Mind the Gap: How France and Germany Can Spearhead Joint Foreign Policy Initiatives Now

Mind the Gap: How France and Germany Can Spearhead Joint Foreign Policy Initiatives Now  

(extraits du dossier dirigé par Claire Demesmay, DGAP, Berlin) : lire ici

Edited by Claire Demesmay 

In light of the current instability on Europe’s borders and uncertainties about the international role of the US under the administration of President Donald Trump, it is high time for Franco-German foreign policy initiatives. With a possible new German government in sight, a window of opportunity opens for new joint action by the two countries at the core of the EU. At the same time, differences between France and Germany, both on policy issues and in terms of their strategic cultures, could impede any such cooperation. This study shows how Paris and Berlin can bridge – and exploit – these gaps to facilitate joint initiatives, even in the short term, on four key topics: Russia, transatlantic relations, Syria and Turkey.

Syria: Associating German with French Initiatives

Frédéric Charillon & Andreas Rinke  

The conflict in Syria currently stands at the center of much of the international debate because it triggered a destabilization of the entire Middle East region – with the military involvement of a large number of foreign countries. The armed conflict also sent huge numbers of refugees to neighboring countries and Europe. As a result, Syria swiftly climbed to the top of the diplomatic agenda
for Germany and France. Despite the shared urgency, however, both countries have very different views on the conflict: This is due partly to historical reasons, and partly to the fact that France and Germany play different roles in world politics and hold different views on the use of military power. Nonetheless, the time for joint initiatives is now better than ever before – frstly, because  both countries share common interests in the Middle East, and secondly, because the election of French President Macron might help fnd a common stance. A common French-German strategy for Syria, and for the wider Middle East, is both possible and necessary, and the EU offers the best framework in pursuing this. Paris made it clear that it wanted to promote new initiatives. Associating Germany with them would be indispensable.

France and Germany: Different Approaches Toward Syria

Germany and France diverge widely in their approaches toward Syria for at least three reasons. These relate to the two countries’ different historical involvement in the region, to their divergent attitudes on the use of military force, and lastly, on the context of current terrorist attacks.

The historical factors at play in the issue date back to colonial times: Unlike Germany, which does not have any colonial background in the Middle East, France used to exert tutelary power in both Lebanon and Syria and has kept strong links with the Levant ever since. Paris’ political clout in Lebanon somewhat decreased when frst, the Syrian, and then the Iranian grip on the country intensifed after the Civil War (1975-1989). But a struggle for influence between the West – mainly France and the US – and the Syrian-Iranian camp remained. Several attacks on the French territory in the 1980s, as well as the assassination of the French Ambassador in Beirut in 1981 and
later the killing of French hostages were attributed to Damascus, Tehran and their local allies, such as Hezbollah.  

Lire la suite

How the U.S. presidential results are being seen around the globe

Article paru dans The Conversation

Learning to work with Trump, despite everything

Frédéric Charillon, Université Clermont Auvergne, France
Unless the new president makes substantial changes to the positions he’s already taken, three developments are very likely:

• We are at the dawn of a new wave of anti-Americanism around the world, from which the United States will not be able to recover quickly. The image of the America portrayed in the speeches that Trump has given will not be easy to repair.
• More than ever, U.S. foreign policy will be a series of extreme shifts and oppositions – other political forces or bureaucracies in the U.S. will no doubt oppose certain positions Trump may take. A measure of paralysis is to be feared.
• European allies, whatever they may say, will have to learn to work with Trump. He will seek to be charming, and – over time – could attract some to his anti-interventionist rhetoric. However, a number of countries will be constrained by segments of their populations completely opposed to any display of cordiality with Trump, who for them embodies absolute evil. It will still be necessary to deal with him, but one good aspect is that he probably has no ideology, making him more pragmatic.

The real question, however, is what leeway Trump will have in an America beset by doubt, divisions and political paralysis. Does he even want to reconcile with the world the part of the United States that didn’t flinch when he suggested building a wall on the Mexican border or banning all Muslims from entering U.S. territory? If he doesn’t, the relationship between the United States and the international community could enter a particularly difficult phase.

Supporters of Donald Trump react as a state is called in his favor, as students watch the live results of the U.S. presidential election, at the University of Sydney in Australia. Jason Reed/Reuters