Leaving China after a three-day trip, French President Emmanuel Macron caused an international stir in an interview, saying that Europe should go its own way on Taiwan, without “following” either China or the U.S. His comments triggered a series of questions and criticisms, precisely at a time when China is conducting military exercises around the island coveted by Beijing.
The interview, given to news media Les Echos, France Inter, and Politico, was published on Sunday, April 9th. Emmanuel Macron defends a “third way” inspired by the Gaullist tradition—but this time not for France, but for Europe. He explains: “The worst thing would be to think that we Europeans should be followers on this issue and adapt to the American pace and to a Chinese overreaction.” He fears that Europe will start “following U.S. policy, out of a kind of panic reflex.”
The president’s remarks were incendiary, and the editors of Politico admitted to having made cuts to their article at the request of the Élysée Palace. Even more controversial remarks about European autonomy and the defence of Taiwan were not included. What appeared in the press was nevertheless enough to trigger the storm.
If, in the French president’s mind, he meant to signal away from any temptation toward escalating alarms regarding the island of Taiwan, many people understood his words, to the contrary, as an encouragement to the Chinese offensive.
To Emmanuel Macron, speaking of the tensions between Beijing and Taipei, “these crises are not ours.” For many observers, this comment rings painfully true at a time of war in Ukraine, so close are the issues of Ukrainian independence and Taiwanese independence. In the United States, hostile reactions have been forthcoming. In a speech, Republican Senator Marco Rubio explained that if Emmanuel Macron was speaking for Europe, the U.S. should learn the lessons and “focus on Taiwan and Chinese threats and let the Europeans handle Ukraine.”
Similar opinions echo in the American press, whether it be the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal. The New York Times considered Emmanuel Macron’s statement as “undercutting” American efforts to contain the influence of the authoritarian regime of Chinese President Xi Jinping. The Wall Street Journal described the French president’s stance on Taiwan as a “blunder.” Curiously, the American presidency insisted, on the contrary, on calming the mood, expressing reassurance about the “excellent relations” existing between Paris and Washington, in no way damaged by the polemical interview. “We are comfortable and confident in our excellent bilateral relationship with France and in the relationship that the president [Joe Biden] has with President Macron,” said John Kirby, spokesman for the National Security Council.
Emmanuel Macron’s European partners do not see it that way.
What gives Emmanuel Macron the right to speak on behalf of Europe? This is the question that several EU member states are asking themselves, furious about his statement. In eastern Europe, the vindictiveness against Macron is particularly strong. The position of balance that Macron claims for Europe is not understood there, and his claim to speak on behalf of the 27 member states is deemed unacceptable. In Poland and the Baltic States, it is taken for granted that European policy must be conducted under the protective wing of the United States. Estonian MP Marko Mihkelson explains that Europe should rather “stand by the United States to balance the power of China.”
In France, experts on China relations and international relations scholars criticised Macron’s present stance towards China, which they perceive as a rehash of his failed attempts to maintain contact with Putin’s Russia. Before 24 February 2022, Macron tried in vain to dissuade Vladimir Putin from intervening. Today, Emmanuel Macron would have the United States solely responsible for the tensions, and not China, similar to when he judged that NATO’s expansion to the east was feeding Russian resentment. A “total error of analysis,” according to Antoine Bondaz, a specialist at the Foundation for Strategic Research interviewed by Le Figaro.
Did Macron speak in the name of Europe, or in the name of France? For the Swiss newspaper Le Temps, the key to Emmanuel Macron’s untimely declaration is to be found in his desire to conform to French opinion. A significant part of the French, still driven by an old Gaullist reflex, has a tradition of being wary of France’s exclusive alignment with American policy. It is to them that Emmanuel Macron would have sought, clumsily, to send a signal. Given his current unpopularity, it is not certain that the signal was perceived: Emmanuel Macron does not have the shoulders of General de Gaulle, and the France of 2023 is no longer the international power it was in the Gaullist era in the 1960s when General de Gaulle’s voice was piercing in the midst of the Cold War. For Antoine Bondaz, even from the French side, the Macronian position is not justified. On Twitter, he clarified his thoughts: France certainly does not have the same interests as the United States, but it is no less important for France to ensure stability in the Taiwan Strait and the country has nothing to gain from a major destabilisation of the Indo-Pacific area.
The interview with Emmanuel Macron, although published on Sunday, April 9th, was conducted on Friday, April 7th. A few hours later, the Chinese government launched major military operations around Taiwan. “We could not imagine a more catastrophic timing,” deplores Antoine Bondaz.
