The fragments of this text were created in November 2022, immediately after Olaf Scholz visited China. Now China has visited Emmanuel Macron in company with ridiculed and lost in global arenas like our Ewa Kopacz, Ursuli von der Leyen. I have so returned to this text, due to the fact that it is already clearly visible how Germany and France want to regain global importance and give the US a signal that they will change their geopolitical strategy.
And this signal is indicated by the visits of O. Scholtz, E. Macron and Ursula von der Leyen in China. With these visits to a country that is an enemy of the United States, they want to get them back to supporting the German and French EU and thus giving Germany all over Europe, including Central and east Europe. Like Germany, Russia.
They seem to effort to "threat" the United States that if they do not give them Europe (with emphasis on our countries, including Poland's central-eastern parts) they are ready to enter a geostrategic alliance with China at the expense of the US.
Both countries realise that their geopolitical importance has fallen to the lowest values for many, many years and the war on which they lose, the countries of Central and east Europe are gaining with Poland. For Germany, the growth of the military, geopolitical and economical importance of Poland is unacceptable and one more time it gives emergence to an awakened centuries-old anti-Polish rage.
The reaction of Germany and France to the aggression of W. Putin to Ukraine, and so de facto the earlier decades of close cooperation with Russia at the expense of all Europe, revealed not only the weakness of these 2 countries, but their rebellious selfishness.
In the case of Germany, we can even say that after the Second WWII, the provisions adopted in the framework of the concept of Mitteleuropa and the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact and the already celebrated Russian-German condominium were almost implemented. In fact, it is Germany, France and their part of the EU that are guilty of creating a war between Russia and Ukraine.
During the Beijing visit of O. Scholz, "there were any crucial statements concerning, among others, Russia and Taiwan, but it would be naive to anticipate that they would change the policy of the PRC," said Dr. Marcin Przychodniak from the Polish Institute of global Affairs (PISA). According to him, the visit was Berlin's "political error" utilized by the PRC to "promotion its own communicative of cooperation with the EU and Germany, for example, for planet peace" (...) The Chancellor announced after gathering Xi that he had asked him to usage his "impact" on Russia to break up the "aggressive war" against Ukraine. At a press conference with Prime Minister Li, he besides stressed the work of the PRC for safety in the region. He stated that Germany adhered to the "one China" policy, but that any change in the position quo on Taiwan would gotta take place peacefully and with the agreement of both parties" (...) Scholz was accompanied by a delegation of German industrialists in Beijing. The PISM expert pointed out that during the visit it was announced, among another things, that mRNA vaccines against the coronavirus of the German company BioNTech would be allowed to be utilized in China, initially for foreigners surviving there. After this declaration, BioNTech stock prices increased by 5 percent - stated Reuter agency" [1].
Prof. Bogdan He had in an interview with the surviving room24 regarding Germany, among others, stated that "More and more politicians are opposed to supporting Putin. But the Russian lobby is inactive strong, and Germany under Scholz is Russia's 5th column (...) In the Polish context, the problem is far greater than interior tensions (in Germany: kj), which are the global economical links of Berlin. It is not only a long-term cooperation with the Russian Federation, but besides the fact that 30 – 40 percent of German exports go to China, which conduct a criminal policy. They are no uncertainty a threat to democracy worldwide. In the meantime, Germany is making dentures with them, applying the German First rule in practice, namely Germany first. This policy must change, and I hope that the United States will yet force this change on German policies. likewise to the situation in Ukraine where the milk simply spilled, there is simply war. And we have any symptoms of change in Germany. Although, of course, the ruling SPD is inactive a pro-Russian formation (...) I think Chancellor Scholz and his people are doing everything to prevent Putin from harming (...) That is why I believe the United States is the only warrant of safety in Europe today. Therefore, since the end of planet War II, the Kremlin's goal has been to push the United States from the continent. It's inactive the same policy that Joseph Stalin developed. Among another things, it was the dependence of individual countries on Russian natural materials. And already during the Cold War, we were dealing with cooperation between Berlin and Moscow. This alliance above the heads of another countries was very dangerous for Finland, Poland, Romania – countries threatened by this Russian aggression. Of course, the nature of this threat changes – after 1990 fresh states were created in the russian space. There was russian aggression before, now it's Russian. But the ideology of “Russian Miru” is besides fatally threatening to its neighbours. Unfortunately, an ally was seen in Germany for decades in the Kremlin. After February 24 something changed – it is about the attitude of the public, any politicians. And Chancellor Scholz, although inactive pro-Russian, cannot go out and say "yes, I am for Putin" [2].
E. Macron's visit to China can besides be considered as a visit under the motto of France First (First France), but that now the "French firk" has usurpatically begun to talk on behalf of all Europe, or possibly alternatively the European Union. And this Beijing stay of E. Macron was much broader politically and more dangerous to us and the full EU than the earlier Chinese visit O Scholz. And I think it was strictly agreed with Germany - hence it was held "under the supervision" of Ursula von der Leyen, who was treated by the Chinese authorities as almost a individual non grata. Her stupid face after being treated like this is invaluable... But the fact of her supervision by the head of the EC is uncontested.
E. Macron signed a 51-point, joint declaration with Xi Jinping [3].
------------------------------------
"It begins with points on the "strategic partnership" between France and China and the announcement of regular meetings "at the highest levels". We can besides read (point 4) about the "deeper dialogue" between the Chinese leadership liable for the confederate theatre of activities (Taiwan) and the Command of the French Armed Forces in the Pacific region. This declaration is eloquent adequate that Beijing immediately after the end of Macron's visit began large maneuvers around Taiwan, whose script predicted an armed invasion. The French president could not have not known this, and this means that the cited point has a completely different pronunciation and is not any innocent diplomatic or rhetorical ornament, even more so since it is further written (paragraph 6). "France reaffirms its policy of 1 China", which means that it considers Taiwan to be a rebellious province. Moving on, points 8 and 9 are connected with atomic issues. France and China declare that they intend to "enhance coordination and cooperation in order to jointly safeguard the authority and effectiveness of the arms control and non-proliferation government and accelerate the global arms control process." This wording must be read together with a akin message by Xi Jinping and Putin, late signed in Moscow, in which the United States is blaming the atomic Sharing programme for breaking the rule of atomic non-proliferation. The message of Paris and Beijing is not formulated in diplomatic vacuum, due to the fact that if it includes the "authority and effectiveness" of arms control, it concerns both Iran's policy and Joe Biden's declaration on atomic weapons in South Korea.
In this context, attention should besides be paid to the fresh declarations by Sebastian Lecorn, the French defence minister, on atomic possible (it is to stay French and will not be converted into European) as well as the fresh announcements of an increase in the military budget, but especially what this money is to be spent on. By 2030, it is expected to emergence to EUR 413 billion, which means a leap from the current 44 billion spent annually to 69 billion in 2030 (in 2017 it was EUR 33 billion), but this does not mean expanding French force in the way we think about it. And so, planned for the years 2027 – 2030, the entry into service of the 42 "Rafal" combat helicopters was moved to 2032, which means that alternatively of the planned 185 by the end of the decade the French will have 137 of these machines. It is besides worth noting that it is planned to rise the maximum age of reservists to 70 years (in any specializations up to 72), all due to the fact that Macro would like to double their number. Paris intends to work on a fresh generation of reflection satellites, to increase the production of ammunition, most of all, a crucial part of these measures are to go to the restoration of stocks (equipment) depleted in connection with what Paris has transferred to Ukraine, but besides to Greece, due to the fact that we must remember about the military pact signed in 2021 against Turkey. Speaking in January at the Mont-de-Marsan Macron Air Base, he said that “the time for the dividend of peace will run out” and should be prepared, including more effort, for a possible war. There is no uncertainty that Paris besides considers the possible of its armed forces as 1 of the crucial tools for leveraging its global position, especially European.
On cyber issues, as recorded, “including 5G, the French side undertakes to prosecute fair and non-discriminatory treatment of licensing applications from Chinese companies on the basis of laws and regulations, including the national safety of both countries.” specified wording means that Paris will not join Washington's proposed policy of blocking Chinese technology companies. There are inactive many words about economic, political, cultural and technological cooperation. A declaration (point 37) on "enhancement of cooperation" in the G20 is peculiarly crucial so that it can play its function as the main forum for global economical cooperation". This is besides a meaningful evidence due to the fact that it is known that Americans are alternatively emphasising G-7, and 1 must remember that there is Russia in the G20 and no 1 is going to throw it out of its midst.
Not only the common French – the Chinese declaration built the context of this visit. In the course of this process, we have faced a demonstrational disregard by the Chinese Ursuli von der Leyen, who gave a hard speech for a European policy on Community policy towards the mediate State before leaving for Beijing. Macron had many confrontations with the head of the European Commission, and the media reporting the visit stressed that he was delighted with the temperature of the reception. This says a lot about both how the French president views the Union and about the individual relations between politicians at the summits of the Community. The economical dimension of this visit is besides crucial due to the fact that it is crucial for the French industry. Thus Airbus is expected to sale 160 aircraft and 50 helicopters to China, and the French energy company EDF has signed an agreement on engineering cooperation, including in the atomic area, with the Chinese state-owned company CGN, French meat companies were allowed on the marketplace there, Suez is expected to build desalination installations for seawater, the transportation of bioethanol has been announced and L’Oreal will sale cosmetics. Although the Anglo-Saxons compose that "Macron has made a fool of himself" in China, the economical results of this journey from the position of Paris are undoubtedly to be considered measurable. 1 thing is clear - Macron had in head France in China, and in the first place French interests which he thought could be promoted by focusing on Europeanism.
He besides raised this issue in interviews that he gave after the visit. In Les Echos, he said that “Europe has not built this strategical autonomy for besides long. Today, the ideological conflict is won.” In Macron's opinion, the fundamental hazard to our continent is that it will be "triggered" into Chinese-American competition. The point is that Europe needs time to build its strategical autonomy. In the opinion of the French President, the decision has already been taken on this issue – both the European Union's taking a common debt and the fresh decisions relating to the joint European procurement of ammunition. So the decision has been made, now it is about time, due to the fact that our continent must have adequate of it to build its possible - both military and economic. And this is the question of time that Macron is referring to erstwhile he declares that the acceleration of American-Chinese rivalry is not our (Europe) hand, due to the fact that specified a script will force polarization, the formation of 2 camps and consequently will lead to the vassalisation of European states towards the United States. On the issue of peace talks between Ukraine and Russia, Macron says that "now is the time of war" and that it is not the time to start negotiations, but it does not change the fact that it is now worth for the powers to talk about the situation, due to the fact that that is how conditions are created to let negotiations to start. In this case, the message is besides very clear – we are waiting for the Ukrainian offensive, followed by a political phase - namely a negotiation phase. Paris and Beijing, as I believe Macron could then make proposals together. As he says, “strategic autonomy means that we have akin views with the United States, but whether it is Ukraine, relations with China or sanctions, we have a European strategy. We don't want to get into the logic of a block against a block. On the contrary, we must "reduce the risk" of our model alternatively than trust on others, keeping the strong integration of our value chains where possible." What is worth remembering from this interview is Macron's conviction that an "ideological battle" has already been won, i.e. no 1 questions the request to increase capabilities, including military ones, Europe. If we are talking about expanding the production of arms and ammunition (it is worth remembering that its largest European manufacturer, Nammo, is simply a Norwegian company, although with the participation of the Finnish government), the French always believe that a tiny part of the larger budgets should be allocated to European companies, i.e. French and German, and so in fresh discussions on joint purchases of ammunition were opposed to the admission of companies outside the Union (the Koreans and Turks). So Europe is already building its strategical autonomy, and what it needs is time. France is ready to lead this fresh Europe, with more military potential, even more so if Germany has been slowing down the changes announced. The French are already doing it, and they have armed forces in better condition. Thus, if in future the military origin plays a greater function in European policy, Paris' position will increase. All the more so if you succeed, and that's what Macron does, impose a political agenda, a imagination of a relation with major players, both friends and rivals. There is only 1 weak point in this strategy – no time. For this reason, France is not curious in dividing the planet into 2 fighting blocks, which objectively supports the communicative on the emergence of a fresh global order with many centres of force.
In an interview with political journalists, the French president went further, saying, for example, that it is not in Europe's interest to depend on the dollar - the world's reserve money. He besides reiterated his declarations on the "strategic autonomy" of our continent that had already been said.
Anglo-Saxons' reaction to these words was easy to predict. The Wall Street diary in its editorial commentary wrote that Macron's rhetoric is in the hands of those representatives of the American strategical establishment who advocate the transfer of the United States' interest from Europe to Asia, and may even lead to Trump's triumph and neo-isolationist stream in the upcoming elections. another commentators were more eloquent erstwhile they wrote that on strategical autonomy of Europe, he said "a man who is incapable to make the streets of Paris burn" (J.J. Carafano) or that his declarations attest "to the failure of contact with reality" (Noah Barkin).
Let's leave the malice aside, think about what “political plan” Macron is doing? In my opinion, he is curious in the division of both Atlantic and European relations. Paradoxically, Trump's triumph in the U.S. elections or another typical of the isolationist current would be in Paris' hand due to the fact that it would act objectively for a "strategic autonomy". Similarly, on political solutions for Ukraine. France does not seem to be open to discussion, announced at the next NATO summit in Vilnius, on the safety warrant for Kiev. Similarly, the possible of Ukraine's membership of the Union must be considered (let us remember that a general referendum must be held in France and won). Thus, in Macro's political plan, the peace declarations mean an effort to build a multilateral agreement, with China's commitment, and that means, even if only partially, taking into account Chinese interests in Ukraine. For example, the anticipation of participating in the reconstruction process. It is worth remembering that in Kiev there are supporters (though Paul Klimkin, erstwhile abroad minister) of this option. In the case of Klimkin, it is besides worth noting that interest in Chinese activity is connected with emphasising the importance of cooperation between Ukraine and France and Germany. erstwhile he was head of the Ministry of abroad Affairs, he did not memorize himself as a proponent of rapprochement with Warsaw, and Poroshenko practiced politics with a clear German – French vector. And so it is now. The imagination of China's commitment to the reconstruction of Ukraine is accompanied by a strong emphasis on "European option", at the expense of Atlantic (US, UK, Poland). The problem is, of course, that the Americans have not yet made a decision, and even, as the Financial Times has late written about it, citing diplomatic sources, in terms of beginning up the possible of NATO membership to Kiev are opponents of this option. This step is inactive considered to be a possibly escalation action in the ongoing war in Washington, and the "putting" of Central Europe means, according to many American analysts, taking on an additional burden and America needs something completely different. This in turn causes that in American strategical calculation Germany's decision is essential. And Macron talking about Europe-China cooperation plays on German economical interests in the mediate State in order to weaken Berlin's temptations to the Atlantic option. Macron's calculation is clear – if the Americans make the decision that Kiev is waiting for (security guarantees, increase in supply, conditions for the end of the war, participation in the reconstruction process), a fresh government of forces will be formed in Central and east Europe, which, given the pro-American sentiments, will lead to a strengthening of European dualism, the actual division of the European Union into "Europe of 2 Speeds". If Washington is incapable to formulate a credible political plan for Europe's security, then the east flank states will have no choice - strategical autonomy, understood as an increase in the independency of the military continent, will become a fact. In the optics of Paris, this is simply a wine-like situation, and what does it look like from our perspective? Not so good. We request to put forward our strategy, especially if Washington is not going in a good direction for us.
------------------------------------
That's all Marek Wake Up - writer in politics.pl. A very long passage of his article, but the journalist's observations are truly valuable and worth getting to know.
""Generally Emmanuel Macron sparked an avalanche of criticism after he said that Europe should not become 'a follower of America' and must avoid getting into a conflict between the US and China over Taiwan. Macron thus assured Xi that France would not lift a finger in defence of Taiwan if China pressed for invasion.
The French president made these remarks in an interview on board the plane after a three-day state visit to China, where he was welcomed with the highest honors by Chinese president Xi Jinping.
In an interview with journalists Les Echos and Politico, Macron said that Europe should be the 3rd planet order power, alongside the US and China, in which France would play a leading role.
The emergence of Europe as an independent geostrategic player has been Macron's mark for years, according to a tradition dating back to the founding president of the V Republic of Charles de Gaulle, who saw France as a balancing force between the Cold War blocks. But the fact that the French president spoke in an interview as representing Europe was very badly received in the United States.
The French president stated that the "great risk" facing Europe is that "it is entangled in crises that are not ours, which prevents it from building its strategical autonomy." "We do not want to fall into block versus block logic" - he added.
According to Les Echos, Macron said, "Do we [Europeans] have an interest in speeding up Taiwan? Nope. The worst would be to think that we Europeans must be copycats on this subject and adapt to the American plan and Chinese exaggeration."
- I'm sorry. Europeans cannot solve the crisis themselves in Ukraine, so how can we say [China] crediblely about Taiwan: be careful, if you do something wrong, we will be there? If you truly want to increase tensions, this is the way," said Macron.
- I'm sorry. If there is an acceleration of the conflict between the American and Chinese duo, we will have no time or resources to finance our own strategical autonomy and become vassals, while we could become the 3rd force [in the planet order] if we had a fewer years to make it - he continued.
One of the Euro MPs in his conversation with The Guardian stressed that the French leader does not talk for the EU. "Macron says 'Europe should' and 'we Europeans', but speaks for France, can't truly talk for Europe".
- I'm sorry. It may be a bit amazing to emphasise strategical autonomy now in April 2023, as the planet has changed in the last 14 months - said the source, suggesting that the Russian invasion of Ukraine has challenged Europe's ability to become a 3rd force in the global order, as Macro suggests.
Norbert Röttgen, a German centre-right MP who is simply a associate and erstwhile president of the Bundestag abroad Affairs Committee, said that Macron turned his journey to China into a "PR bust for Xi and a abroad policy disaster" for Europe. "With its thought of sovereignty, which it defines in demarcation alternatively than partnership with the US, it is increasingly isolated in Europe" - he believes.
Reinhard Butiköfer, a Euro MP who presides over the European Parliament delegation for China, described Macron's visit to China as a "complete disaster". He besides added that Macro's "dream" of strategical EU autonomy and becoming a "third superpower" is "out of reach".
The claims that Europeans must act independently of the United States on crucial issues and ignore Washington's interests are unacceptable to countries on the east flank of NATO - including Lithuania, the Czech Republic or Poland - whose endurance depends on American safety guarantees - notes the portal "NY Post".
Mujtaba Rahman, the head of Europe at Eurasia Group's investigation firm, said that Macron's last comment time was bad. "Speaking these remarks erstwhile Chinese military exercises surrounded Taiwan - and just after his state visit to China - was a mistake. This will be interpreted as calming Beijing and green light for Chinese aggression" - he comments.
The expert added that Macron's interview was seen as a farewell present for Xi. "Another unsuccessful effort (after Putin) to have a sweet conversation with an autocrat," Rahman said.
According to Politico, the Presidential Palace in Paris checked Macron's quotes before publication as a condition for giving an interview and insisted on removing statements in which Macron spoke "more honestly" about Taiwan and Europe's strategical autonomy" [4].
Bottom line.
Germany and France - just like Russia - have always wanted the US to be driven out of Europe. But now the situation has changed so much that they have already openly decided to force Americans to resign from the European continent to shift their activity to the O-Chinese area.
Both countries lost their planet position through the war in Ukraine and took a very risky effort to rebuild their European hegemony. But to do so, they will at all costs decide to banish the Americans from Europe.
Both visits to China have been and are highly negative in the world. For countries in Central and east Europe, the possible success of German-French activities would be a disaster.
However, I believe that the American alleged "deep state" representing the power of the US on the planet phase will not let itself to retreat from Europe. I even think that - paradoxically - Germany and France have made their moves so much "reward" to the US that they will lose even more in the geostrategic sense.
It is worth noting that both countries are members of NATO, which has late expanded to include Finland, and Sweden will shortly join this group. This is not why the US is de facto expanding NATO's east flank to leave Europe now.
In addition, the U.S.'s commitment to the war in Ukraine is large adequate that an abrupt change in American course to if only China would be treated worldwide as a kind of desertion, akin to the celebrated withdrawal of American soldiers from Afghanistan. And that's what the U.S. can't afford today.
In general, I agree with the assessment of this visit: 'On strategical autonomy of Europe,' said 'a man who is incapable to make the streets of Paris burn' (J.J. Carafano) or that his declarations bear witness to 'lost contact with reality' (Noah Barkin)'.
It is besides possible to specify the actions of O. Scholz. He besides seems to have lost contact with reality given that Germany is not entirely a free country and until 2099 are incapacitated by Allies from WWII: the United States, large Britain and France. This is due to the fact that on May 21, 1949 a secret treaty (der Geheime Staatsvertrag) was signed limiting the sovereignty of the future Bundesrepublic. Its signatories were the forming German administration and 3 business powers: the United States, the United Kingdom and France. This paper states that until 2099, or 150 years after its conclusion, each successive Chancellor of the national Republic Germany must sign the business power of a loyale called colloquially der Kanzlerakte. It limits Germany's sovereignty in key areas related to widely understood State safety and is first signed during the first visit of the fresh German Chancellor to the US [5]. And even if the French quit this privilege, they become the United States and the UK!
[1] ]]>https://forsal.pl/world/chiny/articles/8581474,expert-visit-scholza-in-...]]>
[2] ]]>https://www.salon24.pl/newsroom/1293215,German-sub-government-scholza-sa-pi...]]>
[3] ]]>https://wpoliticy.pl/world/641965-macron-turns-to-issue-autonomy-stra...]]>
[4] ]]>https://www.salon24.pl/newsroom/1295228,macron-sincerely-about-question-taiwan...]]>
[5] https://nie Correctni.pl/blog/rafal-brzeski/kanclerska-lojalka. Subsequent German governments effort to question the existence of this paper and consider its copy to be a fake. However, various leaks and statements of German politicians (even veiled erstwhile chancellors) or scientists let to confirm its existence.
