Views: 6
Europeans must take control of their own destiny and security – Minister.
Q. – Before getting into politics, a reminder that you lived in the United States from 2014 to 2022. Back then you were a researcher on international relations, based in Washington. Donald Trump is on track for a probable victory – you experienced Donald Trump’s first victory, you were in Washington then – with much clearer-cut scores than expected. What’s your reaction to these results?
THE MINISTER – We must wait for them to be confirmed, but as you know, the United States is already our ally. So we’ll work with the elected American president, whoever they are. We worked with Donald Trump during Emmanuel Macron’s first mandate, between 2017 and 2020. We’ll have to find ways of working on our common interests. But basically, what I see – and this is what I already felt during the first mandate – is that the response lies with us, lies within us; it’s about Europeans’ ability to take control of their own destiny, their security, at the very time when we’re seeing this tendency in the United States.
Q. – We’ll obviously get back to that, but it’s clear there’s been a sort of naivety, there’s been a sort of failure to understand the reasons why Donald Trump could return to power, even a sort of denial. In a book you published in 2019 entitled Le paradis perdu [Paradise Lost], you wrote: “Donald Trump wasn’t a parenthesis. Donald Trump has never been an accident of history.”
THE MINISTER – Yes, exactly. That’s what I think. I think he speeded up deeper trends we’ve seen in America’s democracy, in its relationship with the world, with protectionism, with foreign policy. Basically, three mistakes were made in 2016. The first was not to want to see the issues that made Donald Trump a success: the issue of deindustrialization, the issue of immigration, and also the rejection of interventionism in foreign policy and what that actually means for us Europeans, but also for what I’d call us moderate pro-Europeans in Europe. The second was to believe he was indeed a parenthesis in history and that everything would go back to normal four years later, and that we’d be able to return to the transatlantic relationship on the same foundations. And the last one, basically, was to go to Washington, as Europeans, in an uncoordinated way and prioritize bilateral, often transactional relations. And once again, it’s European unity, European sovereignty that will enable us not only to defend our security and our interests but also reinvent that transatlantic relationship on more balanced foundations. That’s the message France and President Macron have been sending since 2017.
Q. – Yes, that’s right. But therein lies the challenge: we’ll see how long European unity can stay solid and unbroken. And as you say, won’t the Europeans, won’t the 27 go to Washington in an uncoordinated way? Let’s take the issues central to US-European relations one by one. Defence first of all. Does Europe have the will, does Europe have the means to defend itself? Does it have the means to take control of its security?
THE MINISTER – Look, in any case the answer is simple: it has no choice. Today we have a war on our borders, Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, which has a direct impact on our security. Europeans can’t agree to their security being decided on without them, to a capitulation being imposed on Ukrainians tomorrow without the Ukrainians, without the Europeans. We must create the means to continue supporting the Ukrainians, continue defending Ukraine. It’s the precondition for our security. If we want to be heard, we must be capable of carrying weight economically, by reinvesting in our competitiveness: that’s what the Draghi Report showed. (…)
Q. – Earlier we heard Viktor Orban, the Hungarian Prime Minister, already welcoming a fine victory by Donald Trump. He’s on Vladimir Putin’s side, he’s on Donald Trump’s side in terms of ending the war in 24 hours, as Donald Trump has promised. In your opinion, may there be a Washington-Budapest axis, a new pivot in the transatlantic relationship?
THE MINISTER – Division among Europeans would damage us both collectively and even individually, if we want to be capable of defending our interests. But I’d rather emphasize the statements I’ve heard from certain people. For example, a tweet at the weekend by Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, who said whether it’s Kamala Harris or Donald Trump, the response is/lies in Europe. We must be capable of ensuring our security. He said: “The era of geopolitical outsourcing is over.” (…) So we have partners who talk about European sovereignty, about the need to take control of our destiny, with our American allies, but to do so in order to carry weight in that relationship – which, once again, is what France and President Macron have been saying for a few years. (…)
Q. – Let’s turn now to the hot issues the 27 EU members will face if Donald Trump is indeed the new American president. He wants to introduce new customs duties, which could amount to more than 10% of all American products. Is Europe preparing to wage a trade war with the United States?
THE MINISTER – Protectionism wouldn’t be in anyone’s interest, since we’re each other’s main trade partners. For a few years now, Europe has started being less naïve about these commercial issues and is finally equipping itself with instruments, tools so it can defend its interests. We did so barely a few days ago by imposing customs duties on Chinese electric vehicles, because the Commission carried out an investigation. The European Commission discovered unfair trade practices, subsidies from China for its electric-vehicle industry. And we’ve been able to do what the Americans under Biden did too, when they imposed 100% tariffs on electronic vehicles: we imposed customs tariffs. So the Europeans must go on developing these tools, these instruments on this issue so they can collectively defend themselves. But once again, entering a spiral of protectionism isn’t in anyone’s interest.
Q. – But on this issue too, aren’t the 27 beset by their differences? Can France and Germany find common ground? We know that the Germans really need their markets in the United States. We know that the Italians need their markets in the United States. On this subject too, don’t we risk seeing Europe smash itself to pieces over these economic issues?
THE MINISTER – I strongly believe we face the same challenge. I was talking to you earlier about the Draghi Report. When you see that the Americans have created twice as much GDP as Europe in the past 30 years… Today, on issues such as artificial intelligence and quantum computing, the United States receives the bulk of investment. So reinvesting in our industrialization, in future-growth industries, completing the single market by unifying capital markets, giving innovators and entrepreneurs the resources to innovate in Europe as well, as is the case in the United States – this is an issue affecting France, Germany and all our European partners. And that’s why…
Q. – But it’s clearly understood that France is advocating a muscular power relationship with Washington. But will you be followed?
THE MINISTER – We must be able to adopt power relationships, but we must also be able to invest in our competitiveness, in our productivity at European level, together, because this will be how we carry weight too in the global balance of power. Going beyond simply the relationship with the United States, let’s look at what we can do in Europe for the Europeans. This will also be how we carry weight in a potential power relationship. (…)./.