President Le Pen would pose a threat not only to Europe’s internal order, but also to its external security. Her manifesto has relatively little to say about defence and foreign policy: Russia is referred to once, indirectly (the war in Ukraine has shown that “the policy of fait accompli has gradually become the norm” in international relations). China is mentioned as the country from which COVID-19 came; the US is the only country directly criticised, for deploying its law extra-territorially. But her concrete foreign and security policy proposals would be a significant departure from the post-Cold War French approach. They are founded on folie de grandeur: having described France as the world’s second largest power by geographical extent (based on the extent of its maritime zone around French Polynesia and other Indian Ocean and Pacific territories) she calls for a policy of “free hands” – that is to say, not being tied down by alliances. That is a policy prescription for a super-power, not a medium-sized European power that has decided to undermine its partnerships in the EU as well as NATO. Even the post-Brexit UK has tried to compensate for lost influence in the EU by increasing its political and military investment in NATO and in its bilateral relationship with the US.
By contrast, in order to give France back its freedom of action, Le Pen wants to withdraw from NATO’s integrated military structure, which France rejoined in 2009 after a 43-year absence. Such a step would deprive France of influence (one of the two Supreme Allied Commander posts is always held by a senior French officer, with the other going to an American) and complicate NATO planning. As in the Cold War, no doubt France and its allies would find ways to navigate the problems, but at the cost of time, additional bureaucracy and less effective decision-making.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member