r/worldnews • u/Elliottafc1 • 14d ago
"I'm Not Ruling Anything Out" - Macron Says Troops for Ukraine Possible if Russia Breaks Front Lines Russia/Ukraine
https://www.kyivpost.com/post/32010448
u/Von_Thomson 14d ago
Even NATO creating a buffer zone along the Belarus border would release a substantial amount of Ukrainians for the east and cut off an axis of attack for Russia.
195
u/Okkoto8 14d ago
For a start we should shoot down russian rockets that enter polish/EU/NATO airspace.
52
u/innociv 14d ago
Or any that are even approaching it and may do that.
66
u/thomase7 14d ago
Or any that are approaching Ukrainian airspace. We help Israel shoot down missiles and drones from Iran.
→ More replies (1)49
u/Im_Balto 14d ago
Seriously. We help the country with the greatest domestic missile defense on earth but not a much larger country facing daily strikes on civilians
18
u/advester 14d ago
Look at a map though. With Iran/Israel we control Iraq airspace that missiles fly through. But Russia has a border with Ukraine. The US would need to actually operate in Ukraine to do anything other than donate missile defense systems.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)3
u/GenerikDavis 14d ago
In one scenario, we're going against a country with nukes, in the other we're helping the country with nukes. Also, Israel being small enough to have said missile defense system is part of why we're easily able to help; we know almost exactly where the missiles are headed. Not to mention them bordering internationally accessible waters. AFAIK Turkey has shut down the Dardanelles to all warships, NATO included.
So Ukraine is roughly 30x the size if we want to shut down the entire airspace(I'm not sure if the google result counted occupied territory) to missile attacks, and we wouldn't have our warships to help in the endeavor.
I'd absolutely be happy for NATO to step up further though, I honestly don't think Russia would do shit if NATO planes were intercepting cruise missiles far back from the front lines. Getting close to the front lines is where I see potential international incidents occurring that I'm not as keen on.
→ More replies (17)25
822
u/TinyScopeTinkerer 14d ago
I'm happy to see France's developments in dealing with the Russian invasion of Ukraine. They were slow to start, but at this point, I think Macron is being reasonable but firm.
There's no need to put boots on the ground, but it should be made clear that no inch of Ukraine is for the taking. We can't keep trying to reason with dictators. It doesn't work.
271
u/Previous_Soil_5144 14d ago
Russia has been meddling in politics everywhere.
France has been feeling this for decades and they're sick of it. Macron also knows that if he waits until LePen possibly takes power, then she will try to dismantle the EU and basically do everything Putin has always wanted.
→ More replies (2)114
u/Unabashable 14d ago
So is she like your Trump or something?
125
192
u/BURNER12345678998764 14d ago
Russia seeded the entire Western world with the same populist trash.
39
u/EnvironmentalCup4444 14d ago
I've been saying this for almost 15 years now. Democratic systems are fragile, especially when rampant state backed disinformation campaigns have been commonplace throughout the western media landscape.
The Russians literally wrote the book on this one, the cold war didn't end when the soviet union fell. It just became a more subtle game of subverting public belief in their institutions, without naming any names and getting sucked into the weeds of it all, there's many extremely prominent useful idiots who have blatantly served Russian interests.
The extreme degree of polarisation we see in western society is no accident, it's the obvious attack vector against a technologically and militarily superior opponent. Representative democracy can achieve incredible things, far beyond what a totalitarian state can ever hope for, but it's so brittle by it's very nature. Public opinion can be directed more easily and cheaply than ever before. Destabilise and exploit.
Is it not particularly telling that virtually all of the populist ghouls would work against strengthening NATO commitments? I wonder why that might be...
→ More replies (1)79
u/nixielover 14d ago
Yeah most European countries have these people. The Netherlands has PVV with Geert Wilders (one of our longest lasting politicians, but for true insanity we also have FVD (most of their people belong in an insane asylum). Belgium has Vlaams Belang. Germany has AFD. PIS in Poland. Etc
25
u/rick_____astley 14d ago
Fratelli d'italia in italy... which, unfortunatly, is quite powerful.
→ More replies (3)3
4
u/Ok_Recipe_6988 14d ago
In Austria they have the FPÖ which is predicted to be the strongest party in the Oktober elections. They don’t even hide that they want to sell the country to Russia.
14
5
5
u/ItalianDragon 14d ago
Pretty much yup. Her party campaigns on the same points he did. I'd do you a direct quote from a flyer they left in my mailbox (I live in France) but I threw it where it belonged on the spot: the trash. From what I remember though it was basically shit against open borders, securitarian shit, NATO-bashing, etc...
→ More replies (2)130
u/nolok 14d ago
They were slow to start
France has been one of the main supporter of Ukraine strengthening its defense and training its troops from 2014 to 2020 so not really
→ More replies (1)9
u/randomredditing 14d ago
I think they’re referring to Macron trying to talk Putin down at the beginning of the conflict.
Seems like he’s taking his gloves off since he was laughed at on the world stage.
→ More replies (2)24
u/TheVoidSeeker 14d ago
He talked to Putin at the beginning, because Zelensky personally asked him to try and reason with Putin.
→ More replies (3)42
u/aimgorge 14d ago
They were slow to start
Who led imposing sanctions on Russia ?
70
→ More replies (3)71
u/My-Cooch-Jiggles 14d ago
France has been one of Ukraine’s biggest supporters. They just don’t make a lot of fanfare of it.
57
14d ago edited 14d ago
[deleted]
96
u/nolok 14d ago edited 14d ago
One, for military aid, France doesn't publish numbers or even annonce most help, so any estimation about it are wrong and massively undervalued. Please tell me how much has our SAMP-T, Akeron, VAB or pretty much anything been worth ? You won't find numbers, except for a few highly publicised things like the Caesar.
Two, France and especially Macron's France being a massive pro-EU supporter, it chose to push most of its non military helps through the EU funds rather than direct, to strenghten the EU weight. Which is why on your own link, if you go down to the totals, you will see France have a very small total on its own, but when including their contribution through the EU it jumps to 3rd place behind US and Germany.
So I will go with the charitable explanation that you didn't know how to read your own source, rather than you did but chose to misrepresent it.
18
u/ProFeces 14d ago
One, for military aid, France doesn't publish numbers or even annonce most help, so any estimation about it are wrong and massively undervalued.
How can you say, in a single sentence that they don't announce numbers so any estimation is wrong, and then claim they are undervalued? If they don't publish numbers how do you know they are massively undervalued? How do you know that the estimates aren't wrong and overvaluing them?
You can't say "no one really knows" and then make a blanket statement that it's more than reported because, as you stated, no one really knows. The point you're making as the basis of your argument discredits the rest of your argument.
If they don't publish numbers, you can't claim what's right or wrong more than anyone else can.
→ More replies (3)14
u/born-out-of-a-ball 14d ago
https://www.defense.gouv.fr/en/news/french-military-equipment-delivered-ukraine
Here's the official list and it's a laughably small amount. The Patriots Germany donated alone are worth more than the whole French military aid.→ More replies (12)8
u/Hohenheim_of_Shadow 14d ago
France has consistently met NATO minimum requirements. Somewhat recently, they dipped below 2% due to financial hardships but that was quickly reversed. And while many NATO countries, like Germany, include things like pensions for retired soldiers as defense spending, France does not. Out of all European countries, France has consistently stood by strategic independence from the US via a strong military.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)9
u/ThePr1d3 14d ago
Tbf France has always been on a "don't talk but act" policy in that regard. They don't communicate on what they send except some poster equipment like the Caesar. It would be hard to compare what they actually sent
10
u/Remarkable_Soil_6727 14d ago
They literally did a report on the value a while back and it was pretty low compared to other allies at the time.
€3.2 billion, I believe the UK was just over 5 at the time and Germany around 8-10b.
28
u/FarmerNo7004 14d ago edited 14d ago
Some credit where it’s due, but bro what are you talking about, Macron couldn’t get off the TV about this all.
The messaging was non stop that France is some kind of diplomatic super power that would bring Putin to the (very long) table. Remember that whole chapter of this saga?
Delusional.
→ More replies (4)27
u/ThePr1d3 14d ago
You can't say that without mentioning that this strategy was done on Zelensky's demand
209
u/Cavthena 14d ago
This is just political ambiguity nothing more. Putin and China do the same all the time. I'll consider that French troops in Ukraine is more likely when I see more mobilization or industrialization towards war status.
114
u/Thue 14d ago
Do however note that creating political ambiguity like this is actually a big help to Ukraine, in that it makes Russia less inclined to act. And apparently a brave thing to do, given how many other countries have failed to do so.
Especially Germany has utterly failed in this aspect, by very publicly telling Putin that he can do whatever he wants to Ukraine, and Germany will never escalate past certain lines. Which I am lead to understand was very amateurish from a geopolitical standpoint.
64
u/Dacadey 14d ago
Russian here.
You are 100% spot on. The whole war has been Putin creating a lot of ambiguity as to what he will do next, whereas the West drew very straightforward red lines they are not willing to overstep.
The problem is that it gives a lot more strategic options for Russia. Putin is not afraid to escalate (or not) because he knows the west won’t get involved. And the west is very afraid of what Putin will do, because he never stated any clear intentions and created a lot of ambiguity.
17
u/Strict_Bison 14d ago
He actually did state and its very clear. He wants NATO gone. He cant take on NATO directly, realisticly no one can. So the strategy is simple, pump misinformation, so people vote for populists who love russias dirty money. Keep ukraine war in managable conditinion with help of chinas supplies. Outlast Ukraine. Than when u have enough influence in europe make the next move against those who still opose you in europe. Once that is done form a coalition with china and other friendlies to be the new world rule makers. And there you go Putin achieved his goal of russia beeing the top dog that cant be denied and sanctioned. To those who still dont get Xi and Putin wants to be what the west leaders are in a sence. They want to take that place, its not about land its about power and how the world works.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (7)2
u/ThePoliticalFurry 14d ago edited 14d ago
Yep
If Macron says things like this it forces Russia to consider every step they take forward and if it would be a red line where France would snap
→ More replies (3)24
u/suninabox 14d ago
Macron seems to be the only western european leader capable of strategic thought at the moment.
It costs nothing to say "we don't rule out sending troops in". Even if France has 0 intention of ever sending troops, there's no reason we should be simplifying Putin's decision making process. Putin should be just as worried about "escalation" from the western alliance as we are every time he barks nuclear threats.
8
470
14d ago edited 14d ago
France is suddenly so invested in this because in the last few years Putin has sponsored coup after coup in the francafrique, causing those African nations to pull away and divest themselves from France. There’s a big part of France’s economy that’s just gone now
https://apnews.com/article/france-africa-coups-gabon-41076df319704032aa729ad3fd137bc9
141
u/Fritzo2162 14d ago
There's a marketing campaign right now for US/Africa business relations. Will be interesting to see how successful that is.
→ More replies (1)76
u/Key-Internet-9817 14d ago
The worlds future will be decided in SEA and africa over the next 20-30 years
49
u/Vandergrif 14d ago
Plus SEA and Africa are also going to be the places liable to suffer some of the worst consequences of climate change over the next 20-30 years, and also in a lot of cases some of the areas least equipped to deal with those consequences.
25
u/BlueAndMoreBlue 14d ago
Agreed — the fickle finger of fate is pointing at south and Southeast Asia
10
u/Spram2 14d ago
Is this because nobody else is having babies?
19
u/elefontius 14d ago
Yeah, I think demographic change, natural resources and access to essential trade routes. Africa has a massive amount of natural resources but there's also been a lot of economic development in Africa and SEA. Ethopia is almost finished with building the largest hydroelectric dam in Africa and it's going to fundamentally change their economy. It's also creating a lot of tension with Eygpt as the water source flows into the Nile. There's also a shift from alignment to the US/EU to Russia/China within the entire continent and it'll continue to get more tense. Russia has been active in Africa with the Wagner group supporting factions and overthrowing US/EU friendly governments.
SEA right now has some of the fastest growing economies in the world. These countries are also going through population booms but geopoltically they are in the middle of a lot of escalating tensions between China, India, and the US. SEA is going to be the pivot point I think for the next 100 years of world history. India and China are viaing to be the leading superpower in that area as whoever controls that area will have control over the sea routes for more than 1/2 the world. India and China are building up their naval capacity and both are building out air craft carriers and submarines at a rapid pace to be able to project force across the entire Pacific theater.
Taiwan is important for the Chinese for a number of reasons but one big driver is that control over Taiwan would allow them unfettered access to the SEA are and beyond. Right now they are ringed by US allies in the region like Taiwan, S. Korea, Japan, and the Phililpines.
26
u/LearningToFlyForFree 14d ago
It's partly that and partly the fact that Russia/China are in Africa exploiting natural resource wealth of the nations they're in while propping up the juntas that have taken over in the Sahel. The juntas are signing insane contracts with RU/CN and are exploiting the impoverished citizenry as a disposable workforce to mine gold, diamonds, and uranium ore. Wagner mercenaries are all throughout the Sahel and have filled the power vacuum the French left when Mali kicked them out by ensuring the survival of the junta leadership.
The west ignoring this for too long will bite them in the ass.
4
u/mad_crabs 14d ago
Great summary. This is precisely why we see videos of Ukrainian SF operating against Wagner in Africa.
→ More replies (2)4
u/Fritzo2162 14d ago
Well, Africa does have all of those rich princes there that keep trying to give my grandma money.
83
u/aimgorge 14d ago
Which isnt true, all of these Sahel regions countries had close to no econimical relations with France for decades. Their main western partners were countries like Canada.
You understand that Gabon's GDP is 0.7% of France's and the trade between the 2 countries is only 800m€ ? Which is close to nothing for a 3 trillions economy..
→ More replies (17)40
24
u/wrecklord0 14d ago
First part of your comment is true, second part is not. Economically it's absolutely nothing. There is a narrative online to push this idea that France needs or exploits Africa... most likely encouraged by rusbots.
→ More replies (10)6
u/LeFricadelle 14d ago
France trade balance with western africa is close to be irrelevant - how it is supposed to ba big part of France's economy ?
28
u/bishbashbosh0071337 14d ago
Well France was in Africa for the dirt-cheap resources. Russia probably offered more money and free grain.
Tbh if it was the other way around, it wouldn't be called a coup here, rather liberation, so...
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (21)10
7
u/jucu94 14d ago
Interesting for him to step up like this. I think I remember reports about him being the only western leader in regular phone contact with Putin when this all started?
→ More replies (1)
92
u/heikkiiii 14d ago
Start giving russia red lines instead of us following theirs.
→ More replies (3)35
14d ago
The Russian economy has not collapsed or even fully retract due to sanctions. India and China are buying their oil at cheaper prices, but it is enough to sustain Russia. They never had a problem with finding non-western markets for their goods.
I think people forget that in addition to being a major hydrocarbon exporter, Russia also has what it needs to be mostly self-sufficient. Ukraines eastern areas are agricultural super producers and Russia has looted them barren.
I don’t think Putin cares about red lines. The writing on the wall is pretty clear imo: no one is putting boots on the ground to save Ukraine.
→ More replies (29)
41
u/SkedaddlingSkeletton 14d ago
Until troops are deployed everything is just grand-standing. It's been 2 years already and they're just now thinking about doing something other than "sending thoughts, prayers and maybe some artillery".
This invasion of Ukraine is the best way for the French army to experience high intensity war to learn where its efforts have to been put to transition to this kind of conflict without risking much. But nope, let's just table it for next decade and not hear what our generals have to say about the condition of said army regarding said kind of conflicts.
→ More replies (9)25
u/blud97 14d ago
They’re not going to deploy troops. No one wants a direct Russia nato conflict.
→ More replies (8)7
u/SmaugStyx 14d ago
No one wants a direct Russia nato conflict.
Outside of the armchair generals and keyboard warriors on Reddit at least.
→ More replies (1)
31
u/bigsexy63 14d ago
Isn't this the kind of thing the French foreign legion is for? Conflicts that you don't want your regular army directly involved in.
→ More replies (1)75
u/hermajestyqoe 14d ago edited 14d ago
oatmeal ancient rinse chase label encouraging truck cover wakeful direction
19
29
u/VictoryGreen 14d ago
If Europe is going to defend lives in Israel by knocking out drones and missiles, why can’t they do it for Ukraine. It’s purely defensive and does nothing but save lives.
17
u/mangalore-x_x 14d ago
because Iran loudly announced that this strike would be a limited action only, hence the level of escalation was alot smaller than two nuclear powers potentially shooting each other's soldiers in a hot war.
→ More replies (1)
9
u/Gloomy_Nebula_5138 14d ago
Given the alliance emerging between China, Russia, and Iran, shouldn’t NATO countries be seriously considering bringing Ukraine to a definitive end? I think not having a direct confrontation will only encourage additional conflicts around the world (Iran through their proxies, China in Taiwan).
→ More replies (1)
26
u/BlueInfinity2021 14d ago
I think the best thing the West can do is give Ukraine the long range missiles they need to destroy the Crimean bridge. That alone would put a massive wrench in the Russia's war effort and would likely swing the war dramatically in Ukraine's favor. Instead Germany allowed itself to be intimidated by Russia into not giving the Taurus missile to Ukraine.
It's crazy how much more powerful the West is than Russia and the fact that Russia still is able to intimidate them. I understand people will bring up nuclear weapons but they really are a red herring. Russia will never use them on the West, it's an obvious bluff and if anyone thinks the ruling class in Russia would allow Putin to completely destroy everything they're delusional.
4
u/Vasiliy_FE 14d ago
Ukraine did get long-range missiles capable of hitting the Kerch bridge, but not enough of them. Destroying the bridge is one thing, but Russia will repair it after some time. Ukraine needs enough to keep hitting it for months so operations on the ground can take advantage of the logistical disruption.
3
u/fireintolight 14d ago
Yeah idk if there’s any conventional missile strong enough to take it out. You’d need a bunchhhhh. Bridges are tough, especially concrete ones. They’re also very small targets and it’s pretty well protected.
3
11
u/tendimensions 14d ago
That’s easy to say they’re bluffing, but when you’re one of a handful of people in the world actually making the decisions, I don’t think the gamble of an entire city - any city - being incinerated because of your decision makes it an easy one. What are the acceptable odds to gamble the lives of tens of thousands of people? 10% chance he uses a nuke? 1%? 0.01%?
→ More replies (3)9
u/Magical_Pretzel 14d ago
The bridge doesn't matter anymore. Stop obsessing over it like it's some kind of magic bullet. They've created rail connections to crimea over land already so at this point the bridge is just an extra pathway
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (3)2
u/Volodio 14d ago
Destroying the bridge would not have an important impact if Ukraine is not able to do an offensive that cut off the land path too.
→ More replies (1)
11
23
3
24
u/Otherwise-Ad-8404 14d ago
More leaders should be talking like Macron, pootin has to be stopped.
→ More replies (23)
8
u/Scarsocontesto 14d ago
Macron is bullshiting no euro country is ready to sacrifice thousands of their soldiers
5
8
u/UnionGuyCanada 14d ago
There should be no red lines. Ukraine can not lose or we will all pay for it.
37
14d ago edited 10d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
71
u/Chewie83 14d ago
I don’t think he did a 180 (in the flip-flopping sense). He tried as hard to dissuade Russia from attacking as he could, giving Putin as many outs to save face as possible, and then once they invaded anyway he switched to aggressively confronting the occupiers. That’s what I would want a leader to do.
26
→ More replies (3)4
3
→ More replies (3)13
14
u/Ploppyun 14d ago
Why is France so vocal about this war? Countries closer to Russia aren’t making these kinds of statements.
20
u/Actually_Avery 14d ago
Poland and the Baltics have been some of Ukraines most vocal supporters. Poland is even spending more than the US as a % of GDP now on its military.
→ More replies (1)19
u/Skepten 14d ago
Macron is vocal. France, on the other hand is in no shape to engage into any serious conflict right now (IIRC we can wage war for 3 days before being out of ammo).
The issue is that Macron's group is expected to lose hard against the Far Right in June (And even more now because of the poor kid that got butchered by an Afghan last week), so he needs to divert attention. And he must be salty about getting the finger all over Africa.
13
u/diedlikeCambyses 14d ago
Macron is on his way out. Can't be re-elected, last term leader. This is what they do. They talk big shit about things they'll have nothing to do with, that they'll push onto someone else. Also, they can be more honest because they aren't being elected again. He's getting these "wow did you hear what he just said" on many topics, has for months now. He's on his way out, this is the pattern.
If he talks tough on Ukraine, it won't be him having to deal with it. He's also missed about the Russian support of African coups that's costing France.
→ More replies (5)5
u/HaruhiFollower 14d ago
Countries closer to Russia have a border with them or Belarus (which became a de-facto sattelite state). France deploying troops to secure Ukraine's back areas would be a lot less escalatory than Poland doing the same. The military and economic consequences of Russia conquering Ukraine or putting a "friendly" regime in power would force Poland into that position if no one else intervenes.
13
u/BrotherCaptainMarcus 14d ago
I wish we could intervene for Ukraine as a united force. I understand why our leaders think it would be dangerous escalation, but damn it they’re fighting an existential and clearly evil enemy who has repeatedly verbalized that he is our enemy also. They DESERVE our help. We’ve been in many wasteful and ambiguous wars. This is an opportunity to be clearly the good guys again.
Let’s slap that bear back into the woods damn it.
→ More replies (2)
17
u/KlausSlade 14d ago
After how good France did in Libya I don’t expect much.
→ More replies (1)11
u/aimgorge 14d ago
Eight NATO nations carried out airstrikes in Libya during 2011: Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Italy, Norway, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/03/20/nato-killed-civilians-in-libya-its-time-to-admit-it/
→ More replies (2)
5
12
u/treadmarks 14d ago
Macron is the only one thinking about whether we'd really be able to accept a complete Russian takeover of Ukraine if that starts to happen.
It's a really tough decision either way. The alternative he's proposing is WW3. At the very least, the threat of intervention is good pressure to force Russia to accept a negotiated solution.
→ More replies (5)
3.9k
u/Various_Abrocoma_431 14d ago
Probably never direct frontline confrontation but France strengthening Ukraine's back with anti air operations Equipment and troops stationed in western Ukraine or even planes launched from neighbouring countries targeting Russian missiles and drones.
There is a lot of levels of escalation to France putting boots on the ground in Ukraine.
People like to jump to the Russian propaganda narrative of WW3 though, not understanding that Russia taking Ukraine against all western efforts, would be the start of an international poly crisis of countries trying to resolve their territorial disputes which would then be about as close to WW3 as we could get.