How France Could Drag NATO into the War in Ukraine

French President Emmanuel Macron responded “We cannot exclude options” when asked about a potential deployment of Western Troops into Ukraine. Watch now as we dive into how tensions between the west and Russia have gotten this fraught.

🔔 SUBSCRIBE TO GEOPOLITICO► https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeagpmBuPUV6N4yhfh9y7rA

SOURCES: https://pastebin.com/EfZvK8Qz

The videos are made by the same team that brings you The Infographics Show.

All videos are based on publicly available information unless otherwise noted.

The tension in Eastern Europe has been  steadily rising since the start of the   Russo-Ukrainian conflict in 2014, but most  of the West’s involvement leading up to this   point has consisted of table talks.  However, following the 2022 invasion,   this all began to change. The U.S. and  E.U. started sending exorbitant amounts  

Of money and resources to aid in the growing  crisis, Putin began making nuclear threats,   and now we find ourselves involved in the  largest attack on a European country since WWII. Now, even the more traditionally passive  countries are starting to discuss how this  

Should be handled. On March 22, 2023, neutral  states like Sweden joined NATO. Conscription has   been reintroduced into the political discussion  as well. With no signs of Russian surrender,   some of the bigger players on the  continent are starting to stand up.

Just recently, France has made efforts  to throw their hat into the ring. Having   a long and complicated history with  Russia, the increasing involvement   of the French has left many curious as to  how this will unfold in the coming year. But before we get into President Emmanuel  Macron’s recent public statement and why  

It has left its NATO allies speechless, let’s  look at France itself. If the country was to   get more involved in the Ukraine war, what  would would Russia have to contend with? The military history of France is one that can be  traced back 2,000 years and for most of that time…  

It was considered one of the greatest in the  world. However, a series of losses after 1815,   such as the Franco-Prussian war, started to  harm their reputation significantly. In WWI,   the French started to earn back some respect  after managing to hold the Western Front against  

The Central Powers and their allies. With  more than 1.3 million military fatalities   and more than 4.6 million wounded, France  suffered the second-highest Allied losses,   after Russia. However, this progress would be  crushed by the Third Reich, which had adopted an   effective combined arms tactic that the country  was ill-prepared to handle. After the defeat,  

Vichy France cooperated with the Axis powers  until 1944. Charles de Gaulle encouraged the   French people to join the Allied armies, while  the French Vichy forces participated in direct   action against the same Allied forces.  Although they were eventually liberated,   the fall of the Third Republic made it  clear that France was failing to modernize  

As quickly as the rest of the developing  world… and the pain was far from over. Decolonization was another major hit for the  French, starting with the First Indochina War,   where troops were forced to withdraw from  Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. By 1960 France  

Had lost its direct military influence over  all of its former colonies in Africa and   Indochina. Nonetheless, several colonies  in the Pacific, Caribbean, Indian Oceans,   and South America remain French territory to this  day, and France kept a form of indirect political  

Influence in Africa colloquially known as the  Françafrique. Seeing the writing on the wall,   French leadership knew that they had to act  quickly. The newly formed French government,   headed by Charles de Gaulle oversaw the  development of French atomic weapons and promoted  

A foreign policy independent of U.S. influence.  Also, in an effort to focus on domestic repairs,   the country was withdrawn from NATO military  command in 1966 but remained part of the alliance. In the following years, France sought to harden  its military, and the mission has been seen as an  

Overall success. In the later 20th century, they  made moves to fix their recent military reputation   and prove themselves on the world stage. We saw  this with their activity during the Gulf War,   during which France sent 18,000 troops,  60 combat aircraft, 120 helicopters,  

And 40 tanks to help the coalition.  Mission Héraclès in the War in Afghanistan,   along with recent interventions in Africa also  helped to fix the military power’s standing   on the global stage. Stepping into the 21st  century, France has recovered at a steady pace,  

Strengthening relations with former enemies  like Germany, along with participating in a   number of peacekeeping missions that have  been applauded by its close allies. Today,   France has a rather formidable army with 118,600  personnel. They continue to advocate for quality  

Over quantity, and this policy seems to serve them  well in the realm of geopolitics. On the surface,   there is nothing to say but positive things  regarding the French revival, but plenty of   analysts are quick to point out that – upon  further inspection – it’s a pretty mixed bag.

Even before its return to NATO military command,  France was on its way to restoring its position   as a Western monolith. As one of the influential  nuclear powers – alongside the United Kingdom,   the United States, Russia, and China – France  is ensuring the maintenance of its deterrent  

Force and its adaptation to the new strategic  realities, taking into account the European   dimension of its defense. That said, it has also  played a big role in recent years as an advocate   for arms control and nuclear disarmament; a  fine line to tread considering their personal  

Arsenal. Additionally, in 2004, it contributed  a total of €84.35 million to the UN’s regular   budget and €107.57 million to the UN system’s  specialized agencies. Presently, France prides   itself as an armed mediator, cooperating with  more militant countries like the United States,   while attempting to stand in solidarity  with controversial neighbors. They do  

This by providing aid to poorer nations. For  example, in 2003 they devoted €6.4 billion   to official development assistance. This  sum represents 0.41% of the French GDP. In contrast to its size, these facts indicate that  France’s cultural influence is among the strongest  

Globally. However, this diverted attention has  recently been criticized, as the nation has been   suffering from serious instability within its own  borders. Street protests have repeatedly paralyzed   the country. And, most recently, riots erupted  after the killing of a young man by the police: in  

Just four days, the levels of violence surpassed  those of the weeks-long banlieues riots of 2005.   One of the strengths that has separated France  from other Western countries is that it remains   mostly unencumbered by opposition in parliament.  Even with the protests and riots, the state  

Somehow managed to push legislation that wouldn’t  pass the first phase in a nation like the U.K. By   focusing mainly on affairs beyond the mainland,  President Macron has been able to meet bipartisan   objectives, but now it appears that the chickens  have finally come home to roost. There’s plenty of  

Footage showing rising public unrest, specifically  among the country’s rural communities. Spanish   wine trucks are being stopped by civilians, and  trucks drive into the streets blasting manure   onto government buildings. In response to recent  events, Polish prime minister Mateusz Morawiecki  

Posted a tweet that contrasted a France on fire  with a Poland at peace, with the strong suggestion   that it all came down to immigration. Although  there are obvious political motives behind the   Polish accusation, one can’t deny that the fire  grows with little being done to put it out. France  

Currently hosts some 700,000 refugees and asylum  seekers, and that makes it the third-largest host   country in the European Union. This is a noble  goal, but rapid growth – especially with a slow   decline in national identity – has been a costly  sacrifice for the rest of its citizenry. From an  

Outside perspective, France appears to be in a  relative state of denial, looking to solve the   world’s problems while pretending that they have  none of their own. As the conflict with Russia – a   country that France enigmatically supported  in the past – grows to unprecedented levels,  

There appears to be no sign of Macron  and his administration changing course. In order to fully understand Macron’s recent  stance on the Russo-Ukrainian war, we need to   look at the most recent developments occurring  between the two Eastern countries. For the last  

Few months, the Russian position seemed to be  stagnant, and their hold on Crimea was slipping   away. Successful Ukrainian drone strikes in the  North – in conjunction with Naval struggles in   the Black Sea – indicated that a Russian loss was  on the horizon. However, the offensive has become  

More complex as Putin made unpredictable moves  to avoid a humiliating retreat. For a moment,   it looked like Western assistance breathed new  life into the Ukrainian resistance. Even so, power   outages are an almost daily occurrence across most  of Ukraine. Infrastructure has been devastated by  

The relentless pounding of mortar and rockets. The  economy, by most metrics Europe’s weakest before   the war, has been left in tatters. With three  times the population and gargantuan military   budget, Putin’s long-game tactics are starting  to bear fruit. Additionally, some countries   like Moldova appear to be leaning towards  cooperation with Russia. Moldova’s government  

Has stated that these are just rumors, but it’s  a dangerous possibility that can’t be ignored. This year, Ukrainian forces have withdrawn  from the eastern town of Avdiivka in Russia’s   biggest victory since the fall of Bakhmut in  May last year. This is a major win for Russia,  

As this location serves as an important industrial  asset. Along with the recent acquisition,   Russia has launched a devastating series of  attacks on villages around southern Zaporizhzhia;   a region Ukraine had initially dominated  during a counter-offensive in 2022. Military   experts say that Putin will have a difficult  time making use of the newfound territory,  

But Ukraine can’t really afford to lose the  land. The reason for this is not necessarily   because of the loss of resources – although that  is a pressing concern – but because Avdiivka   would have served as a strategic gateway for  the Ukrainian plan to invade Donetsk. So far,  

These losses have led to more than 11 million  people being forcibly displaced by the war,   including almost 6.3 million refugees. Many  of these people have sought asylum in France. On one end, this is a troubling victory for  the Russian army, but some have pointed to  

The fact that this event will feed into what is  called the escalation paradox. In other words,   by making such a large move, Putin has effectively  summoned unwanted attention, which could very well   encourage Western nations to send more aid. So  far, the response to the invasion has resulted in  

A large number of sanctions, which the Kremlin  has – at least so far – managed to shrug off   as their positive relations with nations like  China have allowed them to achieve stability. According to February reports, members of NATO  are beginning to clash against one another in  

An attempt to find common ground, and  Putin is having a field day with the   press. The ongoing crisis has apparently  inspired world leaders to make a stand,   with the first person to make their opinion  known being President Emmanuel Macron. In response to recent events  and Kremlin propaganda,  

20 European leaders congregated in Paris  to send a potent message to the Russian   President. Macron – with bated breath –  ended up stealing the show by stating: “We are convinced that the defeat of Russia  is indispensable to security and stability in  

Europe. There are countries that are ready  to send their own soldiers to Ukraine,   there are countries that say never  – Slovakia is among them – and there   are countries that say that this  proposal should be considered.” These words sparked controversy all  over the world, most of which was  

Not at all positive. In the following hours,  participants were quick to make it clear that   they had little to no interest in sending  their own people into the meat grinder. Putin did not mince words in his public response,  stating that ″[The West] must realize that we  

Also have weapons that can hit targets on  their territory. All this really threatens   a conflict with the use of nuclear weapons  and the destruction of civilization. Don’t   they get that?!” The Russian leader also went  on to say that if Macron dared to bring troops  

Into the Russo-Ukrainian battle… they would  meet the same fate as Napoleon’s Grand Army.   It’s a reference that – in typical Russian  fashion – leaves little to the imagination. Macron’s alleged call to arms is the product  of the modern model of the French message;  

A motto that pledges support for those unable  to defend themselves. That said, the address has   sparked a series of follow-up announcements  from allies and other members of NATO. Starting with the U.S., the Western superpower  has made its position classically vague. President   Biden has expressed little interest  in sending troops into the conflict,  

But has said they will continue to provide  military aid so Ukrainian troops have the   weapons and ammunition they need to defend  themselves. It’s reminiscent of Roosevelt’s   Lend-Lease Policy during the advent of the Second  World War. How this will manifest remains unclear,  

But renewed interest in the war effort  indicates that Ukraine will most likely   receive a much-needed infusion in the coming  months. A NATO official, who spoke on condition   of anonymity, emphasized that “there are no  plans for NATO combat troops on the ground   in Ukraine despite the unprecedented  military support from the alliance.”

The Italian government also weighed in on Macron’s  statement. The country’s foreign minister went on   record saying: “When we talk about sending  troops, we must be very cautious because we   must not make people think we are at war with  Russia.” Germany added to this, reinforcing  

Its belief that “no European country or Nato  member state would send troops to Ukraine.” One of the more interesting responses came from  the U.K., where a spokesperson for Prime Minister   Rishi Sunak gave a rather cryptic message. They  said that they had no intention of “large-scale”  

Troop deployment, which suggests that they aren’t  completely dismissing the French sentiments. It should be noted that there were a  number of leaders who openly supported   Macron. One of them happened to be  the foreign minister of Lithuania   who told media outlets that the French  President had their “full support.”

Regardless of the current position  most senior NATO members hold,   Putin’s aggressive nuclear threats have put  the country in jeopardy of becoming public   enemy number one. His hopes that the West  would become more distracted by conflict in   other territories like Israel and Iran have since  been stifled by his inability to remain composed.

For those not connected to the European  continent, it’s easy to forget that this   conflict is a mounting priority for those  closest to the invasion. Macron is simply   acting on what many in the region have  been witnessing firsthand. Every month,   thousands are fleeing the carnage and seeking  asylum in these Western states, which are  

Ill-equipped to handle the economic burden of  a large-scale disaster. The magnitude of this   is essentially doubled when you take into account  that many of these countries relied on Eastern oil   refineries to power their businesses and homes.  It’s quite possible that hostilities with Russia  

Will balloon out of control if Putin continues  on his quest to build a new Russian Empire. The only remaining question – if Macron  were to hypothetically follow through   on his passive threat – has to do with  the French military. More specifically,  

Is it really capable of punching back  against a battle-hardened foe like Russia? According to the U.S., the answer is a bit  complicated. Analysts state: “France’s problem   isn’t breadth of capabilities, but depth. Not  just limited numbers of weapons and munitions,   but also crucial support services, such  as electronic warfare, air defense,  

And airlift capacity.” Put simply, it’s not that  France couldn’t launch a proper offensive… rather   they would require the full force of NATO  if they wished to achieve a quick victory. Taking everything into consideration,  Macron’s assessment of the situation   is quite logical. This is very on-brand  considering how France has changed over  

The last 70 years. It is a country that  has all but sworn to hold up the status   quo by any means necessary, and they  have the firepower to make it happen. Only time will tell if his statement is  a prophecy for what is to come… or just  

Another proposition destined to fall on deaf ears.