“It is absolutely necessary that France take the initiative”, pleads a historian

While the meeting between the heads of Russian and American diplomacy on the subject of the crisis in Ukraine, Friday January 21, in Geneva, did not lead to any tangible result, the historian Antoine Arjakovsky, estimates on franceinfo that“It is absolutely necessary for France to take back the initiative”. According to director of research at the Collège des Bernardins, specialist in Ukraine, “France has been progressively marginalized”.

franceinfo: Does France still play a role in the Ukrainian crisis?

Antoine Arjakovsky: The problem is that France has been gradually marginalized and the Russians are now trying to marginalize France. They organize meetings with the United States in Europe, without Europe and therefore without France. It is absolutely necessary for France to regain the initiative. President Macron has been to Russia several times. He has not been to Ukraine once, even though Ukraine is considered a country which has signed an association treaty with Europe, which defends democracy, which fights for Europe. There have been deaths for Europe. There has not been a single visit from a French president.

We say to ourselves that, if France is President of the Council of the European Union, it is really up to France to take a strong initiative by going to Ukraine, as Canadians, Germans and Americans do.

Antoine Arjakovsky, historian

at franceinfo

Everyone goes to Kiev to show the solidarity of these countries. France should go to Kiev in the name of France, in the name of Europe, to really express all the support that France gives to Ukraine, to democracy, to peace in Europe, with threats much stronger vis-à-vis the Kremlin. What Macron said in the European Parliament, namely that he was in favor of setting up a security strategy in Europe and that it would take several months since it requires internal negotiations with the United States. And then they want to negotiate with the Russians as well. It is not at all rhetoric that can worry the Kremlin.

Discussions continue between Americans and Russians. Is this good news?

It is necessarily positive that they meet. [Antony] Blinken [le chef de la diplomatie américaine], obviously trying to buy time, since he had promised to respond in writing next week to the ultimatum that had been sent last December by the Kremlin in the United States. For me, the most important thing is that the Americans are aware of the fact that they have to reverse the strategy of the Kremlin, which is this kind of victim rhetoric where the Russians have tried to explain that they are the ones suffering from encirclement by NATO and that they are the victims of history. The problem is not on the Western side. The problem is with the Russians.

What is the room for maneuver of the Americans?

The Americans seek to put Russia before its responsibilities by explaining that the 100,000 soldiers [massés à la frontière ukrainienne], it is a real, proven and recognized fact. The Russians, who announced today through the mouth of Lavrov that they were not threatening Ukraine, must agree to be consistent with their actions. The position of the United States is to show that there are lies on the Russian side and that, on the contrary, they must be consistent. If they really want to talk on a serious and diplomatic level, then anything is possible. But if they don’t want to discuss, if they continue to mass troops at the border, then there is no room for manoeuvre. It will be an economic, financial response.

Does the continuation of discussions necessarily involve the withdrawal of troops to the border?

This is enormous pressure on the Ukrainians. There are troops who have been massed for several months. There are hybrid wars, propaganda, border attacks, bomb threats. It’s a huge pressure. So much so that President Zeletski made a solemn declaration the day before yesterday on television in front of the Ukrainians: “Above all, don’t panic. The Russians want us to crack in the face of this psychological pressure and give Russia arguments to attack.” This is especially what should not be done. To discuss and try to find a geostrategic solution, we must push the Russians to move back their tanks, their men and to change their rhetoric.


source site-29