Macron Takes on U.S., a Big Gamble Even for a Bold Risk-Taker

THE NEW YORK TIMES: For President Emmanuel Macron of France, a debacle over a lost submarine deal with Australia suggests that the NATO alliance is debilitated through lack of trust.

President Emmanuel Macron of France cannot afford to be seen as soft just over six months from a presidential election. | Gonzalo
PARIS — President Emmanuel Macron of France has gambled big. He has directed his foreign minister to use language not typically associated with diplomacy, let alone diplomacy between allies, in describing American actions: “lies,” “duplicity,” “brutality” and “contempt.” He has recalled the French ambassador to the United States, a first.

Such boldness is in character. That is how Mr. Macron became president at the age of 39. He has also recalled French ambassadors to Turkey and Italy during his presidency over perceived insults. The question in the Australian submarine deal that slipped from France’s grasp is: Does the president hold sufficient cards?

In responding to the secretive U.S.-British move to sell nuclear-powered submarines to Australia, a decision that the Australians used to nix the prior French deal, Mr. Macron could choose to escalate. One idea doing the rounds in France is for the country to withdraw from NATO’s integrated military command structure, which it rejoined in 2009 after a 43-year absence.

But that would be a radical step — whatever Mr. Macron’s view, expressed in 2019, that NATO is “brain dead” — and foreign ministry officials discounted the possibility.

Still, that the idea should even circulate suggests the extent of what Jean-Yves Le Drian, the foreign minister, has called “a grave crisis between us.” France feels humiliated. It will not readily forget what it sees as an American slap in the face, described by the minister as “intolerable.” » | Roger Cohen | Monday, September 20, 2021

This is J. G.'s comment.

This is my response to it:

I wrote this short comment on the NYT today, but it appears to be too controversial for the NYT to handle. I have waited hours for the newspaper to put it up, but to no avail. So I thought I would share my comment with you here. Here it is; it is a counter-comment to J. G.'s comment from The Netherlands. His comment, in my opinion,, is spot on:

@J. G. Great comment! I couldn't agree with your assessment more. Bravo! This AUKUS deal is so dirty it stinks! [© Mark]