Dispute between Trump and Macron Renders Trans-Atlantic Relationship Uncertain

Emmanuel Macron’s policy on rapprochement with the U.S. seems to have reached its limits. At least this is what the Paris events dedicated to the World War I armistice centenary on Nov. 11 showed us. In his speech at the Arc de Triomphe in front of 70 world leaders, the young president of France made sure his message was far removed from Donald Trump’s vision, alluding to Trump’s slogan, “America First,” “This vision of France as a generous nation, of France as a project, of France as the bearer of universal values was displayed during these dark hours, as the very opposite of a selfish nation that only looks after its own interest. Patriotism is the opposite of nationalism. Nationalism is a betrayal of patriotism … Our interests first, whatever happens to the others. You erase the most precious thing a nation can have, that which makes it live, that which causes it to be great.”*

We do not know whether the French president’s speech falls within the kind of election campaign diplomacy at which President Trump excels. However, opposing everything Trump stands for, followed by the Twitter reaction of the White House leader, gives Macron much needed breathing space, as his popularity decreases each month, and as he approaches an important test, the European elections. Perhaps, Macron’s move was in reaction to Trump’s nonparticipation in the World Peace Forum, which was organized to take place at the margins of the commemorative events, or perhaps it was about some deeper misunderstanding over European strategic autonomy. Perhaps it was about the U.S. withdrawal from the nuclear agreement with Iran and sanctions affecting European companies, or perhaps, about Trump’s announcement that the U.S. would withdraw from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. It’s hard to say.

Forty years ago, Raymond Aron, a great French philosopher of international affairs, published an article titled “Uncertainties.” This is exactly what our analysis is about – uncertainties. It’s also possible that the messages Trump tweeted two days after returning to the country, offensive to France and his French counterpart, may have only related to the need to divert voters’ attention – or criticism – from Democratic and Republican observers about Trump’s decision to cancel his visit to the American military cemetery at Aisne-Marne.

What is certain is that trans-Atlantic relations are now undergoing a serious crisis, the effects of which are still not known. We see that President Trump’s attitude has created a rapprochement between Paris and Berlin. Chancellor Angela Merkel expressed her support for Macron’s project to create a European army, complementary to NATO, both in front of the European Parliament and on the occasion of the French president’s visit to Berlin. As the first French leader to address the German Parliament since Jacques Chirac in 2000, President Macron stated in his speech in front of the Berlin Parliament that the European army does not only mean that the equipment of the European military industry and military forces would exist under a single command, but that it would also defend European interests in the event of global conflict. In an interview with CNN’s Fareed Zakaria, President Macron stated something new that helps us better understand the vision behind the European army project: “I do not agree with the increase of the European budget’s military budgets in order to buy American arms. I see this increase as a strengthening of European autonomy in NATO.”*

What conclusion can we draw from this? It is impossible to activate a European army without a common foreign and security policy at the European Union level. Therefore, the European army would contribute to the institutionalization of Europe. Such a structure, with related industrial programs, would entail very high costs. Time will tell whether the strategic ambitions of the French-German alliance, including those regarding the European army, will jeopardize the EU’s cohesiveness, and especially how much longer they can work together within NATO. We will have a clue when the Galileo (European GPS) program is fully operational.** Will the EU accept a collaboration with the United States GPS program, or will it require EU member states to use the European geo-localization program? Another question that time will answer is whether the distance between Paris and Berlin on the one hand, and between Paris and Washington on the other, will continue after Trump, and whether we will see a rupture between these alliances in the meantime.

*Editor’s note: The quotation, accurately translated, could not be verified.

**Editor’s note: Galileo is the global navigation satellite system that is being created by the European Union.