VS’is a rare voice in public debate. François Léotard was Minister of Defense between 1993 and 1995. From Fréjus where he lives, the former president of the Republican Party attends, taken aback, the war between Ukraine and Russia. François Léotard analyzes the reasons for the conflict and regrets that the West has spent so much time talking to a “gangster”, as he calls Vladimir Poutine, who only understands “the balance of power”. The former minister also regrets that the European Union has not taken the measure of the importance of uniting and speaking with one voice. A project carried by Emmanuel Macron since his election, as recalled by the reading of the speech of the Sorbonne, delivered in 2017. The author of Little Praises for surviving in foggy weather confides in Point and declares to vote in more than 30 days for the President of the Republic.
Point : How to explain this excitement and this war in Ukraine?
Francois Leotard: In a way, Ukraine for Putin is the Loire Valley for France: Orléans, Beaugency, Notre-Dame de Cléry, it’s a nostalgic song… It’s an Orthodox patriarchy that was at the heart of Russian history, a place that remains important for the orthodoxy on which Putin relies politically. It is also a country that joined the West and did not hide it as far as individual freedom and the separation of powers are concerned. This constant comparison with the West is unbearable for all the dictators of the world, and this, however imperfect, is our true nobility. The fundamental movement followed by Ukraine since Maidan was a liberal evolution, incompatible in the eyes of the Kremlin with Putin’s authoritarian and personal system. In a way, it was, in his fantasies, America becoming his neighbour. This paranoia is a sign of political weakness for which military force becomes the only recourse. Ideas increasingly ignore borders. We know it since the XVIIIand century for Russia… And the Western world has opened up, for better or for worse, to the “disruption of all the senses”. Putin has chosen, like all dictators, lies as one of the tools of his power. He is a biological and nostalgic liar… Macron, who is almost the opposite of this man, tried everything in good faith to defend the very idea of peace and dialogue. It is both his honor and his peril, because Putin listens only to force. He is like a child who has cheated and does not want to hear anyone reproach him for it. And we speak to a thug with naturally the greatest respect. The tragedy is that he does not even hear what is said to him in a language in the true sense of the term “foreign”. The tank is its real and unique argument.
READ ALSOUkraine: Is Putin crazy? The “tsar” (and Russia) on the couch
Has the world in general, and France in particular, been too conciliatory towards Vladimir Putin?
I believe. I don’t dispute the idea that we could have relations with Russia other than hostility. When President Macron said that we could have a special relationship with Putin, it was a utopia. We could have a cultural relationship. There is an intellectual brotherhood with the Russian world. But the dialogue does not work and we cannot build normal relations with Russia, because the leaders are not normal leaders. Putin is a terrorist and there was no trust in him. We had the weakness to believe that the leaders had abandoned this Soviet spirit linked to power. This is not the case. These leaders understand only force. With us, it’s not our kind of beauty. We are tolerant, we want to solve problems through dialogue and freedom of thought. For Putin, dialogue is abasement. You know, to talk, you need two people… You can call him for hours, but once he hangs up, he does the opposite. We discuss and, meanwhile, the tanks are advancing!
READ ALSOAlexandre Adler: “The world is experiencing the tipping point of the century”
Exactly, how do you analyze Emmanuel Macron’s crisis management?
I believe there is extraordinary goodwill in Macron. But good will is not enough. We were wrong. It was necessary to strengthen Ukraine more quickly, to understand the national feeling that exists in this country. In reality, everything we do today should have been done earlier. This is what happens when the economy is considered an absolute, almost totalitarian priority… President Macron’s energy and intelligence are undeniable. He assumed his national and European responsibilities with dignity.
Finally, Putin opened the eyes of Europe… Germany breaks a taboo by delivering arms to Ukraine
It is indisputable. We only progress through crisis and sudden changes. We are forced to change. But it’s like a boxing match: at the beginning you don’t answer, at the end you answer, but you’re already beat up. It will be very difficult to restore the balance. Germany has taken a historic turn. It is a life-saving start. I worked a lot at the time with Chancellor Kohl and Defense Minister Volker Rühe. Germany wanted to be the peaceful power in the heart of Europe. They were surprised at our military efforts. We were right.
READ ALSOWar in Ukraine: Germany’s brutal transformation
This is the end of naivety…
Yes, and I would add the end of a feeling of comfort that had intoxicated us: the European Union was an economic, human, intellectual and cultural success. But that is not enough. We are not seen as serious adversaries.
Can France, which has supported European defence, better development, everything that is advocated today, come out of this crisis stronger?
Yes, of course, it’s getting late… and we can’t redo the Maginot line. There are still considerable gaps: there are only four or five countries that are capable of building aircraft. Many countries have taken refuge behind the United States. We are still far from the goal. Emmanuel Macron is right: we must arrive at a European defense that is credible. I dreamed about it, I hope he will do it. There is of course the question of the language, the military culture of each country. There are very concrete difficulties that will make it take a long time to set up.
READ ALSOUkraine-Russia war: the 27 want to break Putin’s economy
Should Ukraine immediately join the European Union, as President Volodymyr Zelensky demands?
It’s the word “immediately” that doesn’t work. We must give them an entry perspective, and even speed up the process. We could make them apply a special device, but to do it immediately seems impossible to me. It can even make things worse. It is up to us to take the lead for the other countries that could be threatened by Russian aggression.
Should the EU send troops to Ukraine?
Of course, an individual commitment does not change much, but I have been alongside Vacklav Havel in Prague, Sakharov with Elie Viesel in Moscow, Walesa in Poland, in Lebanon against the Syrian invasion, etc. If I was younger, I would start over and go fight in Ukraine, even if it’s all symbolic. At the time, it was a question of understanding and, if possible, of supporting these revolts. Here comes the time for personal and collective commitment.
The presidential seems evaded…
… Thank God, it tips over to Emmanuel Macron’s side. And he deserves it! Those who naively thought, on the right and on the left, that we could control Putin’s expansionist desires are at their expense. Emmanuel Macron will be the future president. In the chaos that surrounds this crisis, he is the only one who emerges unscathed.
You are therefore going to vote for Emmanuel Macron…
My choice is made: it’s Macron, but without blindness. I have this fear of 1940: what are these people who no longer fight. This crisis made me think of this sentence of Churchill in the Commons after the Munich agreements. A sentence that has not been quoted in recent days: “You had the choice between dishonor and war. You have chosen dishonor and you will have war. We had that choice, we chose dishonor. This is war. He gave us a slap. And you don’t respond to a slap with kindness.