During the president's trip to China, he frequently made remarks advocating diplomacy and a balanced line toward the United States and the public. As the United States reacted violently and allies protested that now was the time to say such things, the government and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs are in the process of picking it up. Ah, it's a French story.

French President Macron's visit to China and bombshell remarks in media interviews on his way home are intensifying. Statements such as whether we are the United States' pawns or why we should be involved in the fight between the United States and China over Taiwan sent shockwaves through a wave of shockwaves. The repercussions are larger on the return trip, but to see why this issue is viewed as a diplomatic disaster by the international community, we first need to look at Macron's state visit to China itself.




Mention of 'multipolar world'... Why is this dangerous?

Macron's remarks and diplomatic results from Macron's state visit to China (April 5~7) were generally "candy in my ears" for Xi Jinping, but they turned NATO members upside down.

The joint statement of the two leaders included the expression "multi-polar world."


It also expressed support for expanded democracy in international relations and opposition to Cold War mentality and bloc confrontation. In the language of ordinary people, it seems like a sentence that is just written in good words, but it is not. Diplomatically, this sentence can be read in the context of the hand-in-hand opposition of China and France to American hegemony.

Is a multipolar world better than a unipolar world (the world in which the United States maintains the international order as the sole superpower)? Russia and China say yes. If I say that I am invading Ukraine and that I will reunify Taiwan by force, why is the United States telling me to let go of the ship, and why is the United States imposing sanctions on Russia that are not even through the United Nations? Speaking of the United Nations, it is Russia and North Korea that violate the UN Charter and Security Council resolutions and engage in acts of aggression, war crimes, and armed provocations, and it is China that is blocking UN-level measures against them.

In the multipolar world that China and Russia want, the great powers are free to do their own front yard work and not interfere in the affairs of others. Whether Russia threatens its Eastern and Northern European neighbors, whether China pours concrete on the high seas to create artificial islands and claims them as its territorial waters, the United States wants the multipolar world not to interfere.


Even in the 20th century, there were politicians who wanted this kind of multipolar world. This is Adolf Hitler in Germany. When things didn't go their way, they eventually started a world war, but Hitler constantly told the Soviet Union, Britain and the United States, 'Don't interfere in continental Europe, because Germany will do as it pleases. Instead, Germany also sent a message that it would not interfere in the affairs of Britain, the Americas, and the Soviet Union.

If such a multipolar world is realized, what will be the impact on Korea? Xi Jinping was the one who told former U.S. President Trump that "South Korea was originally a vassal state of China." The Chinese navy is increasingly blatantly pursuing the "West Sea Process," which seeks to turn the West Sea into its own front yard. In the multipolar world that China wants, East Asia will return to the old Chinese order of the Land of Heaven and the Principality, and the United States will not be able to interfere in the affairs of the region. In a unipolar system in which the United States acts as the world's policeman, which is greater if we compare what the Republic of Korea has lost and what it has gained? We are a country that has made a living by importing resources and technology and exporting goods. It is important to make such imports and exports possible internationally and to maintain harmony in a world that values freedom and human rights domestically, not whether there is one pole or several.


So why does France want a multipolar system? This is because they want to pose as the "third superpower." He wants to reign as the leader of Europe, acting as a mediator between the capitalist-communist camp during the Cold War and now between the United States and China. France prides itself on being once an empire that encompassed the Mediterranean, Africa, Southeast Asia, Central and South America, and on the other hand, it was occupied by Nazi Germany, but was narrowly liberated with the help of the United States and Great Britain, and has since surrendered control of the international order.


Giving Macron a gift and trying to 'divide the West'


Dividing the other side so that they cannot form a strong coalition is the basis of the strategy. At a joint press conference after the summit on 6 June, President Xi Jinping expressed support for Macron's "independent" diplomatic line. "China and France are permanent members of the UN Security Council and large countries with an independent-independent tradition," he said, adding, "China has always regarded Europe as an independent unipolar of the multipolar world, and supports the realization of Europe's strategic independence."

I didn't mention the United States outright, but the "third party" here is the United States.

Macron asked Xi to play a role in a peaceful resolution of the crisis in Ukraine. Xi Jinping listened, but showed no intention of pressuring Putin into a ceasefire or an end to the war. Politico, a news outlet specializing in U.S. and European politics that boarded Macron's presidential plane, reported that "Xi Jinping was visibly upset about taking some sort of responsibility for resolving the Ukraine crisis and downplayed the significance of his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin."


China hopes France can relieve some of the frustration caused by the U.S. separation of high-tech supply chains. Macron, who needs economic results during his visit to China, brought more than 3 executives from major companies including Airbus, Alstom and Louis Vuitton Moët Hennessy (LVMH) to the state visit. China gave Macron a gift of agreeing to buy 3 Airbus aircraft. Macron has expressed his opposition to the U.S. "decoupling," which seeks to decouple China from high-tech supply chains such as semiconductors.

The same is true of the United States, which cannot completely break with China when it comes to trade in goods such as automobiles, batteries, and various consumer goods. However, advanced semiconductors with advanced technology have a different problem. The United States sees this not as a matter of "making money or not earning," but of "death or death in future wars." Decoupling means that it is a national security issue for the United States. Macron gave little consideration to this.


France and the European Union 'Split' Protocol

European Union Commission President Ursula von der Laien also accompanied Macron during the visit. (The European Commission is the executive branch of the European Union, responsible for drafting and implementing legislation, distributing budgets, and monitoring the implementation of treaties by member states.)

Unlike Macron, who is conciliatory to China, the German politician von der Laien has taken a stricter line toward China. A few days before his visit, Von der Leyen delivered a speech to President Xi Jinping strongly criticizing him for maintaining friendship with President Vladimir Putin.

Earlier, China downplayed the 12 points proposed to end the war in Ukraine, saying they were "unfeasible" that would solidify Russia's annexation of Ukraine. Von der Leyen has also promoted the concept of "de-risking" in the public. In other words, Europe should take a tougher voice in public diplomacy, diversify Europe's trade destinations, and protect trade and technology.

If Macron and von der Laien had divided their roles in a "good cop-bad cop" style to deal with Xi Jinping, it would have been effective mass diplomacy in its own way, but it didn't. China treated the two leaders when they arrived in Beijing together quite differently. Macron was received with the utmost courtesy, including a state dinner and the Speaker's Ambassador, while Von der Laien was treated with a markedly low profile. Just looking at the photos taken by the three of them, you can feel the difference in temperature between Xi Jinping's treatment of the two leaders.


The three men held a joint meeting for about two hours, during which Von der Laien told Xi that "it is unacceptable to threaten to use force to change the status quo in Taiwan." In response, Xi Jinping said, "Anyone who thinks they can influence Beijing on the Taiwan issue is delusional."

Xi Jinping sent von der Laien out and held a private meeting with Macron for about four hours, with only an interpreter. After the official itinerary in Beijing, Macron took him to Guangzhou, the southern economic city, where he was treated with special treats such as a walk in the garden of his father's official residence and tea time, and arranged a lecture at Sun Yat-sen University to receive an enthusiastic welcome from Chinese university students.

As a result, Macron has failed to show a united Europe against China. It was just used to show that if you are friendly to China, you will be treated well, and if you are friendly to China, you will be treated poorly.




A full-fledged horse bomb..."Are we America's servants?"

The state visit to China itself had such a diplomatic problem, but the real real accident broke out on the presidential plane on the way home. Macron interviewed reporters from Politico and Le Zeko (a French business daily) separately on the presidential plane, where he unleashed a verbal bomb on the Taiwan issue.



Statements such as "Europe should have strategic autonomy as a third superpower" can be said to be at the level of a joint statement/interview with Xi Jinping, but there were many stronger statements.

For example, "We must avoid being a subject of the United States", "We must try not to get involved in a crisis that does not belong to Europe", "The question Europe must answer is, 'Is it in Europe's interest to accelerate the Taiwan crisis?' and the answer is 'no'.", "Europeans can't even solve the Ukraine crisis, so how can we tell China over the Taiwan issue, 'Be careful! If you misbehave, we'll be there.'"

Like the concept of the "multipolar world" described above, these statements are likely to be read as an idea that China will take care of China's affairs and that France will not intervene.

Macron also called for a reduction in reliance on the "extraterritoriality of the dollar." "When tensions between the two superpowers escalate... We will be reduced to vassals because we have neither the time nor the resources to finance strategic independence."

But he didn't answer questions about the reality that the U.S. has been responsible for Europe's security for decades, Politico reported. Politico added this postscript at the end of the interview.

"The Elysee Palace (the French president's office) demanded verification and 'proofreading' of all statements as a precondition for the interview, which is not in line with Politico's principles but we accepted to hear directly from the French president. (...) His more outspoken statements about Taiwan and strategic sovereignty were removed at the request of the Elysee Palace."

How the hell did you speak... This is where the curiosity grows.


'Cider remarks' set up in the United States...'diplomatic disaster' level storm

Judging from the reports, it is a very difficult statement to hear from the mouth of a leader of a country that is not anti-American. If the South Korean president or a leading presidential candidate had said such a thing, some who value independent diplomacy would have hailed it as a "cider remark." There will be a significant number of voters who think our president should be able to say something to America in the future.

If you look at each one of them, you can say that as the head of a country like France, it is not something that you cannot say, it is not something that you have not said before, and there is nothing that is particularly wrong. The problem is that even the same words have different nuances depending on the time, place, and context. Within hours of Macron's highly conciliatory time with Xi Jinping and his interview on his flight home after being used for a "split," China began military exercises to besiege Taiwan.


Even if you convey the same message, you may need to cover up words and expressions. Assuming that France is on the same side as the United States with regard to Taiwan (*after all, the French presidential palace reiterated this point), it would have been enough to emphasize in gentle language the message that provoking each other and escalating the crisis is not helpful. What good would it be to use provocative expressions such as servants, subordinates, henchmen, etc.? Criticism has sparked criticism in Europe that this push into a battle of egos between the United States and Europe would reduce the number of European countries that would join Macron and eventually lose his influence.


Outrage, ridicule... American Conservative-Liberal Consensus Response

Immediately, a violent reaction erupted in the United States. In any case, the Biden administration, which has to work with Macron's government, spared no words, but political circles, diplomatic experts, and the media spoke out against Macron in unison. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Florida), a leading figure in Congress, left the political party and posted a video of his remarks on Twitter that blatantly captured how Americans feel about Macron's remarks. Below is a four-cut summary of the main parts.


In the video, Senator Rubio doesn't raise his voice, but there is a subtle anger in his expression and voice. In the second cut of the graphic above, "Your troops carried me on our plane," it reads, "Who have you slept on your feet so far? There is even a sense of contempt for strategic autonomy.

What if the South Korean president or a leading presidential candidate makes a statement to the effect that "we should not get involved in the Taiwan issue"? If you imagine solving a problem by substituting another number into a mathematical formula, you might say, "We're going to focus on the Taiwan issue and the threat from China, so take care of the North Korea problem. Then we can save on taxes.' It's a situation you don't really want to experience.

The New York Times, the leading U.S. liberal/liberal media, also reported Macron's remarks in a highly critical tone, with a colorful headline.

"From the red carpet to the doghouse: Macron returns from China to stunn allies" The New York Times reported that the Elysee Palace had stepped in to repair and block the storm after Macron's remarks, adding, "


France is not engaging in equidistant diplomacy between the U.S. and China. America is our ally, sharing our values." He said he had stated his position. He added. "The fact that this clarification is needed shows how much Macron has agitated his allies." In addition to the president's office, the foreign ministry and the ambassador to the United States have come forward to repeat the same phrase and try to appease the United States and European countries.

The New York Times reported that Macron was following China on a state visit to the Netherlands and said, "Our Europe is a dream come true. I don't want to dream of that in the language of other countries." He said it was unclear whether the "other country" referred to the United States or China.

The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), which is classified as conservative, criticized it in an editorial. Macron's useless words pointed out in a strong tone that the deterrence of the United States and Japan against China in the Western Pacific would be severely affected.


The essence of the Russo-China threat is the same: the views of other European countries

The U.S. is what Macron originally wanted to set up a cabinet for, so what about the reaction in Europe where he wants to take leadership?

Since Russia's invasion of Ukraine, most European countries have opened their eyes anew to security issues. The biggest threat to the security of European countries is Russia, it is China that is behind Russia to allow it to do such a mess, and the Ukraine issue and the Taiwan issue are essentially the same issue (the threat of authoritarian regimes to democracy). In the midst of this, what we can count on is the NATO military alliance and the United States, which is the core of it, is the mindset of many European countries, especially those close to Russia.

In Poland, which serves as Ukraine's logistical base, Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki came forward to criticize Macron's remarks.


Germany, which, along with France, forms the EU's two pillars, has also drawn criticism of Macron. Nils Schmidt, a foreign policy spokesman for the ruling Social Democratic Party (SPD), said Foreign Minister Bearbork would go to China to "correct misunderstandings caused by Macron's clumsy mistakes." (The remarks are summarized in three cuts below.)


German Foreign Minister Werbork, who is visiting China on 13-15 July, strongly criticized Macron's perception that Taiwan is "someone else's business" in a statement during his visit to China.


Bundestag Norbert Röttgen (Christian Democratic Union, centrist conservative), a leading German opposition figure, also harshly criticized Macron, calling it "Macron's diplomatic disaster." "Macron will be isolated in Europe because of his idea of sovereignty, which emphasizes boundaries rather than partnerships with the United States."


He also warned that such a "naïve" perception could actually enlarge China's liver, making the situation more dangerous.


​​​​​​​

Growing poison-fire cracks... Anyone good work?

Macron's comments raise fears that they will make German-French relations, which have become increasingly rifted since Russia's invasion of Ukraine, more difficult. The two countries have different economic structures. Before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Germany relied heavily on cheap Russian gas, which created an efficient industry and made money by exporting a lot to China. France, on the other hand, has a high share of nuclear power generation and a relatively low dependence on Chinese exports, so it has been less hit than Germany. In the past, Germany had an advantage, and now France has an advantage. Nevertheless, Germany's complaint is that it tries not to bear the burden of supporting Ukraine as much as possible and that it is too selfish in the matter of China.

Daniel-korn Vendit, a Green Party politician with bilateral citizenship, said in an interview with Der Spiegel> magazine <.

"Chancellor Scholz lacks the genes of a united Europe that Chancellor Helmut Kohl had (at the time of the reunification of East and West Germany). Macron has that. But he sees everything through the lens of France. When Macron talks about rearmament of Europe, he means rearmament of France. At the end of the day, Germany and France are each stuck in their own country-centric mindset."

"What is the concept of European Common Security? What does it mean (for Germany) that France is a nuclear power?"