Yves here. Former ambassador Chas Freeman observed that it was unnatural for EU countries to be dependent on the US for security, which then dictated substantial elements of their foreign policy. He said they needed to grow up. As the post below describes, that process is starting, with the biggest states, France, Germany, and Poland, jockeying for position.
By Andrew Korybko, a Moscow-based American political analyst who specializes in the global systemic transition to multipolarity in the New Cold War. He has a PhD from MGIMO, which is under the umbrella of the Russian Foreign Ministry. Originally published at his website
French President Macron’s declaration on Wednesday that he’s flirting with extending his country’s nuclear umbrella over other continental allies shows that he’s throwing down the gauntlet to Germany and Poland for leadership of post-conflict Europe. Outgoing German Chancellor Scholz published an hegemonic manifesto in December 2022 that later took the form of what can be described as “Fortress Europe”, which refers to the German-led attempt to lead Europe’s containment of Russia.
This concept requires Poland subordinating itself to Germany, which unfolded over the first half of last year but then slowed as the ruling liberal-globalist coalition started taking a more populist-nationalist approach towards Ukraine ahead of May’s presidential election. Even if this started off insincerely, it’s since assumed a life of its own and created a new dynamic in the latest circumstances brought about by Trump’s return whereby “Poland Is Once Again Poised To Become The US’ Top Partner In Europe”.
Poland’s economy is the largest of the EU’s eastern members, it now boasts NATO’s third-largest army, and it’s consistently sought to be the US’ most reliable ally, the last point of which works most in its favor amidst the transatlantic rift. If these trends remain on track, Poland could prevent France or Germany from leading post-conflict Europe by carving out a US-backed sphere of influence in Central Europe, but it would have a shot at leadership in its own right if conservatives or populists come to power.
The sequence of events that would have to unfold begins with either of them winning the presidency, and this either pushing the liberal-globalists more in their direction ahead of fall 2027’s parliamentary elections or early elections being held on whatever pretext and then won by conservatives or populists. Poland’s former conservative government was very imperfect, but their country served as a bastion of EuroRealists (usually described by the Mainstream Media as Euroskeptics) during those eight years.
Should it reassume that role upon the return of conservative rule in parliament, perhaps in a coalition with populists, then this would perfectly align with Trump’s vision and could result in Poland either leading similar domestic political processes across the continent or at least in its own region. Even if only the second-mentioned scenario materializes, it would most effectively prevent liberal-globalist France or Germany from leading Europe as a whole by bifurcating it into ideologically competing halves.
France’s nuclear weapons are the ace up its sleeve though that it might play for keeping some conservative/populist-inclined societies under liberal-globalist sway by extending its umbrella over those countries which fear that Russia will invade but that they’ll then be abandoned by the US. That might help reshape some of their voters’ views if they come to feel dependent on France and thus decide to show fealty to it by keeping their ideologically aligned governments in power instead of change them.
This doesn’t mean that France will succeed, but what was explained above accounts for Macron’s unprecedented proposal in the context of his country’s Great Power ambitions at this historic moment. A lot in this regard will likely depend on the outcome of Romania’s domestic political crisis, which readers can learn more about here, since the liberal-globalist coup against the populist-nationalist frontrunner in May’s election redux could further entrench French influence in this geostrategic frontline state.
Few are aware, but France already has hundreds of troops there, where it leads a NATO battlegroup. It also signed a defense pact with neighboring Moldova in March 2024, which could hypothetically include the deployment of troops to there too. France’s military presence in Southeastern Europe places it in a prime position for conventionally intervening in Ukraine if it so chooses, whether before or after the end of hostilities, and suggests that Macron will focus on this region for expanding French influence.
Should progress be made, then three other scenarios would be possible. The first is that Poland and France compete in Central Europe, with the first eventually extending its sway over the Baltics while the second does the same over Southeastern Europe (within which Moldova is included in this context due to its close ties with Romania), thus trifurcating Europe between them and Germany. In this scenario, Germany would also have some influence over each Central Europe region, but it wouldn’t predominate.
The second scenario is that Poland and France, which have been historical partners since the early 1800s, cooperate in Central Europe by informally dividing the Baltics and Southeastern Europe between them in order to asymmetrically bifurcate Europe into imperfectly German and Polish-Franco halves. The Polish part would either remain under partial US influence if Poland continues aligning with the US even under liberal-globalist rule or the liberal-globalists might pivot towards France and away from the US.
The final scenario is that all three employ their Weimar Triangle format to coordinate tripartite rule over Europe, but this is dependent on the liberal-globalists capturing the Polish presidency in May and then aligning with Berlin/Brussels over Washington. It’s therefore the least likely, especially since the liberal-globalists might pivot towards France instead of Germany/EU as a compromise between their ideological, electoral, and geopolitical interests ahead of fall 2027’s parliamentary elections.
Regardless of what ends up transpiring, the “military Schengen” that was pioneered between Germany, Poland, and the Netherlands last year and to which France expressed an intent to join will likely continue incorporating more EU members in order facilitate these three aspiring leaders’ interests. Germany needs this for its “Fortress Europe” plans, Poland needs its allies to swiftly come to its aid in a hypothetical war with Russia, while France needs this to entrench its influence in Southeastern Europe.
What’s ultimately being determined through the interplay of France, Germany, and Poland’s competing leadership plans for post-conflict Europe is the continent’s future security architecture, which will also be influenced to varying degrees by Russia and the US, be it jointly through their “New Détente” and/or independently. There are too many uncertainties at present to confidently predict what this emerging order will look like, but the dynamics described in this analysis account for the most likely scenarios.
What could possibly go wrong?
Macron may say that he will extend the French nuclear shield east but you can only trust him as far as the door. The next day he is likely to say the opposite as he changes his mind all the time – sometimes on the same day. And it’s not like France has a stable government and Macron’s position is totally secure. Do you really want to have your country’s security depend on Macron?
Another factor is that there are fractures in Europe that will work against common security. The Baltic States would love to have Europe declare war on Russia tomorrow – while they stayed back to make the sandwiches. Hungary and Slovakia want no part of the lunacy that has enveloped European leaders of which a few privately support those two country’s stance. More countries will join this mini-block over time.
And of course the war in the Ukraine has severely undermined the European leadership as they have revealed themselves to be incompetents. Efforts to replace them with the right (as the left has been systematically destroyed in the EU) are encountering fierce opposition and the cancelling of the Romanian election has shown the depths that they are willing to plumb to keep power for themselves. So any new power configuration is going to be compromised right from the get-go.
He said they needed to grow up.
If this is what it means to “grow up” then you can count me as a child. I think Lavrov’s recent comments on Napoleon, Hitler and Europe’s attempts to dominate Russia, and the outcome of those attempts in death of millions, is apropos.
This analysis is interesting, but it is more a diagnosis of continuing problems and fantasies than an indication of what happens after NATO and the European Commission (von der Leyen and Kajas) admit defeat of their ultra-marvelous adventures in Ukraine.
If I may put it this way: What of the PIIGS? The PIIGS, who likely will end up footing the bill? That is, Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece, and Spain. As an Italian commenter has a pointed out, the same Euro Commission that didn’t want to give 300 billion euro to Greece now wants to send 800 billion euro to non-member Ukraine (?). Oh.
The economic disadvantages to the PIIGS are enormous. Living as I do in the Undisclosed Region of Italy, I will point out that Italy is second in the EU in industrial production and, as I discovered recently, first in value added in agriculture. Spain is not so far behind Italy in these regards (having a smaller population).
I tend to think it unlikely that the Lithuanians want to deal with the tenderness of the Poles, who consider them to be bumpkins. Likewise, the Czechs, who will recall Polish misbehavior during the 1938 crisis — a crisis much quoted these days with important details left out.
The French and Germans have limited influence in the former Yugoslavia, because they fomented the mess there, which still hasn’t been settled.
See this article from today’s Links for the English (and I do mean the English) angle and deceptions:
https://consortiumnews.com/2025/03/05/europes-facing-saving-theater-on-ukraine/
from the astute Joe Lauria.
For those who read Italian, Barbara Spinelli, who is a power in her own right, describing the disasters of the rearmament effort (that will land on Italy):
https://www.nuovatlantide.org/barbara-spinelli-cronaca-interno-politica-il-nemico-delleuropa-e-il-riarmo-di-ursula/
Barbara Spinelli’s father was the remarkable Altiero Spinelli, who wrote a manifesto on European integration while a prisoner of the fascist regime on the island of Ventotene. Ernesto Rossi, Eugenio Colorni, and Spinelli worked together (during their “spare time” as prisoners) and are considered the Italian “fathers” of integration as well as participants in creating the post-war constitution and new social order.
In short, the diagnosis is of a north-south split, because no one in southern Europe is going to take Polish pretensions seriously. And an ascendent Germany? Oh.
If they could include the RF in their vision of the future they would have a stronger hand in a multi polar world. And I wonder where Turkey fits.