Macron, l’enfant terrible – From Dreyfus to Gaza
The world has an inexplicable weakness for all things French. Things just seem to sound and taste better when they are in French. Je ne sais quoi does not sound as smart in English, and puff pastry will never taste as good as a croissant. Living in London afforded us many occasions of jumping in the car and indulging in an authentic Parisian bistro lunch, a quick selfie with the Mona Lisa before returning to London for a late dinner. The caveat being that as soon as you cross the Channel, it is advisable to conceal all obvious signs of Judaism for personal safety.
France has effectively been reduced both culturally and politically to the geopolitical equivalent of an Epcot ride absent the Disney smile and good cheer. This was not a faux pas and did not happen overnight; it has been a steady decline over centuries punctuated with the occasional attempt at relevance that would inevitably dissipate.
Even the Founding Fathers were aware of the distinctions between our revolution that introduced universal freedoms and the French version which preceded the Reign of Terror. The only thing that has been consistent during the five iterations of the Republic is the antisemitism that has always been a foundational premise and a fact of life for French Jewry.
To its credit, the Dreyfus affair was the inspiration for Herzl and his Zionist vision, so it can be said the French played a pivotal role in the founding of Israel. More recently, the situation reached a crescendo when Charles Kushner, the United States Ambassador to France, in a departure from diplomatic norms, felt it critical to publish a letter to Macron decrying the open and accepted animosity towards les Juifs.
In his most recent proclamation, Macron is sans valeur, leading the way to arbitrarily recognize a Palestinian state as a means of rewarding terrorism. France has a track record of mistaking capitulation for statesmanship, so arguably this is the basis for his presumptuous strategy at peacemaking. There is a great irony in his sudden “moral clarity,” given the French go-to strategic reflex to surrender first and moralize later.
France does have real-life experience with a “two-state solution” close to home, when they split themselves into the Republic and the Vichy regime. This was a clever strategy to hedge their bets between the Allies and Axis powers because regardless of the outcome of the Second World War, they could herald their brave “resistance.”
They wasted no time upon the conclusion of the war in distancing themselves from the barbarism of Drancy and the Statut des Juifs. They had already prepared their demon/hero in advance with Pétain and De Gaulle, and they sat back to see how things would play out. A cunning maneuver indeed and a playbook with which they are remarkably au fait.
Embed from Getty Images
It would also not be far-fetched to suggest that every American military quagmire over the last century has been the result of America cleaning up after the notoriously sloppy French. World War II was obviously caused by German aggression, but had the French not folded in the first six weeks, the war would most likely have concluded much sooner and saved countless lives. If the Germans were the flames, the French were the kindling.
Vietnam was a direct result of the French colonial ambitions in Asia that concluded in their eventual humiliation at Dien Bien Phu, which led to American intervention and the Vietnam War.
The Middle East today is still reeling from the Sykes-Picot agreement, which gave France control of Lebanon, Syria, and parts of Iraq. These three failed states have been the casus belli for most conflicts in the region up until and including the present day.
While America gets a bad rap for intervention, in fact, they have spent blood and treasure over the past century dealing with the fallout of the French laissez-faire. Do not even get me started on Africa, where the embers of their “Empire” still burn today in places like Burkina Faso, Niger, and Mali.
France, to this very day, remains the largest colonial presence across the globe, long after the British and others ceded sovereignty to the indigenous populations. Here is a fun fact, France’s longest land border is actually with Brazil.
For this reason and others, one cannot help but smirk upon hearing Macron’s righteous indignation in declaring that he will be recognizing a Palestinian state. Macron assuming the role of a papier-mâché arbiter in the Middle East is effectively the arsonist interviewing for a fireman’s position. Coasting on delusions of grandeur based on yesteryear and with the Eiffel Tower operating as its last semi-functioning empire, there is a rich ironie mordante that only the French can muster.
This is not just about French hypocrisy; this is French domestic policy in action. One might be mistaken to assume that this is a foreign affairs issue at the Élysée Palace, but in fact, with the largest Muslim population in Europe, this is entirely a domestic policy initiative. France is a spent force on the world stage, with zero global relevance today, so this is about placating their constituents in the banlieues who never waste an opportunity to set Paris on fire.
If France were serious about peace, it would start with truth. The Palestinians have rejected every compromise ever proposed. Their leadership is divided between kleptocrats in Ramallah and jihadists in Gaza. The “two-state solution” has been tested, and Gaza was the laboratory. Israel unilaterally withdrew in 2005, and the result was not coexistence but rockets, tunnels, and war. France ignores this reality because it cannot face its own insignificance in that it is not a player but a spectator, not an arbiter but an agitator.
Macron’s calls for a Palestinian state are just another Sykes-Picot déjà vu, France drawing lines on the map it will never defend and leaving others to live with the wreckage. He presumes to be De Gaulle, but governs like Louis XVI, offering the world nothing but platitudes and “let them eat cake” diplomacy.
