Source: France-Diplomatie – Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Development
Interview given by M. Jean-Noël Barrot, Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs, to France Inter (Paris, March 3, 2025)
(…)
On Friday evening, millions of French people saw the United States President repeatedly yelling: “You’re gambling with World War III”. World War III – the words were uttered by Donald Trump. Is that something to be afraid of?
THE MINISTER – It’s not the first time Donald Trump has uttered those words. Would we rather the press conference had gone differently? The answer is yes. Do we see Volodymyr Zelenskyy as a great resistance figure, a hero? The answer is yes. Is it our role to issue indictments or lessons in morality? No.
It’s not about either indictments or lessons in morality. I’m asking you the question. What do you say to French people who were terrified as they watched television on Friday evening? Is there a threat, yes or no?
THE MINISTER – Of course. Never has the risk of a war on the European continent, in the European Union, been so great, because for nearly 15 years now the threat has constantly been getting closer, and the front line has constantly been getting closer. That’s why France, President Macron, has been saying for seven years now that we must step up our defence to deter the threat. What we’re witnessing today, what we witnessed in London yesterday, was a whole portion of Europeans waking up after refusing to see the reality of things.
And are we also witnessing a spectacular rapprochement between Donald Trump’s United States and Russia? Last night the US Secretary of Defence said the United States will be ceasing all offensive cyber operations, all digital attacks against Russia.
THE MINISTER – The United States has chosen to embark on dialogue with Vladimir Putin’s Russia to bring it to the negotiating table and put an end to the war in Ukraine. We’ve always said that we’ve attempted dialogue and it hasn’t had all the effects we might have expected, and that we must get Vladimir Putin to negotiate through pressure. That’s the strategy we’re continuing to conduct here in Europe…
We Europeans, not the Americans obviously.
THE MINISTER – We Europeans. As for that decision, it’s true that I found it a bit difficult to understand, because when it comes to cyber attacks the European Union countries are constantly under that form of attack by Russia.
That’s it. In other words, can we no longer rely on the Americans to defend us in that way, as you say?
THE MINISTER – I think it’s in the United States’ interest, it’s even the United States natural destination to be on the side of Ukraine. If Ukraine were to capitulate, it would not only be terrible news for that country, terrible news for the Europeans, but it would be a terrible admission of weakness for the United States of America. And it’s in this spirit that we’re talking to the US administration at every level.
In this spirit, let’s be clear about this: is that what emerged from yesterday’s summit in London – that we have the bulk of the work to do, as the British Prime Minister said, to defend Europe and resolve this conflict, but not without the Americans? Never without the Americans? Can’t we do it without the Americans? Is that what emerged?
THE MINISTER – What emerged from yesterday’s summit in London were two things. In the short term, and to put an end to Russia’s war of aggression in Ukraine, we want the United States, through pressure, to get Vladimir Putin to come to the negotiating table and agree to put an end, once and for all, to these imperialist ambitions that have been pushing the front line closer and closer to us. And the other ambition…
At the risk of seeing them both talking, Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, without us and without the Ukrainians.
THE MINISTER – And the second thing, which is just as important, is that we don’t want to be in the situation we’re in today ever again. In other words, Europe must ensure its own defence and its own security, and we must put in place the necessary resources so that we never again have to ask the United States what it can do for European security, so we can ensure it ourselves.
At the risk of seeing Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump talking to each other about a ceasefire, without us and without the Ukrainians.
THE MINISTER – Everyone can talk to whoever they wish. What’s important for us is for this war to end and for the peace that is reached to be accompanied by enough guarantees to ensure the threat never moves closer to our borders again.
Well, on that point, we read in the press this morning that the British and French want a one-month truce in the fighting. So is this truce in the fighting a prerequisite for being able to discuss peace?
THE MINISTER – It’s a prerequisite, because this truce in the air, at sea and on energy infrastructure will enable us to confirm Vladimir Putin’s good faith, when he engages in that truce. And that’s when the real peace negotiations will start – because we want peace, but we want a solid and durable peace. A peace that definitively ends what’s been happening for 15 years in the east of the continent.
Understood. When you say in the air, at sea and on logistical infrastructure, does that mean no withdrawal of troops on the ground, no withdrawal of Russian troops on the ground?
THE MINISTER – Initially, it’s a way of confirming that Russia really is willing to put an end to this war.
What makes you think the Russians and the Americans will accept it, this French and British plan?
THE MINISTER – Because during the discussions we had last Monday, a week ago to the day, with President Donald Trump and his team, it was in that spirit that he was thinking about a resolution to the crisis.
Is Emmanuel Macron expected to return to Washington to talk about it again?
THE MINISTER – It’s not expected as of today, and the contacts between Emmanuel Macron and Donald Trump are very frequent.
When Emmanuel Macron and Keir Starmer, the British Prime Minister, talk about sending soldiers to Ukraine in a second phase, once the truce has been obtained, does that mean taking on board the risk of a direct confrontation with the Russians?
THE MINISTER – No, it’s about creating the conditions through military capabilities, once peace has been reached, to definitively deter the threat. It’s what we observe in Europe and other places in the world: through the presence of military capabilities, the threat doesn’t materialize, preventing, as it were, the response from coming.
OK. So what’s the reaction of our European partners? Giorgia Meloni, for example, the Italian leader, is against – absolutely against – sending troops on the ground to Ukraine?
THE MINISTER – All the Europeans are fully conscious, because 10 years ago, almost to the day, we saw the Minsk agreements and a ceasefire in Ukraine that was violated 20 times before Russia invaded Ukraine. Everyone’s conscious that a ceasefire isn’t sufficient, that peace must be accompanied by every guarantee to ensure that the fighting stops definitively and that Ukraine’s sovereignty can be respected.
But how are the 27 presenting themselves? Because on Thursday there’s a meeting that’s really absolutely crucial for Europe’s future.
THE MINISTER – Indeed, everyone is convinced that it’s the Europeans who will provide the bulk of these military capabilities, and then each according to their capabilities and their wishes.
Well, we need your thoughts on the discussion about the nuclear deterrent which Emmanuel Macron says he’s ready to begin at the request of the future German chancellor. So France is the only [EU] country to possess a nuclear weapon. Is it going to – how shall I put it? – make that nuclear weapon available to our European allies, as the French far right accuses it of?
THE MINISTER – The answer is no. What President Macron has said is that he’s ready to ensure that those European partners who so wish can deepen strategic dialogue with us about this issue, which may be linked, if need be, with exercises by deterrence forces. The idea isn’t to share the nuclear deterrent, but to develop a culture of strategic deterrence in Europe.
And how does that happen in practical terms? Does it mean that in the future, the French President can decided to press the red button if the vital interests of, for example, the Baltic countries or Poland or Romania or Moldova are threatened?
THE MINISTER – It goes through appropriate channels and not in the France Inter studio, because when it comes to the nuclear deterrent there’s a form of ambiguity that surrounds it and guarantees its effectiveness.
What does a form of ambiguity mean?
THE MINISTER – Well, you don’t say everything about the nuclear deterrent.
Fine. Do you really think a resumption of dialogue between Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Donald Trump is possible?
THE MINISTER – Yes, I think it’s possible. I think there’s a desire on both sides, because there’s a shared awareness that it’s in Ukraine’s interest, in the Europeans’ interest and in the Americans’ interest to ensure we halt Vladimir Putin’s imperialist tendencies.
Is France working on that?
THE MINISTER – France is obviously working on it.
How?
THE MINISTER – First of all by talking regularly to both parties. I myself spoke at the weekend to my US counterpart and my Ukrainian counterpart, and I got an appreciation of the extent to which the intention really is to re-engage in dialogue. And the Europeans are also going to continue the discussions, and in the wake of yesterday’s summit I’ll be bringing together the Europeans from Europe’s northern flank this morning, to talk about the conversations held yesterday evening. (…)./.