"Macron's inadequate policies are consequences of France's historical trauma" Foreign pundits on Caliber.Az

The modern, frankly speaking, toxic policy of France causes more and more bewilderment, rejection, and sometimes outright indignation in Baku. It is more than obvious that all political manipulations of Paris in the South Caucasus are aimed at destabilising the region, creating chaos and imbalance. And in the future, provoke Azerbaijan with this negativity. But the call for sanctions against Baku, the recognition of imaginary “ethnic cleansing” is a policy inherent in some odious regime existing outside the borders of the civilized world, and not at all in a European country. Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev very succinctly described these problems of the foreign policy of Paris in his statement: “France, which cannot abandon the history of colonialism, does not respect the rights and dreams of freedom of the peoples living in overseas communities and territories outside Europe, on the Pacific Islands and the Atlantic oceans, in every possible way hinders the realization of their aspirations.”

What is the reason for this direction in Paris? What is he counting on? The Caliber.Az correspondent addressed these questions to foreign political scientists.

According to Turkish political expert Engin Ozer, classical French politics is always a policy of two lines, and one must take into account how this policy works. Often, through the Foreign Ministry, relations with a certain state can be quite partnership-based and constructive, but along the second, disguised line, everything is built exclusively on the interests of Paris and can easily work against this or that state.

“In principle, this is a sign of typical imperial policy, and therefore France ranks itself among the list of world powers. For example, the French Foreign Ministry maintains a state dialogue with Tripoli, but it is possible that French intelligence simultaneously communicates closely with Haftar, looking for weaknesses in Libyan policy. In line with this, the official preferences of Paris may change,” says the political scientist.

As for France’s attitude to the situation in the South Caucasus, according to Ozer, it is greatly influenced by the large Armenian diaspora of this country. And Macron is trying to play by its rules.

“In general, the European Union is more pragmatic and realistic and tries to maintain a certain political balance. That is, if Germany is more inclined to develop partnerships with Azerbaijan, and this is primarily due to energy cooperation between the two countries, then France supports Armenia and promotes its interests. This means, from the position of Brussels, everything looks quite balanced. It is worth considering, however, that Paris is a distant player and will not take any active actions in the South Caucasus, “on the ground,” playing more at the level of political insinuations and contradictions. For any specific actions, France's resources are too small and cannot withstand the positions of Azerbaijan and Türkiye. So, no immediate threat can come from it,” Ozer said.

The Israeli publicist, head of the international relations commission of the Union of Journalists of Israel, Rostislav Goltsman, examines the modern politics of France from a slightly different aspect. He says it's important to keep in mind that this country has not yet fully recovered from the trauma of World War II.

“With the goodwill of Churchill, in response to Stalin’s proposal to include China in the UN Security Council, France was also declared a victorious country. Although, as we remember, there was a collaborationist regime there, and it was liberated by the Anglo-American landing - General de Gaulle’s troops were then generally in North Africa, in Morocco. And this trauma of being a “non-winner” haunts the French to this day,” says the political scientist.

To a certain extent, this post-traumatic syndrome was smoothed out, according to Goltsman, by the scale of the personalities who stood at the head of France for a long time. For example, Prime Minister Leon Blum is a man who survived a Nazi concentration camp and then led the country. This is General de Gaulle himself. However, France is still the country with the largest number of colonies. For many, this is probably a revelation...

"The point is that in parting with their colonies, the French did not complete the process, as, for example, Britain did by converting its former colonies into commonwealth countries," Goltsman explained.

This did not happen in France, although the policy of its other [former] president, Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, was to change the previous inequalities against the inhabitants of the French colonies.

“If previously everything was determined according to the strict principle “nationality is citizenship,” then according to d’Estaing’s approach, it is citizenship that is the definition of a Frenchman. Which actually meant that any resident of the French colonies could obtain French citizenship and consider themselves French. In the president’s opinion, this should have united the French as a nation, but, as we see, this did not happen,” the Israeli expert states.

And now, he points out, one can see that the same residents of any Arab country or Armenia who arrived in France do not consider themselves French at all.

“This experiment failed, but the French do not want to admit it. All the unrest and unrest that is happening in France is proof of this. That is why French foreign policy is often so toxic, reflecting the post-traumas and new traumas of domestic politics. A clear indicator of these algorithms is Macron’s behaviour,” Goltsman noted.

According to him, in Israel, this is more than well understood. For example, recently the Chancellor of Germany, the President of the United States, and the Prime Minister of Great Britain visited there on visits of friendship and support. Macron also announced his visit, but cancelled it at the last moment...

“So those Arabs who have lived in France for a long time and should have been committed to the French flag remained Arabs. And for them, Macron's trip in support of Israel is simply an insult. That is why Macron himself, as the living embodiment of this not entirely adequate policy, uttered his already sensational phrase: “Israel has the right to self-defence, but at the same time it must maintain proportion.” The question is – proportion of what? In the number of severed heads or rapes? This is complete nonsense, but the French president has already said it. Or, for example, why does this country encourage the separatist sentiments of Quebec, although France and Great Britain seem to be political allies? And the same unhealthy style is now being revealed by Paris in relation to the South Caucasus. It is unclear where the criticism of Azerbaijan “on behalf of the French” and the thirst for sanctions came from. It would seem that everything is already clear: Armenia recognized Karabakh as Azerbaijani, all problems with this land have been resolved, but Paris continues to dwell on this topic, create tension, and pump the region with weapons. That is, the same severe post-trauma that France cannot survive, and President Macron is no exception in this sense,” Goltsman added.