Open Letter: Mr. President Macron

Mr. President,

I am writing you a letter,
Which you may read,
If you have the time…

Rest assured, Mr. President, I am neither a pacifist nor a deserter.
I am simply a citizen, concerned about defending our national interests, but also increasingly worried about developments around the war in Ukraine. A concern, I must admit, partly fueled by your statements.

Your latest, televised on Wednesday, March 5, gathered 14 million of our fellow citizens. You achieved a remarkable 70% audience share to announce what? That beyond Ukraine, “the Russian threat affects us,” that “its aggressiveness seems to know no boundaries,” that Russia is—and you repeated it—“a threat to France and to Europe,” and that in these conditions, “to remain spectators would be madness.”

While Trump is renewing ties with Russia, you are labeling it our adversary, even our enemy, echoing Zelensky’s refrain: “after Ukraine, Putin will take Europe.” A highly debatable assumption, considering the Russian army’s poor performance after three years of war against a much smaller and poorer opponent.

While the United States is seeking a quick ceasefire—even suspending military aid to Kyiv—you announce the intention to keep fighting, or more precisely, to let Ukrainians continue a battle that is now lost, since Ukraine cannot militarily reconquer Donbas and Crimea. For that, you wish—alongside most of your European colleagues—to replace the already-suspended American aid. How far, and with what goals? With what means? No one knows…

Your decisions seem firm and your resolve absolute. Yet, to reassure concerned citizens, it’s worth recalling your habit of repeated U-turns. Since 2017, you’ve taken positions in foreign policy that some might call contradictory:

• In Lebanon, you lectured on democracy before losing interest. Today, we are absent from the region.
• In Israel, after October 7, you called for an international coalition against Daesh before demanding an immediate ceasefire.
• In Africa, after proposing a renewed relationship with young Africans, we were expelled from the Sahel after ten years and billions of euros.
• In Europe, you followed Germany’s ecological agenda before realizing the urgency of France’s nuclear program.
• In Ukraine, you began by talking to Putin, then declared, “Russia must not win.”

Finally, you brandished France’s nuclear umbrella, offering it to European partners—an uncertain strategy, especially given our financial and military limitations.

Despite your careful phrasing, I’ve seen in Paris and beyond a wave of deep anxiety triggered by your statements. You said: “You are legitimately worried.” Perhaps they weren’t before your speech; they certainly are now.

So the fundamental question remains: what strategy should we follow in the face of war in Ukraine and Europe’s security architecture?

• If Russia is an existential threat, why haven’t we rearmed in three years?
• Europe talks defense, but hasn’t backed it with meaningful budgets.
• If Poland and Germany have chosen rearmament, France—under budget constraints—can only do so by cutting social spending.

If, as you say, Russia is reviving its imperial ambitions, we must prepare. But it’s likely Russians and Americans will strike a deal, and Ukraine will have to accept it. Sanctions will be lifted, Russia will re-enter the world economy—and we Europeans may find ourselves isolated, without a diplomatic way out.

In conclusion, this war is already a disaster for France and for Europe. It may get worse if further miscalculations occur. In these conditions, Mr. President, I hope you understand why I am not reassured by your direction.

Pierre Lellouche
March 10, 2025