Macron's idea could spell the demise of NATO. The French president, on the other side of the horse, puts everything on one page to create a lasting one. It's just that he doesn't hit the nettle in the garden with his own scythe, instead he whistles to everyone he knows, then leans against the fence and nods, "aren't we how expeditious we are together like this, mes amis?".
The Gallic rooster won't stop. The man who at the beginning of the war did everything to keep the channels of communication open between Europe and Russia, who even months after the outbreak of the conflict kept saying that "Russia must not be humiliated", has now thrown himself on the other side of the horse by turning it back you definitely can't repeat it.
Europe's loose ship cannon put everything on the same page. The peacemaking, which could have entered the Geopolitical Dictionary, did not work, so he puts on the other costume, if necessary, he will be death, the destroyer of worlds. In his last interview, he already played the nuclear card, which could be waved at, but knowing the position of the other side, it is not necessarily wise to organize a running race towards the push buttons.
Just as it is not a smart idea, even at the level of communication, to envision sending Western troops to Ukraine, especially considering that there are countries (Poland, the Baltics, which are otherwise militarily nowhere, or the Czech Republic, which envisions itself as an armed middle power) that enthusiastically assist the French Sith knight's third for his fire prevention ideas. Most recently, the foreign minister of the new NATO member (the door will open soon if your brothers are behind you in the gym locker room) announced that sending troops to Ukraine cannot be ruled out in the long term, and even asked the United States to reconsider its rejectionist position .
For the sake of completeness, what Macron is doing now is not about Ukraine, but about his own existential fears.
We could also say that it is a matter of domestic politics. His judgment in his own country is uncritical, and his masterful plans for strategic autonomy, a European defense community, and a geopolitical protagonist are either rejected or bored, and the president feels that he should concretely implement his self-realization, because in the upcoming European elections, his politics will be punished by that it becomes an unmistakable sign of downfall.
Macron puts everything on one page to create something lasting. He just doesn't hit the nettles in the garden with his own scythe, but whistles to everyone he knows, then leans against the fence and nods,
"how expeditious we are together like this, mes amis?".
Age of idiots
Of course, Macron was well aware that the change of opinion in Europe regarding the war in Ukraine and the complete deadlock of the United States, as well as the expected return of Trump, offer a niche into which he can squeeze himself into with aggressive war rhetoric. Don't get me wrong:
there is no such thing as "we are sending non-NATO, but Western troops to Ukraine".
If France, Estonia, Finland, Poland and other Russophobic states decide to send their soldiers to die in a war outside the alliance, it will drag the whole of NATO down with it.
An unpleasant side effect of the case will be that half the world could be destroyed in the process, but this would not, for example, excite Estonia, which has a little over one million inhabitants, where Kaja Kallas, self-taught, is currently preparing for a doctorate in military science, sometimes forgetting that even with its own air force it has, but why would you even think of it, there is NATO (among other things with the Hungarian Gripens), which will take care of it. On an "I'll tie you in and you beat me" basis.
No one could elaborate on the incomprehensible idea that because Western troops enter Ukraine "by concluding bilateral agreements" that NATO will still remain a virgin.
According to the arguments of Macron and the other military leaders, Putin would not attack NATO territory then, since the alliance is not actually present in the war, it is only an individual decision of some of its member states.
Sounds good, just stupid. It is hard to believe that Macron and his annexed territories would be so stupid as to believe this themselves.
This is how version B remains: they know exactly that using a defense organization for an attack without attacking a single member of the alliance is equivalent not only to the Third World War, but also to the collapse of NATO.
You can say: they fly two birds to Putin's hand. The assumption that we will "tell Putin" that NATO has nothing to do with this suggests that the champions of escalation have either not understood anything about Russian politics, or that they are not interested at all. The sending of the troops will support Putin's argument in every way, which marks NATO as a war aggressor, moreover, Russian citizens no longer need to prove that they are "the enemy at the gates".
The fact is that if Macron's madness comes true, European soldiers will die in Ukraine. A lot of people. In a war that does not serve the defense of their own country, that is not a retaliatory strike due to an attack on a NATO member state, and one that is not approved by the public opinion of any European state in this form, on the contrary: it is disapproved by an overwhelming majority.
Does anyone seriously think that Putin will wink and say, of course, come on, we'll keep an eye out so that nothing happens to you? Can it be assumed for a moment that from then on, the logistics centers, warehouses, and military industrial facilities of the NATO member states will not be in the crosshairs - especially Poland?
And shall we expect the Poles not to implement Article 5 after the first missile, which defines the principle of collective defense, in this case the outbreak of the Third World War?
But even if things don't get to this point, what about collective defense in the event that the French, Poles, Estonians, Finns, Latvians, Lithuanians, and Czechs begin to fall en masse in Ukraine? What should NATO do? Look away while Stoltenberg or his successor, Rutte, mutter "what did they go there for"? The whole disastrous idea puts the alliance in a position from which it will not find a way out. The dilemma will ultimately be its own undoing. If it attacks, it's because, if it doesn't attack, it's because.
Two big boogers, that's what it should be
We can continue the thought: Macron's plan will practically tear NATO to shreds even before the fatal step actually takes place. In the broad rejection expressed by the NATO member states in connection with the French president's rampage, the leading role belongs to the United States and Germany, and of course it can weaken Chancellor Macron Scholz, but in the embarrassing situation it seems that the German is exceptionally right, who is more he can profit by wearing the title of "Peace Chancellor" as Macron does with his own warmongering.
The formula is this: Macron and the slepp want to create a strike force that anyone from NATO with a burning desire to start a world conflagration can join, while communicating that this is not a NATO operation. All of this without even thinking of consulting with NATO, taking into account the consequences, or listening to warnings pointing to the consensual operation of the alliance. (In desperation, Stoltenberg almost ordered Macron into a report, then muttered something about throwing peas on the wall.)
What the French are doing is equivalent to the execution of the entire NATO. However, no member state has the right to do so.
In an unsolvable situation, NATO either enters the war, or veto follows veto, and the alliance simply ceases to exist due to its own helplessness. All this, moreover, because the French president is trying to feed everyone the mask of existential threats. (He is telling the truth anyway, but the expression is not meant for France or the Union, but only for himself.)
We have already seen this in history, and how it ended. It would be a solution if someone, let's say the president of the United States, who is drowning in helplessness, shook himself a little with his remaining strength, handed out two taslits to Macron with a trembling hand, and explained to him that chanting the biggest nonsense is not necessarily the same as geopolitical reasoning.
In the best case, Macron and those clinging to his back will continue to sing for a while longer, and then before their stupidity can gain another momentum, the war will be suddenly over. At worst, they launch an all-out offensive against their own reluctant allies, trying to convince them that even in the absence of a Russian attack in the current situation, a world war with its nasty nukes part is safe.
In the latter case, many will probably send Macron to rest in strong terms and at the same time.
Because if not, and NATO starts seriously thinking about an intervention even for a single moment, it will be a moment of disaster and complete madness.
Although, as the Estonian Prime Minister said: "Hold my beer!"
Featured image: MTI/EPA pool/Mohamed Badra
