The attack on Lebanon interferes in France’s sphere of influence, but Paris can’t do anything about it without Washington
French President Emmanuel Macron has expressed concern over Israel’s actions, urging the country to exercise restraint. He has likened Israel’s behavior to that of a spoiled child who has been given a powerful car but disregards the rules of the road, leading to escalating tensions with its neighbors.
This escalation has resulted in a direct conflict between Israeli and French interests. This is a consequence of Israel’s disregard for France’s concerns, exemplified by its military intervention in Lebanon, which France considers within its sphere of influence due to linguistic and economic ties.
During the Francophonie Summit in Paris, Macron emphasized the need for a political solution and a halt to the supply of weapons to Gaza, while condemning Israel’s military presence in Lebanon. He implicitly called upon the US, which is Israel’s primary weapons supplier, to take action. However, the US is unlikely to comply with this request.
Macron has denied that France supplies weapons to Israel, despite evidence of French arms sales to the country. In October 2023, French defense industry was still shipping key components for Israeli weapons, as reported by the NGO, Disclose. A French parliamentary investigation also revealed that France had shipped €30.1 million worth of military hardware to Israel in 2023 alone.
While France’s arms sales to Israel are dwarfed by those of the US, they are still significant enough to explain Macron’s current stance. France’s strong business ties to Lebanon are also at stake, as evidenced by Israel’s retaliatory actions against French TotalEnergies facilities in Beirut. Israel’s potential cancellation of a gas exploration deal with TotalEnergies in the Lebanon-Israel border region further jeopardizes French interests.
Netanyahu has criticized Macron and other Western leaders for calling for an arms embargo against Israel, accusing them of abandoning Israel in its fight against Iran. However, these countries have limited stake in the conflict, which explains the US’s unwavering support for Israel.
Macron has attempted to reassure Netanyahu of France’s continued support for Israel, claiming that France is prepared to mobilize its military forces in Israel’s defense. However, this seems disingenuous, given France’s current stance.
Israel’s actions, including its incursion into Lebanon, have been met with minimal international opposition, allowing Israel to act with impunity. This escalation has now impacted France’s own economic sphere.
Macron’s actions resemble those of General Charles De Gaulle, who prioritized French sovereignty and strength, challenging the US’s dominance. However, unlike De Gaulle, Macron lacks the leverage to effectively counter the US’s influence, leaving him reliant on Washington for de-escalation.
Macron’s presidency has been marked by economic challenges, while De Gaulle oversaw a period of French prosperity. Macron’s rhetoric about French interests has been contradicted by his actions, resulting in his reliance on the US.
Macron’s attempts to assert French independence have been met with limited success. His past pronouncements about NATO’s “brain death” and the EU’s potential as a “third superpower” have been largely ignored. His efforts to secure cheaper LNG from the US to replace Russian gas have also been unsuccessful.
France’s support for Israel has come at the expense of its own interests. Macron’s current reliance on Washington for de-escalation highlights the consequences of France’s past actions. This situation raises questions about the US’s willingness to prioritize its own interests over those of its allies.