#316 Re: 回顾和展望乌克兰情况
发表于 ： 2024年 5月 2日 12:11
https://www.economist.com/europe/2024/0 ... ds-english
May 2nd 2024
Emmanuel Macron in his own words (English)
The French president’s interview with The Economist
Editor’s note: The interview was conducted at the Elysée Palace in Paris on April 29th.
The Economist: Do you stand by what you said about possibly sending ground troops to Ukraine?
Emmanuel Macron: Absolutely. As I said, I’m not ruling anything out, because we are facing someone who is not ruling anything out. We have undoubtedly been too hesitant by defining the limits of our action to someone who no longer has any and who is the aggressor! Our capacity is to be credible, to continue to help, to give Ukraine the means to resist. But our credibility also depends on a capacity to deter by not giving full visibility as to what we will or will not do. Otherwise we weaken ourselves, which is the framework within which we have been operating until now. In fact, many countries said that in the weeks that followed that they understood our approach, that they agreed with our position and that this position was a good thing. I have a clear strategic objective: Russia cannot win in Ukraine. If Russia wins in Ukraine, there will be no security in Europe. Who can pretend that Russia will stop there? What security will there be for the other neighbouring countries, Moldova, Romania, Poland, Lithuania and the others? And behind that, what credibility for Europeans who would have spent billions, said that the survival of the continent was at stake and not have given themselves the means to stop Russia? So yes, we mustn’t rule anything out because our objective is that Russia must never be able to win in Ukraine
After that, the question is what is the American strategy towards China and what is the Chinese strategy towards the Americans? I prefer to choose my relationship with the United States, with China, rather than have it imposed on me by one of the two parties, either pushing me in one direction or pulling me in the other. Very clearly, we are not equidistant. We are allies of the Americans. We have disagreements from time to time, and we must be able to acknowledge and respect these disagreements. We also have trade relations with China, which is a great power. We need it, we can trade with it within the limits I mentioned earlier, and China is also fundamental to major issues such as climate and stability.
Then I look at the planet: billions of people live neither in China nor in the United States of America. From India to Brazil, from Africa to the Indo-Pacific, all these people are saying: we have preferences, friends, sometimes the same as you, but we would still like to find a space where we can defend our values and our interests, continue to work with one and continue to be involved to some extent with the other. It’s good and necessary that Europeans can continue to talk to this part of the world too. And that’s the whole point of what I’ve done with the Paris Pact for People and Planet. There’s an agenda for fighting inequality and for development and investment based on solidarity. There is an agenda for the climate, for biodiversity, which must be thought through with this part of the globe that is in the majority. And it cannot be regarded exclusively through the lens of Sino-American tension.
。。。
But there comes a time when it is in the interests of the Americans for the Europeans to play a greater role in the defence of their neighbourhood and in this conflict. Because the Americans cannot be placed in this strategic dilemma. There’s a way of thinking which is to look at the world in a lateral sense, as I have just done. To say: I want to keep my autonomy and I want to talk to all the others. I don’t want to be crushed between two blocs. There is also our complementary way of doing things, which is to say: if I am a good partner of Americans and I owe them a great deal for my security over the last few decades, my responsibility is never to put them in a strategic dilemma that would mean choosing between Europeans and their own interests in the face of China. And so we have to say that it’s our job to do that.