[ Flash ] Never Mind His Bollocks

Emmanuel Macron patronizes the United Kingdom, which annoys our friends across the Channel.

IA generated image

Emmanuel Macron and Keir Starmer, two European leaders facing accute lack of legitimacy, seek to reinvigorate the enduring entente cordiale, whilst this bond that has remained steadfast.

For insights into the current dynamics in the United Kingdom, we invite you to explore our interview with Claire Fox, a distinguished member of the House of Lords.

A narrative persists that Brexit is the sole cause of the United Kingdom’s challenges, yet this is a profound misconception. The true source of Britain’s struggles lies in the reluctance of its predominantly pro-EU ruling elite to honor the mandate delivered by the British people. Far from embracing the decision to leave the European Union, this establishment appears to be penalizing the English public for their choice, as if to fulfill its dire warnings that Brexit would unleash calamities akin to the biblical plagues.

Keir Starmer was among the vocal advocates in 2016 for a second referendum, arguing that the public’s decision warranted a redo. This troubling tactic, all too familiar in European politics, recalls the imposition of the Lisbon Treaty through parliamentary channels—a replica of the European Constitutional Treaty rejected by French voters in a 2005 referendum. Such maneuvers are the original sin.

President Emmanuel Macron asserts that Brexit is to blame for the United Kingdom’s challenges in controlling immigration, a claim that is fundamentally misleading. Immigration control is governed by the Schengen Agreement, not the European Union, and the UK has never been a Schengen member. Consequently, Brexit has no bearing on its immigration dynamics. The true issue lies with the Schengen Area, which allows migrants to move freely across its member states, enabling their journey to Calais.

It is worth recalling that the migration crisis traces back to Germany’s actions. In 2015, Angela Merkel unilaterally opened the EU’s borders, despite Germany not being responsible for any of the Union’s external frontiers. To attribute the UK’s immigration headache to Brexit, regardless of any agreement with the EU on that matter, is a flagrant misrepresentation. Furthermore, the absence of political resolve in Europe to address this immigration issue is the root cause.

In London, Emmanuel Macron announced with much fanfare a proposal to coordinate the nuclear deterrents of France and the United Kingdom. This ambition, however, is flawed.

The UK’s nuclear deterrence lacks full sovereignty, as it relies on Trident missiles leased from the United States, which thus supplies and maintains the missiles and their submarine-based silos while retaining control over the technology.

Without replacing the Royal Navy’s entire submarine fleet Tridents with French launch systems—an impractical endeavor—such coordination is unfeasible. The patrol schedules of submarines, critical to the efficacy of nuclear deterrence, are among the most closely guarded state secrets. Sharing them would undermine the very foundation of deterrence.

It bears repeating that nuclear deterrence is inherently non-shareable, a principle reflected in NATO’s structure as a conventional military alliance, deliberately excluding nuclear coordination. Integrating nuclear capabilities carries grave risks: should France, for example, face a scenario triggering Russian nuclear retaliation, the UK would become mechanically a target.

The United Kingdom offers ample opportunities for robust military and industrial collaboration, consistently proving a more reliable partner than Germany. A prime example is the Sepecat Jaguar developped in the 1960s through a BAC-Bréguet joint-ventre, a highly effective training and ground-attack aircraft. Dropping Germany, an unreliable partner, would undoubtedly be a strategic advantage.

However, a significant obstacle persists: the UK’s deep dependence on the United States, which shows no inclination to grant greater autonomy. The F-35 program, widely regarded as one of the most flawed combat aircraft in history, exemplifies this enduring reliance.