BAKU, Azerbaijan, June 30. As Azerbaijan and Armenia approach the point of breaking through the stalemate, thanks to the steadfastness of the international mediators, President Macron’s statements paint a troubling picture of his South Caucasus vision.
Discussions between Baku and Yerevan can hardly be described as easy or smooth, however incremental progress is being made. While both sides work out different angles to find acceptable solutions to existing problems, the French Head of State makes extremely controversial comments regarding his views on the direction of the talks and his overall outlook on the qualities exhibited by the Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan. In short, President Macron accused the Armenian PM of not doing enough to normalize relations with Azerbaijan on terms beneficial to Armenia.
While Macron is busy playing a geopolitical chess game, the situation in France remains tense. Social injustices, coupled with poor economic policies, indicate that French interests would be better served by a president capable of handling domestic crises, which have rocked the country in the last few months.
The pitfalls of Macron’s rhetoric
The position of the French president is dangerous, primarily for Yerevan and Paris. The issue here is that Macron labels Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan as “the key hurdle” to reaching an agreement on Karabakh that will favor Armenia. On a surface level, this can seem like an innocent statement, however, a more in-depth look may uncover more sinister aspects to this thought. The first issue here is that President Macron’s words indicate that he is interfering with domestic matters of another state. This is a very serious point of concern because his words can be interpreted as a call for a coup d’etat. In essence, Macron’s views on how Armenia should be run optimally contradict the basic principle of international relations, diplomatic norms, and openly calls to overthrow a government, which France previously labeled as “democratically elected”. Furthermore, the hypocritical approach of President Macron endangers the long-term future of Armenia and stability in the South Caucasus as such views will lead to increased hostilities in the troubled region.
Consequently, this will harm the interests of Armenia, which President Macron aims to “protect”.
This brings us to second crucial point. The vision of Armenia with a “pro-Armenian” Prime Minister, who will be more resolute in their pursuit of an agreement with Azerbaijan, endangers Yerevan. Armenia has a very limited arsenal for promoting its desired agenda vis-à-vis Azerbaijan. The lack of influence over the process can be attributed to several factors, including the loss in the second Karabakh war, limited economic growth potential, and lack of diplomatic power to sway political sentiments in favor of Yerevan. Pursuing an agreement, which will favor the Armenian position will inadvertently lead to a more difficult discussion with a high possibility of a consequent breakdown of talks. This development would be devastating for the region as hostilities in the South Caucasus will be renewed, essentially returning the situation to its starting point.
However, the renewal of hostilities would be something that France would welcome, as Paris will have an opportunity to expand its influence to the South Caucasus via Armenia. This would enable Paris to accomplish several objectives. First, France would have a chance to exact revenge on Turkiye in the regions of Ankara’s strategic interests. Additionally, President Macron seeks to amend the tarnished political image of France, which has suffered several geopolitical defeats during his presidency. Consequently, a more volatile South Caucasus would help Macron to become a regional player, which would give him a much-needed geopolitical win.
No leverage against Azerbaijan - key issue for Macron
Another matter to consider in this context is that President Macron has no leverage to influence Azerbaijan. It is possible to argue that France is a major political power with a permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). True, this is something that is very real, however, it is hard to argue that Paris can utilize it as a coercive mechanism against Azerbaijan, which Baku may feel threatened by. The reason why Azerbaijan does not feel threatened is simple – France has already utilized this approach in the past and failed. Therefore, Baku knows what it deals with and how to respond to the possible threats. Furthermore, due to a well-developed diplomatic network, Baku can thwart the threats posed by France even in the UNSC.
On the contrary, France has a level of dependence on Azerbaijan as it uses the territory of Azerbaijan for the movement of strategically important goods via the Middle Corridor to Asia. It is hard to envision that businesses and French society would be happy with a shortage of vital goods and services due to Macron’s policies. From this perspective, France should be quite careful when interfering with regional affairs, as the blowback of playing a power projection game may be quite significant for the French economy.
Is Macron capable of handling domestic political crises?
Although President Macron is trying to establish an image of a capable politician, his domestic record indicates that most of his economic policies failed miserably. The “yellow vest protests”, the French labor law reform, and high fuel tax protests are just a few that spring to mind.
The overarching theme of these protests was the economic struggles of the population. However, the latest round of protests illustrates that there are more problematic issues – Islamophobia, racism, and excessive use of force by police. The fatal shooting of a teenager of Algerian and Moroccan descent sparked riots in several major cities in France. Incidents like this lead to an extremely volatile domestic situation, which is not a new phenomenon in French society, unfortunately.
And the grievances are quite understandable. The feeling of relative deprivation, which can be summarized as a lack of opportunities to sustain the lifestyle that individuals or society are accustomed to or that are widely encouraged or approved in the society to which they belong is a strong mechanism for protests. While France promotes the principles of equality it is hard to argue that a person of French origin would be treated the same way that most Algerian or Moroccan youth are used to. The perceived distance between political elites in France, and the general population, is another reason for the grievances. Young people in disadvantageous suburbs do not feel that politicians are willing to listen and improve their lives for the best, which is a ticking time bomb and a recipe for future crises.
Despite the issues, President Macron tends to overlook the problems, by paying little attention to the divide in French society. Considering the domestic trouble brewing in France non-stop from the day of President Macron’s election, it is hypocritical of him to protect the interests of any other nation while his voters have to deal with a wide array of issues on their own.
It currently looks like the French head of state is more comfortable waiting on the sidelines and hoping the protests will lose steam. To be fair, this strategy worked well for President Macron in the past, however freezing the domestic divide is not a wise policy option to pursue because smaller issues will snowball into a more contentious situation in the future.
Back to the South Caucasus
Freezing problems seems to be the preferred modus operandi for President Macron. He is unwilling or unable to address domestic issues, and it is looking likely that he is not going to do anything about it.
Leaving the problem for future leaders and generations is also his preference when it comes to the situation in the South Caucasus. As President Macron pushes the agenda of reaching a “pro-Armenian” deal with Azerbaijan, he is willing to increase the costs of the conflict both for Baku and Yerevan. But this trade-off is acceptable for him as it will enable the Head of the French State to extend the nation’s influence in the South Caucasus.
Does the end justify the means? It is an age-old philosophical question, which most politicians usually answer correctly. But also, their actions sometimes do not correlate with their words. Just as President Macron demonstrated, once again.