The Economist - USA (2022-01-22)

46 Europe TheEconomistJanuary22nd 2022

weaponswithouttroops ontheground,

emulatingnato’s airwaragainstSerbiain

1999.Strikesbyrocketlaunchersandmis­

sileswouldwreakhavoc.Thesecouldbe

supplemented by more novel weapons,

suchascyber­attacksonUkrainianinfra­

structureliketheoneswhichdisruptedthe

country’spowergridin 2015 and2016.

Theproblemisthatsuchpunitivecam­

paignstendtolastlongerandproveharder

thantheyfirstappear.Ifwarcomes,stand­

offstrikesaremorelikelytobea prelude

andaccompanimenttoa groundwarrath­

erthana substituteforit.“Idon’tseea lot

betweenthem andKyiv thatcould stop

them,”saysDavidShlapakoftherandCor­

poration,a think­tank.

TheaimwouldprobablybetohurtUk­

raine,notoccupyit.Thecountryisaslarge

andpopulousasAfghanistan, andsince

2014 over300,000Ukrainianshavegained

someformofmilitaryexperience;most

haveaccesstofirearms.Americanofficials

havetoldalliesthatthePentagonandcia

wouldbothsupportanarmedinsurgency.

RussiamightconsiderwhatAmerica’s

armycallsa “thunderrun”,saysMrShla­

pak,a swiftanddeepassaultona narrow

front,intendedtoshockandparalysethe

enemyratherthanseizeterritory.Andan

attackneednotcomesolelyfromtheeast.

OnJanuary17thRussiantroops,some

fromthefareast,beganarrivinginBelarus,

ostensiblyformilitaryexercisesscheduled

forFebruary.Russiahassaiditwillalso

senda dozenwarplanesandtwos­400air­

defencesystems.Anattackfromthenorth,

overtheBelarus­Ukraineborder,wouldal­

lowRussiatoapproachtheUkrainiancap­

italfromthewestandencircleit.

“Once they’rewithin rocket rangeof

downtownKyiv,”asksMrShlapak,“isthata

situation the Ukrainians want to live

with?” Even if Volodymyr Zelensky,

Ukraine’spresident,iswillingtotoleratea

siege,Russiamaygamblethathisgovern­

mentwillsimplycollapse—anditmayuse

spies,specialforcesanddisinformationto

hastenthatprocess.

Wars,though,unfoldinunpredictable

ways.Russiahasnotfoughta large­scale

offensiveinvolvinginfantry,armourand

airpowersincetheclimacticbattlesofthe

secondworldwar.Countriesunderattack

canjustaseasilystandfirmasfallapart.

IvanTimofeevoftheRussianInternational

AffairsCouncilwarnsofa “longandslug­

gishconfrontation”thatwouldbe“fraught

withdestabilisationof...Russiaitself”.

Evenvictorywouldbecostly.“TheUk­

rainianswillfightandinflictmajorlosses

ontheRussians,”saysPeterZwack,a re­

tiredgeneralwhowasAmerica’sdefence

attachéinMoscowduringtheKremlin’s

firstinvasionofUkrainein2014.“Thisis

goingtobehardforRussia—andtheyare

basicallyalone.”Coupledwiththethreatof

heavysanctionsbeingpreparedbyAmeri­

caanditsEuropeanallies,andtheappar­

entabsenceofanydomesticsupportfora

newadventure,allthismay,evennow,be

givingMrPutinpauseforthought.n

Moscow

Tallinn

Kyiv

Seaof

Azov

BlackSea

BalticSea

UKRAINE

BELARUS

SWEDEN

Gotland

Kaliningrad

POLAND

HUNG.

ROMANIA

TURKEY

LITH.

LAT.

EST.

RUSSIA

Crimea

Controlledby

Russian-backed

separatists

Abkhazia GEORGIA

South

Ossetia

500 km

Source:CSIS

PotentialRussian

advances

NATO members

FranceandEurope

An ever-closer

union

F

iveyearsago,whenBrexitprompted

fears  that  the  European  Union  would

unravel, Emmanuel Macron put Europe at

the  heart  of  his  political  identity.  Suppor­

ters  at  his  rallies  enthusiastically  waved

the eu flag. So it was no surprise that, with

France in charge of the rotating six­month

presidency  of  the  Council  of  the  eu since

January  1st,  the  French  president  headed

on  January  19th  to  the  European  Parlia­

ment in Strasbourg to renew his vows. 

The eu, declared Mr Macron, represent­

ed democracy, progress and peace at a time

when  each  was  under  threat.  Faced  with

rising  authoritarian  powers,  breaches  of

the rule of law within the euand the men­

ace of war on its doorstep, “European civi­

lisation”  needed  to  be  upheld  and  cher­

ished.  He  pleaded  for  a  “new  security  or­

der” in Europe. Resolute Atlanticists, espe­

cially  in  eastern  Europe,  hate  the  idea,

which they think undermines nato, but it

is  an  abiding  French  passion.  France  had

hung  the  eu flag  alone  under  the  Arc  de

Triomphe to launch the French presidency,

noted  the  president—a  decision  met  with

howls  of  protest  by  his  domestic  oppo­

nents. “I’m proud of that,” he declared.

The  French  opposition  meps  in  the

chamber,  however  (including  a  presiden­

tial  candidate,  the  Greens’  Yannick  Jadot),

did their best to turn the event into a cam­

paign  debate.  And  miffed  as  Mr  Macron

was  made  out  to  be,  the  exercise  struck  a

distinctly  domestic  note.  For  the  presi­

dent, expected shortly to confirm that he is

running  for  re­election,  is  hoping  once

again to use Europe as a political football.

In  some  respects,  only  a  brave  politi­

cian seeks to put Europe at the forefront of

a  French  electoral  campaign.  The  country

may  be  co­architect  of  the  post­war  pro­

ject, but in 2005 the French voted in a refer­

endum  against  a  draft  eu constitution.  In

2017 48% of the first­round vote at the pres­

idential election went to candidates, such

as  the  nationalist  Marine  Le  Pen,  who  are

Europhobic or Eurosceptic. Last year a poll

found that only 53% of the French were op­

timistic about the eu, compared with 67%

of Germans.

France is split over Europe. Hostility to

the eu characterises the political extremes.

This includes the radical left, whose candi­

date, Jean­Luc Mélenchon, is better placed

than any other on the left. And it marks the

hard  right,  including  Ms  Le  Pen  and  Eric

Zemmour,  a  polemicist  running  on  a  vis­

cerally anti­immigration platform to “res­

cue France”. 

In  contrast,  there  is  a  broad  pro­Euro­

pean  consensus  among  the  mainstream

candidates.  It  reaches  from  Mr  Jadot  and

the Socialists’ Anne Hidalgo via Mr Macron

to  the  Republicans’  Valérie  Pécresse.  This

broadly  reflects  what  the  French  call

Gaullo-Mitterrandisme:  a  general  continu­

ity  in  foreign  policy  between  Charles  de

Gaulle,  on  the  right,  and  François  Mitter­

rand, on the left, over the need for France

to  retain  an  independent  voice,  while  re­

maining  a  Western  ally,  notes  François

Heisbourg  of  the  Foundation  for  Strategic

Research.  To  this  end  Europe  is  a  way  for

France to enhance its voice, not dilute it. 

Yet  this  underlying  division  over  Eu­

rope is less clear now than in 2017. Mr Mé­

lenchon  no  longer  promises  to  tear  up  all

eu treaties, although he still wants France

out of nato. Ms Le Pen maintains that her

vision  of  Europe  is  the  “antithesis”  of  Mr

Macron’s,  and  wants  to  pull  France  out  of

nato’s  integrated  military  command.  But

she has now dropped all talk of Frexit, and

no longer vows to take France out of the eu­

ro, a policy that proved unpopular. Instead,

by promising to protect the French consti­

tution from eulaw, her strategy is to try to

undermine the union from within, like her

friends in Poland and Hungary.

Mr  Macron’s  most  credible  challenger,

Mrs  Pécresse,  holds  pro­European  views

that are not so very different from his. She

has  had  to  nod  to  the  nationalist  wing  of

her party. She denounced the solo flying of

the eu flag, and backs the idea of building

barbed­wire  walls  to  funnel  migrants  on

the  eu’s  external  border  to  reception

points. But her underlying sympathies are

with the eu as a political project. In short,

nobody  is  quite  as  enthusiasticabout  Eu­

rope as Mr Macron. But norarethe differ­

ences quite as stark as before.n

P ARIS

Emmanuel Macron’s rivals are less

Eurosceptic than before