“This will not be the last contact we will have with the Russians,” says a former French ambassador to Moscow

On Wednesday, French Minister of the Armed Forces Sébastien Lecornu spoke on the telephone with his Russian counterpart Sergei Choïgu, a first since October 2022. But openly divergent reports were then produced. Decryption with Jean de Gliniasty, research director at IRIS and former French ambassador to Russia.

French President Emmanuel Macron denounced, Thursday April 4, “baroque and threatening comments” Russians after the meeting the day before between the Defense Ministers of the two countries, Sébastien Lecornu and Sergei Choïgou, which aimed to transmit “useful information” to the Russians over the Moscow attack. François Hollande, the former President of the Republic, recommended yesterday on France Inter to no longer have any contact with Russia.

For Jean de Gliniasty, research director atInstitute of International and Strategic Relations (IRIS) and former French ambassador to Russia from 2009 to 2013, guest on franceinfo, this would be a serious error.

Franceinfo: Should France break all contact with Russia, as François Hollande suggests?

John of Gliniasty : Of course not. There is consistency in the French approach. On the one hand, we are sort of leading the coalition that supports Ukraine. But on the other hand, and this is the second leg of the French approach, we are trying to establish contact with Russia. This contact is not very happy, but it is the first in two years. Of course, it is marked by lack of mutual trust, by bad manners and all that. But it’s a first contact. And at a time when Americans are withdrawing more or less quietly – but it is clear that even if Biden wins, Americans are not as involved as they have been in the past – it is important to have this global approach, that is to say both supporting Ukraine and at the same time talking to the Russians.

How can we interpret Moscow’s statements following this telephone exchange? Obviously the Elysée did not appreciate…

Everyone pulls the blanket for themselves. When there is this type of interview marked by a lack of trust, groping, distrust and all that, there is no common statement. So the press releases, each one the facts on their own. The Russians said what interested them and what they wanted to say in their opinion: basically, that the French were “went to Canossa” (the fact of giving in completely to someone, of going to humiliate oneself in front of one’s enemy, editor’s note). And the French said what interested French opinion, that is to say that we talked about terrorism, which is a concern for all French citizens. We did not talk about Ukraine, because it would have been disloyal to Ukraine to talk about kyiv behind its back. But in reality, it is the start of a debate. Certainly, it took a bad turn, but I think that this will not be the last contact we will have with the Russians.

Do you see there a resumption of dialogue between Paris and Moscow?

On questions of terrorism, I believe it is desirable for Paris and it is desirable for the Russians. The problem is that the Russians are locked into a logic which consists of saying that Ukraine is not a state, is not a country, is not a nation, but that it participated in the Moscow attack, which she was involved in without really being the sponsor. The Russians have locked themselves into a starting position on this issue of terrorism which is not very positive. But I believe that, despite everything, the two countries don’t really have a choice, and not only them. The fight against Islamic terrorism has always been sidelined and sheltered from wars, tensions, the war in Ukraine, both by the Russians, the Americans, the French and others.

Do you, like the Head of State, Emmanuel Macron, think that Russia will target the organization of the Olympic Games, including in informational terms?

I’m not ruling it out, and besides, I think that if the president said it, it’s because he probably has information. So, I don’t know if it will be Russia itself, more or less paid hacker groups, but I think there is a real risk. As sport is obviously a national cause, as in many regimes of this type, the fact of having been put aside a little, of not being able to march behind their flag, is experienced for them as a humiliation or as a capitis deminutio, even as an insult. And so that obviously leads to reactions of all kinds. At the same time, parallel Games, at the same time perhaps hacker interventions. So in any case, they will not make things easier for the Games from which they feel unfairly excluded.