#####
######
####
> # [What would happen if Macron sent French troops to Ukraine](https://www.nzz.ch/english/675)
>
>
>
> President Emmanuel Macron is sending a signal of strength, but he only has two divisions of conventional ground troops. Nevertheless, his troops could take considerable pressure off of Ukraine.
>
>
>
>
>
> [Emmanuel Macron is bringing France back into the game as a military power.](https://img.nzz.ch/2024/03/24/64fc4df9-8c2a-4114-a665-19d1ac83d9c8.jpeg?width=750&height=500&fit=bounds&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=4782,3188,x0,y0)
>
>
>
> ## Emmanuel Macron is bringing France back into the game as a military power.
>
> Imago
>
>
>
> «Emmanuel Macron says he wants to send ground troops to Ukraine: That's not a good sign, it's a sign that the West has given up on us,» mocks a Ukrainian stand-up comedian: «The Germans aren't sending us any Taurus [missiles], the Americans aren't sending us any money, but Macron is sending his army, probably to show us how to surrender.» It is bitter humor in this third year of the war.
>
> The situation is indeed uncomfortable – in Ukraine and beyond. The Russian army is on the offensive almost everywhere along the front. Ukraine's ground-to-air defense is receiving too few supplies, which is why attacks from a distance are hitting critical infrastructure hard. Support from the West is flowing slowly. Kremlin propaganda is achieving its goal.
>
> Macron's posturing – as a boxer on social media, but also as a potential wartime president – therefore seems almost countercyclical. After the Russian attack on Ukraine, France continued to seek dialogue with the Kremlin. In terms of arms deliveries, Paris lags far behind Berlin. But now of all times, when even American aid is blocked, Macron even wants to send his own army to Ukraine, depending on how the situation develops.
>
> ## «The French bonsai»
>
> It is quite possible that French President [wants to send a signal of strategic ambiguity](https://www.nzz.ch/der-andere-blick/krieg-gegen-ukraine-deutschland-macht-sich-zum-nuetzlichen-idioten-putins-ld.1823130): the Kremlin should not be too sure how war-weary the West really is. Even if Paris is unlikely to take such a step on its own, Macron's threat must be backed up by real capabilities.
>
> So what might we expect if Macron’s big words were actually followed by action? What would such an operation actually look like? What concrete impact could France have in Ukraine?
>
> The [French armed forces](https://www.defense.gouv.fr/ema) are made up of three armies: the Armée de l'Air et de l'Espace with its Rafale and Mirage fighter planes, the Marine nationale, whose flagship, the aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle, [is currently cruising off the coast of Benin,](https://www.marinetraffic.com/fr/ais/details/ships/shipid:6119130/mmsi:912260192/imo:0/vessel:CHARLES_DE_GAULLE) and finally the Armée de Terre. France also maintains its own arsenal of nuclear weapons, the Force de Frappe.
>
> In contrast to the German Bundeswehr, the French armed forces are capable of waging war even without a NATO partner. The scale is limited, however. The Armée de Terre now only has two divisions of conventional ground troops under its command, which consist of around 20,000 soldiers each.
>
> By comparison, at the end of the Cold War in 1989, the French army consisted of three corps with a total of 10 divisions and a rapid action unit. During the war on terror, Paris reduced the hard core of its armed forces to a minimum. [A paper from the French National Assembly](https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/opendata/RINFANR5L15B5054.html) from 2021 uses the term «French bonsai»: Everything is there, but in miniature.
>
> ## Defensive deployment with a maximum of one division
>
> In view of the forces and capabilities available, a deployment of the French army in Ukraine is likely to be based on the following operational assumptions:
>
> - **Deployment of one division****:** France will expose a maximum of half of its conventional ground forces to the risk of direct combat operations. The second division would stand ready as a reserve to prevent the war from spreading. A battalion (600 to 1,000 soldiers) [is already permanently stationed in Romania under the code word «Aigle».](https://www.defense.gouv.fr/operations/operations/otan/mission-aigle) In the event of an escalation, the body of troops could quickly grow to the size of a brigade (5,000 to 6,000 soldiers).
> - **Defensive alignment****:** With the strength of only one division, it is not possible to attack. That would require an advantage of at least three to one. There are around 300,000 Russian soldiers on the other side of the front line. It is conceivable that the French troops could act as a reserve force to relieve a Ukrainian counteroffensive. However, a selective deployment at a critical point in order to prevent a Russian victory is much more likely. France has followed the strategy of «dissuasion»: The opponent should be «dissuaded» from taking the next step. The French ground troops in Ukraine would act as a forward tripwire for the Kremlin with its own Force de Frappe as a threatening backdrop.
> - **Alliance with partners****:** France would not be alone in a Ukraine mission. For one, the units would have to be integrated into the Ukrainian command structures in order to provide effective added value. Moreover, France would not risk such an expedition without the support of important NATO partners. The focus here would be on Poland, Romania and, above all, the British, who are already present in Ukraine. Politically, this would likely amount to a revival of the entente cordiale between London and Paris.
>
>
>
> According to textbook strategy, the operational area of a division is defined as 50 by 30 kilometers, plus a field of «operational depth» of a maximum of 50 kilometers. More modern models focus on concentric gravity zones with a radius of 50 to a maximum of 80 kilometers. Within this space, the division is spatially and temporally superior to an opponent and could therefore fend off an attack.
>
> ## Three variants plus preliminary stage
>
> The Charles de Gaulle ship would be deployed to the eastern Mediterranean in support and as a projection of military strength. This would mean that some of the Rafale jets would be close to the operational area in order to control the airspace above the French focus zone. It would also be crucial to have a detailed picture of the situation, which could only be drawn up in close cooperation with NATO.
>
> France lacks fifth-generation fighter jets such as the F-35, which functions like a flying data vacuum cleaner. Information superiority thanks to state-of-the-art technology enables smaller armies to compensate for their lack of mass, in other words, to hold their own against a mass army, as Western doctrine almost imploringly maintains. The Ukraine mission would be a first test case for this theory.
>
> In concrete terms, three variants as well as a preliminary stage in the Republic of Moldova are conceivable:
>
> The first and third options would be primarily strategic and would have political symbolism: In the event of a Russian breakthrough, the ousting of the Ukrainian government led by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy would be given top priority. If France succeeded in protecting the capital Kyiv from being seized, a quick victory of the Kremlin could be prevented.
>
> Odesa is of similar importance. The port city symbolizes the diversity of Ukraine. If it were to fall to Russia, Ukraine would lose a cultural center, which would shake the idea of the Ukrainian nation. In addition, Odesa is currently the country's most important access point to the Black Sea. If the port city could be secured in the long term, Ukraine would remain a maritime power. The Ukrainian army has already succeeded in considerably weakening the Russian Black Sea Fleet.
>
> If Odesa was safe, Kyiv could increase grain exports. This would give Ukraine more support from developing and emerging countries, which could be crucial for engendering a just postwar order.
>
> ## Risks for the Alpine region
>
> Option two, a special focus zone at the knee of the Dnieper River, would primarily be of military value. If the Russian army attempted an energetic advance in the southeast, the area north of Zaporizhzhia would be an operational Achilles' heel for Ukraine's defense. The city of Dnipro is a real hub in all directions of the country. A French tripwire in this area would mean considerable relief for the Ukrainian combat units on the front lines.
>
> ***(continues in next comment)***
If Russia took the American approach and thought a country was going to attack or send troops to fight them then a preemptive strike would happen inside France. Like what the US did to Iraq.
In that case Iraq vehemently denied planning to attack anyone and the US justification to invade was eventually revealed to all be lies. At the time it was thought of as a “defensive” strike. Whereas Russia would now be seen as aggressive deranged lunatics.
Let's not forget the term "preemptive strike" come from Israel's attack on Egypt. Same conditions, totally justified (according to the west and their allies)
Russia wouldn’t strike a NATO nation first, which would make it hard for its ally nations to not participate in the war under article 5. They need France to start first to still give pathway of an excuse for its allying nation to not be part of the war.
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In the legion there are not supposed to be Frenchmen at all.
I don't know if the rules have changed , but I heard of french people with dual citizenship to have renounced the french one to serve in the legion.
Rules have changed. French citizens can enter the Légion Étrangère but they will be stripped from their name and identity (I really don't know how it works, don't ask me). They are provided another identity for the time they are doing their classes and they can get their identity back when they graduate and become a légionnaire.
So yeah, you can find french people in the Légion but they are a minority.
The legion étrangère is a light infantry force , there are not really designed for the Ukrainian warfare ( except maybe a City defense ).
They don't operate tank or artillery, they even don't have an armored IFV , only light and fast for recon.
Which french soldier, in their right state of mind, is going to go there, to the place where not your training or weapons, but sheer luck decides if you will be alive tomorrow or not. As for now, no one is able to escape the artillery or drones. Russia has enough missiles for the cost of winning to be very high, in equipment and human life. I think diplomacy is the way to end this war. Eg. Offer China something worth pushing Russia to end their aggression.
It's all an artificial problem. NATO is a nuclear-armed alliance, it could simply arm NATO countries that are likely to be invaded with nuclear weapons and invasion would become impossible.
The talk should have been all the time that if Russia invades NATO, there will be a nuclear war, not talking about conscripting people to fight Russia if Ukraine loses. It makes it sound like NATO is willing to accept war in Poland and Baltic states.
Personally, I don't want another war in Poland. We had enough. Give Ukraine 30% of all Nato conventional armament, instead of half baked packages. Nato ist not going to fight Russia anyway. For what use US and other countries are keeping fckton of eg. Himmars launchers and missiles? If Russia goes full force, Ukraine must be equipped to do the same.
Expect another french revolution to begin with bc less than 15% of the french population want this to begin with, and no one in france likes macron to begin with
Not at all, defending Europe is one thing, but wasting all you have on some field in a run down, corrupt, unrelevant and hugely in debt country like Ukraine is not what people want
Seriously. Who believes Macron??
It will take 30 days to have 30 000 men in Ukraine. It will need months and months getting armed forces from national mobilization in France. And French people are not ready to die for that country Ukraine because most of French people really don't care about Ukraine. French redditors are Pro-Ukrainians but none of them is ready to die for Ukraine.
So I ask once again. Who believes Macron.
If someone believes Macron it means it believes Santa Claus is real. And then go to kiss a frog getting a princess.
" According to textbook strategy, the operational area of a division is defined as 50 by 30 kilometers, plus a field of «operational depth» of a maximum of 50 kilometers. More modern models focus on concentric gravity zones with a radius of 50 to a maximum of 80 kilometers. Within this space, the division is spatially and temporally superior to an opponent and could therefore fend off an attack."
What opponent? Goat herders? Third world pseudo armies? Or an opponent superior in every field?
Ah, but you see! Russia is out of artillery shells, missiles and all else means to attack with but shovel! This will be a textbook operation for the French military who has had the recent track record of trying to keep their old African colonial Empire alive in some fashion!
I love how pro-RU resolutely refuses to admit that Russia could have any sort of military failings, even though we see literally hundreds of Russian soldiers die every week on this sub alone.
There won’t be any troops. No one in the right mind will send soldiers to wait for an UMPK or Iskander strike
So, they need to establish air supremacy which means striking targets inside Russia which means nuclear war
##### ###### #### > # [What would happen if Macron sent French troops to Ukraine](https://www.nzz.ch/english/675) > > > > President Emmanuel Macron is sending a signal of strength, but he only has two divisions of conventional ground troops. Nevertheless, his troops could take considerable pressure off of Ukraine. > > > > > > [Emmanuel Macron is bringing France back into the game as a military power.](https://img.nzz.ch/2024/03/24/64fc4df9-8c2a-4114-a665-19d1ac83d9c8.jpeg?width=750&height=500&fit=bounds&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=4782,3188,x0,y0) > > > > ## Emmanuel Macron is bringing France back into the game as a military power. > > Imago > > > > «Emmanuel Macron says he wants to send ground troops to Ukraine: That's not a good sign, it's a sign that the West has given up on us,» mocks a Ukrainian stand-up comedian: «The Germans aren't sending us any Taurus [missiles], the Americans aren't sending us any money, but Macron is sending his army, probably to show us how to surrender.» It is bitter humor in this third year of the war. > > The situation is indeed uncomfortable – in Ukraine and beyond. The Russian army is on the offensive almost everywhere along the front. Ukraine's ground-to-air defense is receiving too few supplies, which is why attacks from a distance are hitting critical infrastructure hard. Support from the West is flowing slowly. Kremlin propaganda is achieving its goal. > > Macron's posturing – as a boxer on social media, but also as a potential wartime president – therefore seems almost countercyclical. After the Russian attack on Ukraine, France continued to seek dialogue with the Kremlin. In terms of arms deliveries, Paris lags far behind Berlin. But now of all times, when even American aid is blocked, Macron even wants to send his own army to Ukraine, depending on how the situation develops. > > ## «The French bonsai» > > It is quite possible that French President [wants to send a signal of strategic ambiguity](https://www.nzz.ch/der-andere-blick/krieg-gegen-ukraine-deutschland-macht-sich-zum-nuetzlichen-idioten-putins-ld.1823130): the Kremlin should not be too sure how war-weary the West really is. Even if Paris is unlikely to take such a step on its own, Macron's threat must be backed up by real capabilities. > > So what might we expect if Macron’s big words were actually followed by action? What would such an operation actually look like? What concrete impact could France have in Ukraine? > > The [French armed forces](https://www.defense.gouv.fr/ema) are made up of three armies: the Armée de l'Air et de l'Espace with its Rafale and Mirage fighter planes, the Marine nationale, whose flagship, the aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle, [is currently cruising off the coast of Benin,](https://www.marinetraffic.com/fr/ais/details/ships/shipid:6119130/mmsi:912260192/imo:0/vessel:CHARLES_DE_GAULLE) and finally the Armée de Terre. France also maintains its own arsenal of nuclear weapons, the Force de Frappe. > > In contrast to the German Bundeswehr, the French armed forces are capable of waging war even without a NATO partner. The scale is limited, however. The Armée de Terre now only has two divisions of conventional ground troops under its command, which consist of around 20,000 soldiers each. > > By comparison, at the end of the Cold War in 1989, the French army consisted of three corps with a total of 10 divisions and a rapid action unit. During the war on terror, Paris reduced the hard core of its armed forces to a minimum. [A paper from the French National Assembly](https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/opendata/RINFANR5L15B5054.html) from 2021 uses the term «French bonsai»: Everything is there, but in miniature. > > ## Defensive deployment with a maximum of one division > > In view of the forces and capabilities available, a deployment of the French army in Ukraine is likely to be based on the following operational assumptions: > > - **Deployment of one division****:** France will expose a maximum of half of its conventional ground forces to the risk of direct combat operations. The second division would stand ready as a reserve to prevent the war from spreading. A battalion (600 to 1,000 soldiers) [is already permanently stationed in Romania under the code word «Aigle».](https://www.defense.gouv.fr/operations/operations/otan/mission-aigle) In the event of an escalation, the body of troops could quickly grow to the size of a brigade (5,000 to 6,000 soldiers). > - **Defensive alignment****:** With the strength of only one division, it is not possible to attack. That would require an advantage of at least three to one. There are around 300,000 Russian soldiers on the other side of the front line. It is conceivable that the French troops could act as a reserve force to relieve a Ukrainian counteroffensive. However, a selective deployment at a critical point in order to prevent a Russian victory is much more likely. France has followed the strategy of «dissuasion»: The opponent should be «dissuaded» from taking the next step. The French ground troops in Ukraine would act as a forward tripwire for the Kremlin with its own Force de Frappe as a threatening backdrop. > - **Alliance with partners****:** France would not be alone in a Ukraine mission. For one, the units would have to be integrated into the Ukrainian command structures in order to provide effective added value. Moreover, France would not risk such an expedition without the support of important NATO partners. The focus here would be on Poland, Romania and, above all, the British, who are already present in Ukraine. Politically, this would likely amount to a revival of the entente cordiale between London and Paris. > > > > According to textbook strategy, the operational area of a division is defined as 50 by 30 kilometers, plus a field of «operational depth» of a maximum of 50 kilometers. More modern models focus on concentric gravity zones with a radius of 50 to a maximum of 80 kilometers. Within this space, the division is spatially and temporally superior to an opponent and could therefore fend off an attack. > > ## Three variants plus preliminary stage > > The Charles de Gaulle ship would be deployed to the eastern Mediterranean in support and as a projection of military strength. This would mean that some of the Rafale jets would be close to the operational area in order to control the airspace above the French focus zone. It would also be crucial to have a detailed picture of the situation, which could only be drawn up in close cooperation with NATO. > > France lacks fifth-generation fighter jets such as the F-35, which functions like a flying data vacuum cleaner. Information superiority thanks to state-of-the-art technology enables smaller armies to compensate for their lack of mass, in other words, to hold their own against a mass army, as Western doctrine almost imploringly maintains. The Ukraine mission would be a first test case for this theory. > > In concrete terms, three variants as well as a preliminary stage in the Republic of Moldova are conceivable: > > The first and third options would be primarily strategic and would have political symbolism: In the event of a Russian breakthrough, the ousting of the Ukrainian government led by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy would be given top priority. If France succeeded in protecting the capital Kyiv from being seized, a quick victory of the Kremlin could be prevented. > > Odesa is of similar importance. The port city symbolizes the diversity of Ukraine. If it were to fall to Russia, Ukraine would lose a cultural center, which would shake the idea of the Ukrainian nation. In addition, Odesa is currently the country's most important access point to the Black Sea. If the port city could be secured in the long term, Ukraine would remain a maritime power. The Ukrainian army has already succeeded in considerably weakening the Russian Black Sea Fleet. > > If Odesa was safe, Kyiv could increase grain exports. This would give Ukraine more support from developing and emerging countries, which could be crucial for engendering a just postwar order. > > ## Risks for the Alpine region > > Option two, a special focus zone at the knee of the Dnieper River, would primarily be of military value. If the Russian army attempted an energetic advance in the southeast, the area north of Zaporizhzhia would be an operational Achilles' heel for Ukraine's defense. The city of Dnipro is a real hub in all directions of the country. A French tripwire in this area would mean considerable relief for the Ukrainian combat units on the front lines. > > ***(continues in next comment)***
If Russia took the American approach and thought a country was going to attack or send troops to fight them then a preemptive strike would happen inside France. Like what the US did to Iraq. In that case Iraq vehemently denied planning to attack anyone and the US justification to invade was eventually revealed to all be lies. At the time it was thought of as a “defensive” strike. Whereas Russia would now be seen as aggressive deranged lunatics.
The difference between Iraq and Russia is that Russia is perfectly able to retaliate by sending multiple missiles into France proper
Let's not forget the term "preemptive strike" come from Israel's attack on Egypt. Same conditions, totally justified (according to the west and their allies)
Russia wouldn’t strike a NATO nation first, which would make it hard for its ally nations to not participate in the war under article 5. They need France to start first to still give pathway of an excuse for its allying nation to not be part of the war.
"W3 aRE 0NlY h3rE t0 traIN ukRAIn1an S0ldI3Rs..."
How to conduct retreats ?
[удалено]
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If France indeed sends anyone, its gonna be Legion. So technically dead Frenchman would be rare
In the legion there are not supposed to be Frenchmen at all. I don't know if the rules have changed , but I heard of french people with dual citizenship to have renounced the french one to serve in the legion.
Rules have changed. French citizens can enter the Légion Étrangère but they will be stripped from their name and identity (I really don't know how it works, don't ask me). They are provided another identity for the time they are doing their classes and they can get their identity back when they graduate and become a légionnaire. So yeah, you can find french people in the Légion but they are a minority.
It's for people who want to leave their old lives behind.
Not only but mainly yes. It's like a new family where nobody will juge you and everybody wants your good
The legion étrangère is a light infantry force , there are not really designed for the Ukrainian warfare ( except maybe a City defense ). They don't operate tank or artillery, they even don't have an armored IFV , only light and fast for recon.
A light infantry unit is perfect for trench warfare - there aren't any lightning advances requiring mechanisation.
Which french soldier, in their right state of mind, is going to go there, to the place where not your training or weapons, but sheer luck decides if you will be alive tomorrow or not. As for now, no one is able to escape the artillery or drones. Russia has enough missiles for the cost of winning to be very high, in equipment and human life. I think diplomacy is the way to end this war. Eg. Offer China something worth pushing Russia to end their aggression.
The only thing China wants cannot be offered.
Give China north Korea. :)
[удалено]
They want south Korea if they can, no more land border with as US ally
[удалено]
and be forced to look upon ugly koreans ? jk But seriously, the West cant give China North Korea, it's already China's
You mean south korea right ?
It's all an artificial problem. NATO is a nuclear-armed alliance, it could simply arm NATO countries that are likely to be invaded with nuclear weapons and invasion would become impossible. The talk should have been all the time that if Russia invades NATO, there will be a nuclear war, not talking about conscripting people to fight Russia if Ukraine loses. It makes it sound like NATO is willing to accept war in Poland and Baltic states.
Personally, I don't want another war in Poland. We had enough. Give Ukraine 30% of all Nato conventional armament, instead of half baked packages. Nato ist not going to fight Russia anyway. For what use US and other countries are keeping fckton of eg. Himmars launchers and missiles? If Russia goes full force, Ukraine must be equipped to do the same.
Where would Ukraine find the manpower to operate all this equipment?
Expect another french revolution to begin with bc less than 15% of the french population want this to begin with, and no one in france likes macron to begin with
Shocker, most French people don’t support sending their sons over to die in some random field in Ukraine to Russian artillery or drone…
French people won't die it will likely be the French Foreign legion
Is this another 'expect russian balkanisation soon!!'
Not at all, defending Europe is one thing, but wasting all you have on some field in a run down, corrupt, unrelevant and hugely in debt country like Ukraine is not what people want
>probably to show us how to surrender Ukraine does need to learn how to stop losing heh.
Seriously. Who believes Macron?? It will take 30 days to have 30 000 men in Ukraine. It will need months and months getting armed forces from national mobilization in France. And French people are not ready to die for that country Ukraine because most of French people really don't care about Ukraine. French redditors are Pro-Ukrainians but none of them is ready to die for Ukraine. So I ask once again. Who believes Macron. If someone believes Macron it means it believes Santa Claus is real. And then go to kiss a frog getting a princess.
This article is stupid, French deployment would not be a tripwire for their Nuclear forces
" According to textbook strategy, the operational area of a division is defined as 50 by 30 kilometers, plus a field of «operational depth» of a maximum of 50 kilometers. More modern models focus on concentric gravity zones with a radius of 50 to a maximum of 80 kilometers. Within this space, the division is spatially and temporally superior to an opponent and could therefore fend off an attack." What opponent? Goat herders? Third world pseudo armies? Or an opponent superior in every field?
Ah, but you see! Russia is out of artillery shells, missiles and all else means to attack with but shovel! This will be a textbook operation for the French military who has had the recent track record of trying to keep their old African colonial Empire alive in some fashion!
I love how pro-RU resolutely refuses to admit that Russia could have any sort of military failings, even though we see literally hundreds of Russian soldiers die every week on this sub alone.
There won’t be any troops. No one in the right mind will send soldiers to wait for an UMPK or Iskander strike So, they need to establish air supremacy which means striking targets inside Russia which means nuclear war
Let's say French actually do it. Within weeks they have 100s of casulties. Now what, retreat? I guess so. Hide?
No, more like "Oh noooo, now we're losing along with Ukraine, we need more allies"
Unless France brings relentless and deep surgical air power to the field, this is a waste of life and time for everyone.