Ronald Tiersky is Professor of Political Science at Amherst College. He recently completed a fellowship at the Centre d'Etudes des Relations Internationales in Paris.
From de Gaulle through Mitterrand, France saw its historic task to be one of repairing the damage of Yalta—the division of Europe into Cold War blocs. Moving "beyond Yalta," it was said, would free Eastern Europe from communism and leave Europe as a whole free from domination by the superpower rivalry. That historic geopolitical change has now occurred—unexpectedly, astoundingly, within only a few years. And the healing of Europe’s division has now been guaranteed by the astonishing disappearance of the U.S.S.R. as a state and an empire. French long-term policy has thus been served. Yet hard dilemmas confront the French in the new Europe.
To some, France emerged a big loser among the winning Western powers. Prior to the Cold War’s passing a divided Europe and a divided Germany profited France geopolitically. France’s main postwar foreign policy stage was Western Europe, and its main dilemma was how to maintain a political edge over West Germany’s ever-growing economic influence.
Thus France supposedly had a geopolitical interest in avoiding both German unification and the end of superpower spheres of influence. In a divided Europe, built on a divided Germany, French overall influence was maximized. By extrapolation, the end of divided Europe meant for France above all else German ascension.
The consequence for the French is a rapid evaporation of France’s ability inside the European Community to be the political/diplomatic engineer of the German economic locomotive in pivotal Franco-German relations. Or worse, with the probable expansion of the EC into a larger European Union—centered geographically more in the east and north—the Franco-German relationship will be put under stress, if not completely thrown into question.
II
In 1989 President François Mitterrand was initially reluctant about encouraging German unification, not as a principle, which he saw as inevitable and right, but as a practical matter—about the pace at which it was coming, the risks West German leaders created by moving so quickly and the nature of the resulting entity. To the French reluctance was added the deeper British reservations of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, not to mention the initial Soviet opposition of President Mikhail Gorbachev and Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze. For all three, France, Britain and the Soviet Union, German unification was not on the agenda...
This is a premium article
You must be a logged in Foreign Affairs subscriber to continue reading. If you wish to continue reading this article please subscribe , or activate your online account to get full online access.
Log In
Buy PDF
Buy a premium PDF reprint of this article.Related
For five years between 1925 and 1929, a certain portion of mankind, like those parched travelers in the desert who think they have glimpsed the oasis which will save them, believed the gate to lasting peace was at hand. This, as we now know, was only a mirage. But such a mirage had never before existed. People had never believed so fervently in the blessings of peace, or hoped so passionately that peace would be perpetual. Optimism rose to new heights. "Away with cannon and machineguns: instead, conciliation, arbitration, and peace!" At the meeting of the League of Nations on September 10, 1926, when Germany, recently defeated, was received as a member, the French Foreign Minister Aristide Briand touched a new intensity of emotion with these celebrated words.
ISVOLSKY AND THE WORLD WAR. BY FREIDRICH STIEVE. New York: Knopf, 1926.
AU SERVICE DE LA FRANCE. BY RAYMOND POINCARÉ. Paris: Plon-Nourrit et Cie, 1926. Vols. I--III.
TWENTY-FIVE YEARS, 1892-1916. BY VISCOUNT GREY of Fallodon, K.G. New York: Stokes, 1925. 2 vols.
THE INTERNATIONAL ANARCHY, 1904-1914. BY G. LOWES DICKINSON. New York: Century Co., 1926.
THE SERAJEVO CRIME. BY M. EDITH DURHAM. London: George Allen and Unwin, 1925.
SARAJEVO. BY R. W. SETON-WATSON. London: Hutchinson & Co., 1926.
ON the east side of the circle of statues to French cities that bounds the Place de la Concorde, the female figure representing Strasbourg, capital of Alsace-Lorraine, for many years sat draped in mourning, a constant reminder to a symbol-loving nation of an historical event which President Wilson in his Fourteen Points was to describe as "the wrong done to France in 1871." That wrong having been righted by the agreement by which Germany laid down her arms on November 22, 1918, the French army marched over the Vosges, to be greeted at every village by an outburst of collective emo

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.