Wait, brother Musa

The trip of Emmanuel Macron to Petersburg surpassed the most daring expectations of Putinferstera. On the eve of the French commentators, having forgotten about Salisbury and the starving sensov, they enthusiastically discussed what Macron would be able to agree with Putin on Iran and Syria. The French delegation at the St. Petersburg Economic Forum behaved as if there was no expulsion of the head of Business France at the end of March. Macron showered Putin with compliments and enthusiastic quotes from Russian classics at the very moment when Russia was finally declared guilty of the destruction of a passenger aircraft.

At the height of Cyberwalls (the other day Cisco Systems warned that Russian hackers infected half a million routers around the world) Moscow and Paris agreed to "exchange information" on cyber attacks. And now the Russian embassy in London advises the British side to "learn from its French colleagues."

To conduct an independent foreign policy, to talk with everyone frankly, but firmly - the young French leader is confident in his talents. But he was warned that the game was lost in advance. “Russia is a systemic threat,” recalled political scientist Nicolas Tenzer on the eve of the St. Petersburg visit. “If it pursued“ classical ”geopolitical goals, she would not invade Ukraine, unconditionally maintain a criminal Syrian regime and commit war crimes of this scale. The idea to appease the Kremlin is absurd.”

At the request of the "faces", French political scientists comment on the results of the visit.

Francoise Tom , French historian, professor of the Sorbonne, author of the book "Understand Putinism":

What are the Kremlin's intentions? The St. Petersburg summit in this regard was very indicative. These intentions, in general, have not changed since 1949: to expel the Americans from Europe. You cannot call the foreign policy of Moscow inconsistent. The Kremlin, therefore, supported Trump, which he understood: his election would sow discord in NATO. And this policy begins to bear fruit. In St. Petersburg, Putin tried to drive a wedge between Europeans and Washington.

Unfortunately, Europeans do not understand that in the eyes of the Kremlin European countries are not a political subject. The Kremlin is fighting America for Europe. In his imperial perception of the United States is an opponent, and Europe is a battlefield. If the Americans leave Europe, Russia will take their place. This is what Putin said: "Do not worry, we will ensure your safety." Then he outlined the essence of his policy. Russia has a huge army and police, and Europe has not yet acquired its own security system.

For the Putin regime, the only option for survival is to involve Europe in Russian orbit. This would solve the problems associated with the economic and technological lag of Russia. If this project fails, Putin's regime is doomed.

But Putin’s gain from the St. Petersburg summit is more likely psychological. Europeans felt a threat. So we are talking about a symbolic victory: we can say that Russia is not in isolation, we can talk about the anti -Tramp front. All this helps to temporarily stabilize the Putin regime - it begins to seem that its dead end policy can cut it off somewhere, that it will be possible to take possession of European potential.

Philip de Lara , philosopher, political scientist, professor of the University of Pantheon-Assas:

I feel great disappointment and even anger, since what happened during this visit completely contradicts how Macron intended to adjust the European course against Russia. I thought that Macron understands: it is useless to indulge in Russia - on the contrary, the language of power is effective.

I believe that Macron wanted to bargain something in the Iranian nuclear transaction and Syrian settlement, but this calculation is incorrect with Russia, since Putin lies all the time and does not comply with his obligations. He will observe any agreements or violate depending on his own benefit, and not because it is connected by the word of the statesman.

No matter how beautiful the goals in Iran and Syria are, no matter how the partnership with Moscow is justified, Macron could nevertheless mention the fifty Ukrainian hostages in Russia, among which there are many Crimeans. When the Western governments sought during periods of discharge - sometimes erroneously - to achieve agreements with the USSR in the field of disarmament, this did not prevent them from adhering to a firm position in human rights, visiting Academician Sakharov, and so on.

The meeting of the President of France with representatives of Russian civil society is, of course, important. But public statements will remain in the memory. Even if in private Macron said something to Putin - and he always emphasizes that he communicates directly and frankly - this does not lead to anything if he does not transform at least partially into public statements. Macron loves entertainment, symbolic representation is very important in politics, and he perfectly owns it - but then Putin outplayed him.

Economic cooperation with Russia is a lentil stew. And if business sodes with China are largely immoral, at least they bring a lot of money, then what kind of enrichment can be expected from rapprochement with Russia, given the state of its economy, and even in the conditions of sanctions?

Germany lost positions due to difficulties with the formation of the ruling coalition and its involvement in the project "Northern Stream - 2". In Italy, a coalition agreement is concluded with the most vague formulations, and only one thing was said clearly: Russia is our friend. In this context, Macron, after his election, who became de facto leader of the EU, was supposed to represent Europe in St. Petersburg. Well, his trip to the PEF is just an episode, and I hope we will forget about him.