those powers. This then enhancing France's independence and reduce its' need for NATO. Note reduce its' need, not eliminate it. Thus giving France the best of all possible worlds by, in effect, magnifying French power and diplomatic influence within Europe and thus the wider world by harnessing European defense capabilities to French national capacities and utilizing the German economy to fund them.
I agree with what you wrote, that it would allow France to be the dominant power on the continent etc... .
The problem is that none of our European partners wants this defense, Germany has made this clear on several occasions, as have the other countries. Because they rightly consider that their security is assured by NATO, or rather by the USA. So France is wasting its time wanting this Europe of defense as well as its "strategic autonomy", frankly we'd do better to move on to something else.
And the second problem is the Europe of defense. What is it in concrete terms? We don't even have a clear idea of what it would look like, and if we think that men are ready to die not for their nations but for Europe, we might as well say that it's never going to happen.
As far as your second point, that will evolve over time - but my hunch is that a European defense will be a defense rooted in the sum of its' parts. That is, France will pursue its' national interests, Germany its' national interests, Italy its' national interests and so on.
Each will make concessions to the other to the extent that such concessions may assure the support of other powers in those cases where one nation's interests are at stake. Suffice to say this will develop over time - and already has - and will never be complete.
On your first point, yes, all still look ultimately to the USA as the final insurance policy as it were. However, each state will want an insurance policy. First, because they may not always agree with where the USA - or trust where the USA - is leading them. So they will want a fallback.
Second, because the USA cannot always be assured of supporting Europe. The divide over the Middle East and Ukraine and the priority each gives those two conflicts is radically different, A Europe that relies only on the USA with no fallback position will have no means of assuring its interests.
No don't get me wrong, this is a subtle and nuanced game. Germany resists France not because it always agrees with the USA - it does not. Rather, it resists French domination because - as two world wars illustrate with an exclamation point - although the European powers have interests in common, they are not always in agreement.
As I mentioned elsewhere, this is not an either/or. Rather it is a game of three dimensional chess.
Firstly, historical context and security - France has a long history of playing a significant role in European defense and security affairs. It has a strong military tradition and has been involved in various European conflicts and security initiatives throughout history. It recognizes the importance of collective security in Europe, particularly in light of historical conflicts and geopolitical challenges. A strong European defense can enhance the security and stability of the continent as a whole. France is a member of NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) but sees a European defense as complementary to NATO. It believes that a strong European defense can serve as a valuable partner to NATO, providing additional security capabilities and flexibility.
Secondly, sovereignty and independence - France values its sovereignty and seeks to maintain its independence in defense and security matters. A European defense initiative allows France to work collaboratively with other European countries while retaining control over its security policies.
Third, European integration - France is a proponent of European integration and believes that a common defense policy is a natural progression of the European project. It sees a united Europe as a more influential player on the global stage.
We've no guarantee the next war won't be Europe v usa. Trump is in Putin's pocket and once he's elected its fair to say Ukraine will fall. That cuts a wedge of land deep into Europe for invasion by Russia and I wouldn't rule out a sea attack on the west coast by America.
The US controls NATO, because the US pays for the majority of NATO. France doesn't want to have to play along, and they know that if they don't, then they'd better have a strong enough military to defend themselves - and their allies and territories - on their own. As it stands, they do not - not even close. And they're not going to get to have it both ways. They WANT other wealthy NATO members (Germany in particular) to join in with them, but most of Europe is under no illusions: they could not protect themselves without NATO, especially since they've been investing far too little money into their own militaries for decades.
Should Russia find a way out of Ukraine, Putin's ambitions are to move west, and if/when that happens, eastern Europe can't cry to NATO for help if they decide to "go their own way." France is the stubborn holdout - they want everything to be "French first!" even when they do things worse - but that doesn't mean the rest of Europe has to go along with them.
I've been to the Somme battlefield memorials. Walked through the trenches where a generation died or were scarred by what they saw. My Great Grandfather included.
I've seen the beaches in Normandy where the next generation was cut down or scarred by the horrors of the machine gun posts and flamethrowers and seeing their friends torn apart. My Grandfather included.
Twice in the last 120 years the French took a massive beating from foreign invasion. German forces walked in and they were outmatched until soldiers from other countries came to their aid.
The height of the French power was Napoleon. Since him their position has been as the place everyone else goes to fight. I'm not surprised they want to push for a united European Defence Force. In their position with their history over the last 120 years I'd probably want one too. Twice they got caught out and were unable to do anything in open battle (the Resistance is a different matter). It's not implausible that NATO could collapse in the next ten years or less. A united EDF would at least reduce the chance that they would be the front line in a third conflict.
With Brexit, France and Germany are the two major economic European powers. Germany has eschewed military power in the shadow of WWII like Japan.
A European Defence force would probably be dominated by France. Germany would probably still avoid appearing militarized. While UK is in NATO, joining a European defence force without being in the EU is probably difficult. I can't see the Royal Navy being peacefully transferred to the European Defence force.
Without checking, I recollect a reward to France for rejoining NATO was a permanent position governing NATO acquisitions. Even if I have that wrong, France's military industry would get a boost. It is a sound economic decision to favor a European Defence force by France. Much argy bargy would go into acquisitions but France industry probably gets an automatic nose ahead.
In short there is leverage for France in a European Defence force. The history of France walking out of NATO would be a caution for the rest of Europe.
I think any country close to the Russian border is going to be less than enthusiastic if they look at Ukraine and compare French aide & support to the UK's. Poland is substantially arming and there is a concept of an military/economic alliance from the Baltic to the Mediterranean lead by Poland. Sweden's military industry is significant and it has a land border with Russia. Ukraine had a significant arms industry and it would surprising if Luch missiles don't domesticate in Poland.
I could see a Western European Defence force and a Eastern European Defence force with a NATO overlay more easily than a single European Defence force sans NATO.
France has had an iffy relationship with NATO, specifically the Americans, the likes of suez, decolonisation, the need to have troops in Algeria, etc and the fact Americans did not like idea of French having its own nukes. This has put France at logger heads with NATO a fair bit, also they want to protect their own defence industry and not buy American. Such as Rafale. Then with EU, both France and Germany wanted or still want a Euro Force but if there was to be a decent force setup, it would be relatively week and could not share intelligence with all EU members, looking at you Hungary. It possibly would be a good idea as it would mean buy less American kit. The Tempest venture with Japan, closer connections to Sweden, Finland and other factors may produce a Euro force. At present EX Steadfast Defender is a large NATO exercise which includes a large number of assets that an EU force could not muster. Heavy lift, Tankers, Elint, are all lacking within the EU.
Because NATO is an extension of US foreign policy. France only recently rejoined NATO after decades of being independent of it. One big reason is the war in Ukraine which only started because the biden regime was pushing for Ukraine to join NATO knowing what the Russian's response will be, as a result corporate sponsors of Biden fuher are making vast profits which Ukraine will have to pay for in the future and if when it's all over Ukraine joins the EU, France and other EU countries will be on the hook in the future rebuilding 🇺🇦 and paying for the war. France as maybe the 2nd or 3rd most powerful military probably figures that along with Spain, Italy, Poland, Austria, Scandinavia and a rebuilt German military along with the rest would have a pretty powerful military on its own that Russia or anyone else could not challenge and its probably true.
France is the only country in the European Union that does strategic thinking. Germany is mainly focused on (short term) economics.
Trump showed the EU that the USA might just be a partner we can't rely on. Article 5 of NATO is the cornerstone of European security. He told the world he wasn't sure if he would stand by the article.
The Union is trying to get their house in order. Years of peace divident after the cold war and under the security umbrella of the USA has decimated European defence companies. Our armies are small and mainly build for peacekeeping. This will not change overnight. Buying tanks, boats or satellites could take years and years.
Countries close to Russia are not waiting for the European countries, they need security now and are placing their bets on the USA.
Seems to me like they finally want offensive independence because they're mad the U. S pulled out of the accords, and are worried about the whole NATO thing if Trump gets back in office.. I believe at least.. I guess France just wants to be ready for anything that happens..
well france is kind of wrong in this. since nato is factually dictated by the usa, spending lots of ressources on military just so the usa can waste that money is not very smart.
if Europe was souvereign and not just the mindless puppet of the north atlantic bridge in terms of military decisions, then the french would be right. but that's not the case.
I actually applaud France for this. It would mean Europe was taking more responsibility for its own defense. NATO has been weakened because of the failure of most member countries to commit to their agreed upon spending on defense.
Because they are "la grande nation" and always wanted to be independent. For a while they even opted out of the unified NATO command structure (currently they are in).
When we were called the Great Nation it was the good time for us 😂 what's annoying is that France doesn't want to understand that no one wants this Europe of defense.
I mean, we had the WEU till 2011 as a purely European defense alliance. I liked the concept, but I guess with NATO around there is no really a point of having duplicate military structures.
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
m +1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
u +1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
Anonymous(36-45)+1 y
+1 y
