I say Macron should send Ukraine and the EU to the bin and fix his own country’s problems
What, to be told not to aggressively expand the EU towards Russia?
Can the vote just happen and he can go back to doing nothing?
a little late to the game, no?
Where did they get that from?
I watched the whole speech and I frankly don’t know where this assumed call could have been mentioned?
Possibly this?
>These next few weeks should lead us to bring to fruition a European proposal building a new order of security and stability. We must build it between Europeans, then share it with our allies within the framework of NATO and then offer it for negotiation with Russia.
But that doesn’t really sound like he pushed for a dialoge with Russia without allies.
Many other newspapers seem to have interpreted his words as a call for a new security architecture, not for a dialog with Russia excluding other allies.
There are only five mentions of Russia directly in the speech, all of them in the following text:
>Europe must finally build a collective security order on our continent. The security of our continent requires a strategic rearmament of our Europe as a power of peace and balance, in particular in the dialogue with Russia. This dialogue, I have been defending it for several years. It is not an option because both our history and our geography are stubborn. Both for ourselves and for Russia, for the security of our continent which is indivisible, we need this dialogue. We Europeans must collectively set our own demands and put ourselves in a position to enforce them. A frank, demanding dialogue in the face of destabilization, interference and manipulation.
>
>
>What we need to build is a European order based on the principles and rules to which we sided and which we acted upon, not against or without, but with Russia 30 years ago and that I want to recall here: the rejection of the use of force, threat, coercion, the free choice for States to participate in the organizations, alliances, security arrangements of their choice, the inviolability of borders, the territorial integrity of States, the rejection of spheres of influence.
>
>
>What I am talking about are the principles that we Europeans and Russia signed 30 years ago. It is up to us, Europeans, to defend these principles and these rights inherent in the sovereignty of States; it is up to us to reaffirm its value and effectively sanction its violation. Sovereignty is a freedom, it is at the heart of our European project, it is also a response to the destabilizations at work on our continent. This is why we will continue with Germany, within the framework of the Normandy format, to seek a political solution to the conflict in Ukraine, which remains the source of current tensions, and your collective support is necessary to support our efforts.
>
>
>This is also why we will ensure that Europe makes its voice heard, unique and strong, on the question of strategic armaments, the control of conventional armaments, the transparency of military activities and respect for the sovereignty of all European states, whatever their history. These next few weeks should lead us to bring to fruition a European proposal building a new order of security and stability. We must build it between Europeans, then share it with our allies within the framework of NATO and then offer it for negotiation with Russia.
(This is translated based on the French transcript here:
And so history repeats itself. Remember when Britain and France tried to make peace with Hitler and just gave him Czechoslovakia in the hope of “peace”? You know what happened two years later?
non merci, it’s a road to nowhere
Yes. Ukraine should stay as a neutral buffer state. I don’t want a war with Russia over this US NATO bullshit. Don’t tolerate Russian encroachment on the Ukrainian border, but don’t start a war over America’s ego. We are not American vassal states.
8 comments
I say Macron should send Ukraine and the EU to the bin and fix his own country’s problems
What, to be told not to aggressively expand the EU towards Russia?
Can the vote just happen and he can go back to doing nothing?
a little late to the game, no?
Where did they get that from?
I watched the whole speech and I frankly don’t know where this assumed call could have been mentioned?
Possibly this?
>These next few weeks should lead us to bring to fruition a European proposal building a new order of security and stability. We must build it between Europeans, then share it with our allies within the framework of NATO and then offer it for negotiation with Russia.
But that doesn’t really sound like he pushed for a dialoge with Russia without allies.
Many other newspapers seem to have interpreted his words as a call for a new security architecture, not for a dialog with Russia excluding other allies.
There are only five mentions of Russia directly in the speech, all of them in the following text:
>Europe must finally build a collective security order on our continent. The security of our continent requires a strategic rearmament of our Europe as a power of peace and balance, in particular in the dialogue with Russia. This dialogue, I have been defending it for several years. It is not an option because both our history and our geography are stubborn. Both for ourselves and for Russia, for the security of our continent which is indivisible, we need this dialogue. We Europeans must collectively set our own demands and put ourselves in a position to enforce them. A frank, demanding dialogue in the face of destabilization, interference and manipulation.
>
>
>What we need to build is a European order based on the principles and rules to which we sided and which we acted upon, not against or without, but with Russia 30 years ago and that I want to recall here: the rejection of the use of force, threat, coercion, the free choice for States to participate in the organizations, alliances, security arrangements of their choice, the inviolability of borders, the territorial integrity of States, the rejection of spheres of influence.
>
>
>What I am talking about are the principles that we Europeans and Russia signed 30 years ago. It is up to us, Europeans, to defend these principles and these rights inherent in the sovereignty of States; it is up to us to reaffirm its value and effectively sanction its violation. Sovereignty is a freedom, it is at the heart of our European project, it is also a response to the destabilizations at work on our continent. This is why we will continue with Germany, within the framework of the Normandy format, to seek a political solution to the conflict in Ukraine, which remains the source of current tensions, and your collective support is necessary to support our efforts.
>
>
>This is also why we will ensure that Europe makes its voice heard, unique and strong, on the question of strategic armaments, the control of conventional armaments, the transparency of military activities and respect for the sovereignty of all European states, whatever their history. These next few weeks should lead us to bring to fruition a European proposal building a new order of security and stability. We must build it between Europeans, then share it with our allies within the framework of NATO and then offer it for negotiation with Russia.
(This is translated based on the French transcript here:
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sed/doc/speech/20220117/1642588724331_01_fr.docx
Watch the whole speech in English here:
https://youtu.be/irJPTHztdhg?t=420)
And so history repeats itself. Remember when Britain and France tried to make peace with Hitler and just gave him Czechoslovakia in the hope of “peace”? You know what happened two years later?
non merci, it’s a road to nowhere
Yes. Ukraine should stay as a neutral buffer state. I don’t want a war with Russia over this US NATO bullshit. Don’t tolerate Russian encroachment on the Ukrainian border, but don’t start a war over America’s ego. We are not American vassal states.