Leave it to the French to get things derrière-backwards and paint it as progress — particularly when it comes to affairs of state. How else to explain the defense minister’s decision to start his Middle East tour in Egypt, a country that is not at war, instead of one that is? Israel will be Sebastien Lecornu’s last stop, on Friday, before sashaying back to Paris. 

The sclerotic French capital used to be a world capital, but has long been supplanted by the likes of Washington and, mon dieu, Brussels. And it is with a twinge of jealousy toward that schizophrenic but more relevant capital that a new report comes casting doubt on France’s future within the NATO military alliance. 

France’s presence in NATO, according to a recent official report by the French court of auditor’s office, is not really “profitable.” The report warned, “The Ministry of the Armed Forces must ensure that, through the human and financial resources it invests, France is in a position to fully assume its role in NATO.”

Always count on France to take a contrarian stance — regardless of whether it serves the country’s strategic long-term interests. Now, with Europe’s sense of security punctured by wars in Ukraine and not far beyond in the Middle East, some French are quietly raising questions about France’s place in the NATO alliance — if, down the road, there even is one. 

Paris has had a long and complicated relationship with the Western military alliance. In 1966 President de Gaulle pulled the Fifth Republic out of NATO’s integrated command structure, and it was decades before it rejoined the bloc in terms of operational planning.

More recently, President Macron has branded any expansion of NATO’s “geography” as a “big mistake” despite its large army and budget,  favoring more of what he calls strategic autonomy for the EU and less reliance on Washington. 

This is the guy who, when he won the presidency, forsook the Marseillaise and flew the flag of Europe. His Gallic cheek reached a peak, if that’s the word, when he described NATO as “brain-dead” after it failed to resolve disputes between France and  Turkey in the Mediterranean.

Paris’s course changed after the war in Ukraine broke out, and it increased participation in missions on the eastern flank of the organization, even leading a battlegroup  in Romania. The French auditors’ report, though, warns that the recent decision to increase national contributions to NATO ought to be more of  a strategic investment and that French influence in NATO is unsatisfactorily petite compared to the country’s historical heft. 

The report described a “twofold challenge: getting the best possible return on investment from the increase in the alliance’s common budgets decided at the Madrid Summit and strengthening France’s position in the key posts of NATO’s military and civilian structures.”

The report states that France “must make the most” of the increase in NATO’s common budget to provide an annual 10 percent growth in civil and military budgets due to the war in Ukraine. Paris’s contribution to NATO amounted to about $205 million in 2022 and could reach around  $830 million in 2030.

France is still the fourth-largest contributor to NATO among the 31 allies, behind America, Germany, and Britain, but the size of its allowance goes unseen, according to the auditors. The prospect of a higher contribution “should be accompanied by a strengthening of the French presence at all levels of NATO structures,” the report reads in part, noting that the French presence in NATO is underrepresented.

That is both in the headquarters’ staff and in comparison to the other members’ overall staff. In 2022, the French representation to NATO accounted for 63 staff, “far fewer staff than those of the main Allies.” Germany, by contrast,  has 120 and the United States 200.

Moreover, France fills only 75 percent of the 678 posts allocated under the NATO staff distribution, which is “one of the lowest rates among the Allies,” while the French defense ministry set an 84 percent target in 2019. 

To increase its footprint in NATO, the auditors said Paris should improve its participation in the organization’s plans for weapons research and development of innovation. Specifically, Paris should make “greater participation in NATO armaments and research programs from the design phase onwards.”

However, while France’s defense industry is one of the main recipients of the European Union’s funds for defense-related research and development, the country is generally uninterested in joining NATO-led projects — and that detracts from its influence.

Then there’s Monsieur Macron’s own ego. It, too, arguably erodes French influence. When the EU is mired in so much self-created bureaucracy the bloc has next to zero influence in shaping the direction of major global events, the French leader has chosen to create an additional group, the European Political Community.

The EPC is Mr. Macron’s idea of a “new space for cooperation,” which presumably he likes better than the EU because he gets to manage the guest list. The creation of the EPC may reflect Mr. Macron’s frustration with the utility of the broader European project, which after all was predicated on France and Germany getting their coal and steel industries to commingle so as to help avert another war. 

France has so far faltered in its efforts to keep the peace in its former African colonies, and it has proven to be diplomatically deficient when it comes to halting Russian aggression on the Continent. Reports about the perceived diminishing returns of NATO or the EU are a distraction, but more could be on the way. There are already some voices on the French right that have called France’s membership in both blocs into question.

Mr. Macron or the next French president — whoever he or she may be — could start thinking that belonging to Western organizations that are for Europe’s benefit but not of French conception are not worth it. If that happens, then it is not inconceivable that the ghost of Charles de Gaulle could reappear just long enough to bid NATO adieu. It could, ironically, prove to be the route to recovering its independence and, even, la gloire qu’était la France.

________

Correction: Emmanuel is the accurate spelling of the name of the president of the Fifth Republic. The name was given incorrectly in the bulldog.