Report of the conference of Mr Marc ROUSSET, organised by the Académie de Géopolitique de Paris (AGP), Wednesday 15 October 2025, at 5 rue Conté (75003 Paris), on the topic ” For a lasting peace and a new rapprochement with Russia ».
About the author: Graduated from HEC and ENA, holds a state doctorate from Harvard University, Marc ROUSSET is an essayist and has exercised several economic and financial responsibilities, including as a manager and manager in large groups. Known for its positions in favour of an independent Europe of the United States and a strategic rapprochement with Russia, it published Our fake friend America – For a lasting alliance with Russia (p. Piotr Tolstoy, Paris, Librinova, December 2023 or even New Europe Paris-Berlin-Moscow (Paris, ed. Godefroy de Bouillon, 2009).
Presentation by Dr. Ali RASTBEEN, President of the Paris Academy of Geopolitics.
We are pleased to welcome you to this conference dedicated to an essential topic for our time: ” Towards lasting peace and a new rapprochement between Europe and Russia ” This event is part of a global context marked by rising tensions, a recomposition of geopolitical balances and a worrying weakening of international dialogue.
In this context, the search for a new balance between Europe and Russia represents a major challenge for the future of our continent and global stability.
Today we have the honour of receiving Marc Rousset, writer, economist and essayist, graduate of HEC and ENA, holder of a state doctorate from Harvard University, author of several books with geopolitical and strategic scope, including Our fake friend America – For an alliance with Russia, New Europe Paris-Berlin-Moscow, and The Crusade of the 20th Century: Globalism against Europe.
In his analysis, he pleads for a sovereign Europe, independent of external influences, and for continental cooperation between European nations and Russia, natural partners in defending the continent’s common values and interests.
Since the conflict in Ukraine, Europe has been experiencing a deep crisis that has called into question the security architecture inherited from the Cold War. The collapse of arms control treaties, militarisation of borders, energy disruption and political polarization have fragmented the European area. Yet, despite war and mistrust, Europe and Russia remain linked by geography, history and common challenges: nuclear stability, energy security, climate change, cybersecurity and Arctic management. These challenges go beyond political rivalries and require minimal cooperation to preserve peace and avoid escalation.
Reflecting on a new rapprochement does not mean forgetting violations of international law or legitimizing violence. It is to recognize that lasting peace requires legal firmness and diplomatic openness, i.e. a strategy of clarity and not illusion.
The obstacles to dialogue remain numerous: total strategic mistrust, irreconcilable political narratives and legal frameworks saturated by sanctions and diplomatic litigation. Added to this is the erosion of arms control treaties – such as the INF, the CFE, Open Skies and New START – which once limited nuclear and conventional arsenals. Their weakening increases the risk of military incidents and strategic misunderstandings. Finally, political and societal constraints hinder the resumption of dialogue: fear of compromise, internal divisions, media and memorial divides. However, refusing dialogue would mean freezing confrontation. New strategic normality, based on transparency and mutual verification, must be invented.
The world today is marked by unstable multipolarity. The tightening of the blocs – Euro-Atlantic and Eurasian – reduces Europe’s diplomatic margin. As Russia approaches China and the “global South”, Europe remains dependent on American protection. This situation makes the continent vulnerable, both in its strategic neighbourhoods (Black Sea, Caucasus, Arctic) and in its energy supplies and economic transitions. Moreover, the gaze of the global South reveals a moral imbalance: many States reject Western sanctions and denounce selective application of international law. To defend its universal values, Europe must regain a coherent, open and independent diplomacy.
A just and stable peace must be based on fundamental principles such as: respect for international law and the prohibition of the acquisition of territory by force; the indivisibility of security, based on transparency and predictability; accountability and redress, guided by impartial legal mechanisms; protection of civilians and unimpeded humanitarian access; the reversibility of the reconciliation, subject to verifiable compliance with the commitments.
These principles must guide a balanced approach, combining justice and diplomacy, firmness and openness. Peace cannot be imposed: it is built step by step, in trust and reciprocity. The reconstruction of common security requires a new process of pan-European dialogue, inspired by the spirit of Helsinki of 1975.
This Helsinki 2.0 should be structured around four axes:
- Reduction of military risks: restoration of communication channels and transparency of exercises;
- Centrality of Ukraine: negotiations with, not on, Ukraine, security guarantees and reconstruction;
- Economy and energy: diversification of supplies and conditional lifting of sanctions;
- Cultural and societal diplomacy: relaunching academic, scientific and media exchanges to restore trust among peoples.
This progressive and verifiable process is the only realistic way to restore lasting stability on the European continent. Some will see this approach as appeasement; It’s not. Dialogue does not replace firmness, it accompanies it. History shows that the lack of communication inevitably leads to escalation. The real political force is to prepare peace before it is imposed by exhaustion.
To think about a rapprochement between Europe and Russia is not to minimize responsibilities, but to anticipate the future. Lasting peace is not a state, but a political process based on lucidity, patience and will. Europe must once again become a strategic actor of its own destiny, capable of assuming its historical responsibility: building safeguards before the next war, not after.
Statement by Mr Marc ROUSSET.
Introduction
« I say that we must make Europe with an agreement between French and German. Once Europe is done on these bases, then we can try, once and for all, to make Europe as a whole with Russia too, should it change its regime. That is the programme of real Europeans. Here’s mine. ».
Prophecy of General De Gaulle, Press Conference held at the Palais d’Orsay on 29 March 1949.
« Europe’s future is Euro-Asian, not Euro-Atlantic »
General Vincent Desportes.
« We need the Russians and they need us. »
Nicolas Sarkozy, former President of the Republic, in an interview with Figaro Magazine, 18 août 2023.
« Who still believes in the threat of a Soviet invasion? On the other hand, the presence of American bases and forces in France and our country’s membership in an American-led military organization may one day involve France, against its will, in conflicts that do not concern it. »
General de Gaulle in the Council of Ministers, 1966.
« The existential threat is not Russia; It’s the South and the Great Replacement! »
Eric Zemmour, President of the Party Reconquest!Statement on BFM TV3 March 2025.
« Instead of fearing Russia, it would be time to understand it, to understand that, drawn between two worlds, it is still Europe that this great country identifies and that it is its destiny that it intends to continue to share? To us to contribute »
Hélène Carrère d’Encausse, Permanent Secretary of the French Academy, in Russia between two worlds, Paris, Fayard, 2010.
Russia, Europe’s rampart against China, according to French Admiral Castex (1878-1968)
In a famous chronicle “Moscow, Rempart of the West”[1] of the National Defence Review, Amiral Castex, a well-known strategist and very great scholar, warned the Westerners, in 1955, in a futuristic and premonitory way, in the midst of the cold war with the USSR, against the coming rise in power of China. According to him, it was beneficial for the West and Europe to maintain the strategic advantage of a strong Russia against China.
Castex not only opposed the American theories of Alfred Mahan on the inevitable superiority of the sea[2]but he also theorized China’s future rivalry with Russia and the West. He concluded his column with a dialogue between Sir Anthony Eden, secretary of the Foreign Office, and Mr Molotov, Soviet Minister for Foreign Affairs, at the time of signature of the Geneva Agreements 1954. Molotov said to Sir Anthony Eden, about some difficulties raised by the Chinese: ” Que voulez-vous ? Ils ne pensent pas comme nous ! ». Castex termine l’article ainsi : « I found this ‘nous’ heavy of meaning, and immense hopes ». Ce « nous Indeed, it is an historic word of fundamental importance, the absolute proof that Russia is European, the proof that Russia and Europe must conclude a vital and beneficial Alliance for both sides, faced with many common dangers, notwithstanding the many mutual benefits of economic and technological cooperation.
I) The Mirage of the Russian Threat
Russia is not thinking of invading Western Europe, but defending its besieged pre-square
Today, Russians feel surrounded by NATO in the West, China in the East, Muslim countries in Central Asia, Turkey and Iran in the South, with about 20 million Muslims inside their country.
The Russian is still in a warlike posture, imagining, rightly, being surrounded by enemies wanting to take his territory large and empty. In Asia, the European is the Russian! Russia should rather be seen by Western Europeans as the “guard dog”, the protective shield of Europe in the East, against Muslim countries and China. As for Europe, it should consider itself and be regarded as theHinterland Russia by the Russians, rather than as an integral part of the NATO aggressor, a name for America. If one day the Muslim world were to be in Stavropol, starting point of Russian colonization in the XIXe If the Chinese were to be in the Urals, this would be for Europeans a civilizational and strategic defeat, even more resounding than the capture of Byzantium (Constantinople) by the Turks in 1453.
Struggling for its demographic survival in an immense territory to defend, Russia does not have the human resources, nor the slightest desire to invade Europe: on the contrary, it wants to bring it closer!
Low birth rate, low life expectancy (especially alcoholism), 27 million deaths during the Second World War, collapse of the birth rate after the fall of the USSR, Russia has accumulated “demographic penalties”. It has enough and much better to do, with its meagre human resources in an immense territory to defend, than to want to invade Europe, an attempt that would be suicidal and stupid.
The unifying civilizational cement of Russia, the state-empire, is the European civilization: losing this providential cement would ultimately increase the risk of secession and break-up in Siberia and the Caucasus because Russia would lose its founding soul!
Putin’s Russia, like Gorbachev’s Russia, wants and has always wanted, on the contrary, to get closer to Europe!
Europe’s enemies are itself immigration, conquering Islamism, China and emerging economic countries; an economic, military and cultural quasi-enemy: the United States / Russia, a potential friend
As Europeans wait to finally open their eyes, faced with the only real mortal danger of conquering Islamism, of the extra-European migration invasion leading to the replacement of populations and civil war! What do Europeans expect to change their opinion completely and get closer to Moscow, Ukraine being an internal problem of Russia! Europeans should be inspired, on the contrary, by the failed attempt of US President Donald Trump in 2025 to get closer to Russia! This oversized state-empire is a threat fantasized by the stupid, unrealistic, lying, decadent European elites, without a realistic geopolitical vision of the Future! The Russian threat to Europe is a fable, a state lie!
2) France and Europe of nations must move closer to Russia
In the book Great chess player. America and the rest of the world[3]American presidential adviser of Polish origin Zbigniew Brzezinski had advocated American hegemony and Russia’s isolation. Europe must be a power and not just a market, in order to build military and technological sovereignty. We must reconnect with Russia: it is the mutual interest of Europe and Russia. It is important for Europeans to see the complementarity of their continent with a Euro-Asian Union led by Russia. The current European elites, with the exception of Viktor Orban, do not seem to have understood that the times had changed, that Vladimir Putin’s Russia could become a partner and no longer be an opponent; their diplomacy is unrealistic, while European patriots reason in the very long term geopolitically, strategically and civilizationally.
Interest in a Europe of nations anchoring Russia in a Greater Europe with a common future
Russia must be anchored in a Greater Europe with the vision of a common future, of certain common actions, and a pan-European Continental Alliance must be set up to counterbalance both America and the Middle Empire. The sense of history will inevitably lead Russia towards European membership, especially since Russia is also geographically anchored in Asia, where its security is threatened.
Whatever the treaties, what is needed is that Europeans are now introducing Russia into the geostrategic equation, based on the principle that we are in the same pan-European boat. Western Europe’s interest is to move strategically closer to Russia, regardless of the totalitarian, democratic or liberal character of the regime currently in place, as General de Gaulle had already had the brilliant premonitory vision in 1949, at his press conference at the Palais d’Orsay, when it was in the midst of a cold war with Stalin.[4].
Europe must consider itself to be Hinterland Russia against China to keep control of Siberia. Europe does not go from Washington to Brussels, but from Brest to Vladivostok, from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean!
Russia / European Europe: real European and civilizational common values
In the long term, Europe’s merger with the Eurasian continent, of which it is part, promises more than any Atlantic “community of values”. These are true historical, universal European values, carrying a message, as was the case for Greeks, Arabs, Persia, China, and India, able to survive all political powers.
Developing economic exchanges between Europe and Russia
Russia has 22 per cent of the world’s mining wealth, an increasingly powerful industry that accounts for 33 per cent of Russian GDP and agriculture that can feed much of the third world. Russia has become the 4thème economic power in terms of purchasing power parity (PPA), while France fell to 9ème row. A holder of the world’s largest gas reserves, the only continental power with France to control civilian and military nuclear power, a major space power, a strategic supplier to many European countries, Russia is the ideal strategic partner for Europe.
The stupid losses of investments, sources of supply, opportunities, jobs and profitability of European companies, following economic sanctions against Russia advocated by the United States and its irresponsible European valets
France was the first foreign employer in Russia with Total, Renault, Safran and Auchan. Renault held 33% of the country’s automotive market. Total, which owns 30% of the giant Yamal consortium in the heart of the Russian Arctic, has had to give up stakes in Siberia. New areas of cooperation were to be opened for new energies, nuclear and artificial intelligence (AI), each country having already built a strategic plan. At a time when Europeans must fight to survive economically and not lose their jobs in an increasingly dangerous and competitive world, it is an unnecessary, pure and simple European economic suicide for America’s beautiful eyes!
The astronomical losses of French and European agriculture, following the Western suicidal economic sanctions against Russia
Russia accounted for 10% of total European agricultural exports. This volume evaporated and resulted in dry losses for many producers. In 2013, France had shipped more than EUR 1 billion of the 10 billion that Russia imported from the European Union (EU). The Russian embargo of 6 August 2022 on certain European food products in retaliation for the sanctions imposed by Brussels caused considerable damage to French agriculture.
Strategic complementarity with Russia: putting an end to priceless liquefied US shale gas and reopening the two German-Russian gas pipelines Nord Stream 1 and 2
Russian gas is not a dependency on Europe, but rather a reliable, complementary and very cheap energy source, while American gas costs 4 times more, pollutes with LNG tankers on the seas as well as with liquefaction plants in the United States and regasification plants in Europe. Other sources of supply (Norway, Netherlands, Algeria) are declining. By 1971, the President of the Soviet Council Alexis Kossyguin had been able to declare to his German interlocutors that ” The common market should give way to an energy Europe based on the USSR »[5].
Energy complementarity of the TurkStream : a gas pipeline to deliver Russian gas to southern Europe
With the pipeline TurkStream whose valves were solemnly opened on 8 January 2020 in Istanbul by Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Vladimir Putin, the leader of the Kremlin has completed a long-standing purpose: to increase and secure the supply of Russian gas to Europeans.
Europe cannot do without Russian gas
EU gas needs are enormous: 400 billion m3 per year of which 187 billion were provided by Russia, or 46.8% until the war in Ukraine. 55% of the German gas consumed was of Russian origin. In fact, Europe continues to depend more than ever on Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG).
Nuclear: Close collaboration between Russia and France resists war in Ukraine, but America has done everything to end it
Most reactors under construction outside Russia by Rosatom, the Russian nuclear giant, must be equipped with French Arabelle turbines, with all the equipment and maintenance that goes with it. For each new reactor built by Rosatom In Europe or elsewhere, up to EUR 1 billion goes to the French technologies of Framatome, a subsidiary of EDF. Purchases of French turbines by Rosatom account for more than half of the turnover of the Belfort factory. This successful collaboration is the result of the successful export of the VVER reactor Rosatom. The Russian company is the world’s leading exporter of nuclear power plants and holds 30% market share. Turbines are not the only strong point in the French industry benefiting from Russian commercial dynamism. Framatome has also become a key partner of Rosatom for the control-command system, another key component of the VVER reactor exported by Rosatom.
These strategic activities of Alstom (turbines also needed for EPR nuclear reactors and Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier) sold to General Electric by Finance Minister Emmanuel Macron in 2014, were finally bought, not without bad, and at a very high price by EDF, in 2024.
The suspension of the launch of Soyouz in Kourou: from the beautiful waste and a nightmare for Europe, France and Arianespace, until the launch of Ariane 6
The war in Ukraine will have been due to the Franco-Russian cooperation which was launched in 1996 with the creation of Starsem; she ended the adventure Soyouz en Guyane. En onze ans, Soyouz carried out 27 missions from Guyanese soil on behalf of private clients, but also ESA (European Space Agency) and the European Commission. Soyuz launched the satellites Galileo, but also emblematic missions like Gaia that map the Milky Way.
Close cooperation with Russia, the world’s third largest space power, is the only way to ensure the long-term survival of the European space industry, which is increasingly out of date in fierce competition with China, the United States and Russia![6]
Russia, at the heart of the gigantic ITER nuclear fusion project (20 billion euros) in Cadarache
At the heart of the device is a gigantic machine invented by the Russians, a “tokamak” where the fusion reaction will be produced, resulting from the collision of nuclei of two variants of hydrogen (deuterium and tritium) caused by temperatures of the order of 150 million degrees.
Russia’s potential contribution to Europe of new energy wealth and new waterways in the Arctic
The Northern Seaway is Asia’s shortest route to Europe and the Americas. 80% of the journey takes place in Russian territorial waters. This route shortens the distance from 7000 to 5000 km, a 40 per cent gain from the route between Europe and Asia via the Suez Canal (457 million tonnes in 2024) and thus 40 per cent less time and fuel. According to the Montego Bay Accords of 1982, Russia can claim a toll or accompaniment fee in its territorial waters and refuse access to undesirables. The Russians strengthened their armed forces and built the immense ultra-modern base with power plant, ultra-modern clinic and covered airfield, from the “Arctic Clover” on Kotelny Island, 600 kilometres from the North Pole[7].
Russia’s potential contribution to Europe of opening up to the Pacific and boom the Russian Far East
« Europe at 2 o’clock! In Seoul, South Korea, we read about the Europeanity of the Russian Far East. For a long time, abandoned by Moscow, wary of the possible sinisation of immigrants, Russian Asia, following the rejection of Gorbachev’s and Putin’s advances by American European valets, has become, with the Arctic, the new priority.
Indeed, the development potential of this part of the Asian continent is enormous. By 2023, 2800 investment projects were under way, supplemented by the creation of several advanced, international special economic zones (ASEZ) and the expansion of the Vladivostok free port. Remaining unexplored and unexploited on two-thirds of its space, the Russian Far East now benefits from a three-fold higher investment rate than the Russian average. Its potential for natural resource industries (wood, minerals, oil, gas, fishing, port activity and related industries with the new Arctic shipping routes) is unlimited. By 2030, Russian LNG production in the Arctic will triple. In this conquest of ” Far-East Russian railway plays a fundamental role: Trans-Baikal is the busiest railway in the world[8].
New link by the Caspian Sea from Russia to India
It is also worth noting Putin’s new Asian road to the south of the country, this time connecting St. Petersburg to Bombay, in 15-24 days, descending the Volga and joining the Caspian Sea, thanks to the ITC Canal, towards Astrakhan, Caspian port. The goods are then transported by boat to Rashi, Iran, and then shipped by rail to Tehran, where they are then transported to Bombay, China or the Middle East. By the Suez Canal, the journey time from St. Petersburg to Bombay is 30 to 45 days[9]. The connection by the Caspian Sea also allows the short-circuiting of maritime routes by the Baltic and the Black Sea, subject to Western sanctions.
The Great Europe of the nations of the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean would have an ideal strategic location in the world, much better than that of the United States!
After being imperialist and dominating, Europe became an American colony dependent on the United States. It must be decolonized in turn to become itself, free, European, independent. Its main asset is its natural proximity and a good neighbourhood with Russia. Europe remains the natural culmination of the northern Eurasian plains with their end to the Atlantic. Because of this geographical situation, Europeans have no choice but to submit to America or to the influence of their power and civilization, along with defending their geopolitical and strategic interests. To exist, to defend oneself, to radiate in a multipolar world that promises to become more and more difficult, it is necessary to strategically regroup itself into a great set of nations, from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean.
The Greater Europe would then benefit very incidentally from the same strategic advantage as the “United States Island” between the Atlantic Ocean and the Pacific Ocean! But it would have in addition to the immense strategic advantage over the United States, to be the famous ” Heartland » to dominate the World Island (” World Island ), thus the world, according to Mackinder’s concept[10], and benefit in addition from direct access to the new Arctic Seaway to Asia! Anyway, the dream! Europe from Brest to Vladivostok is a great mobilising objective: it would allow the Pan-Europeans not only to get closer to power parity with the United States, but more likely to overcome them!
Alliance Europe of Nations / Russia to face US imperialism and China
Without the slightest imagination, nor long-term vision, by submission to the Americans, European leaders have therefore stifled the future of Europe prepared by Charles de Gaulle, to only make Washington happy. The blind European elites preferred to wage war against Russia, a great European, white and Christian nation, while the real threat is internal, with the ongoing extra-European migration invasion, conquering Islamism, and the risk of civil war. The Greater Europe from Brest to Vladivostok would represent a potential strategic, demographic, geographical, civilizational, cultural, economic and military colossus.
Conclusion
There is therefore no alternative to rapprochement, to the Alliance between Europe and Russia! Any alliance of Russia or Europe with China or the United States can only be tactical, short-term defensive, but not strategic and civilizational in the long term. Brest’s Greater Europe in Vladivostok could be the third largest power pole in the world, speaking equal to or even surpassing the United States and China!
ISSUES OF THE ROOM AND GENERAL DEBATE
S.E.M. Jean-Pierre VETTOVAGLIA, Ambassador of Switzerland (1988-2007) to Vienna, Bucharest and Paris, personal representative of the President of Switzerland for the Francophonie in Paris (2000-2007), administrator of an international trade finance bank in Geneva (Trade Finance, BIC-BRED), essayist, lecturer in analysis and prospective international relations.
Please excuse my cooling: I want to thank you, it happens that I share your goals widely, you are right about many things, but you are, like me in Switzerland elsewhere, one of the very few reasonable voices in a vast desert of war, ignorance and foolishness. And it happens that we do not evolve in a dominant narrative: We stick you to the wall, we ostracise you, it’s a very difficult situation to live elsewhere, so we could say by laughing, and there’s only humor in my remark, that you wrote a science fiction book… I have two remarks.
The title of your speech speaks of “sustainable peace” and “new rapprochement”. You are trying a lot of political foresight, and I can tell you that it is very unlikely to have lasting peace and rapprochement between Europe and Russia over the next five, ten years… It must be excluded, both for Ukraine and for Israel, because no one is preparing it, this peace, no one within governments, is really preparing this rapprochement. Russia doesn’t necessarily want peace either, Zelensky doesn’t, Netanyahu doesn’t, neither do Europeans – as the very unsupported politicians are a proven bellicism: the less voices you have, the more bellicists you are – nor the US.
The only question I’d like to ask is, where is intelligence in all this? Where’s the intelligence? Because I advise all those who have not yet done so to read Samuel Fitoussi’s latest book on intelligence[11], which is absolutely remarkable and which I use for my next book that I will publish. It proves, Fitoussi, and we can use it today, that all those who have adopted these false narratives that they are seeking to overthrow will defend them until the end, because their intelligence will allow them to accumulate arguments for their preservation, will never give them the assets to change their mind. And we are in this extremely difficult situation. That’s all I wanted to say at this point, not to monopolize attention.
M. Marc ROUSSET
Excuse me, Ambassador, but I do not agree with you at all. I’ll tell you why. Indeed, you are right to say that you are extrapolating the current situation. Now you’re absolutely right. I am a realistic man, on the contrary, I think the world can evolve very, very quickly, because I think we are practically in a pre-revolutionary situation, and look at what happened in all revolutions, attitudes… You may be reasoning – And what I tell you is not pejorative – in the world that is yours, the world of embassies, where you have a notion of continuity. I think we are in a world that can be very disruptive, which can evolve very quickly. On the contrary, I think that things can move very quickly in the direction that is mine – So maybe not as fast as I say, but it inspires part of my message anyway – that people think of getting closer to Russia, for a very simple reason that the deep state has taken over the continuation of the ideology of the deep state in the United States. This is paradoxical, because the war in Ukraine in America, by people of the deep state, and now it is the successors of the deep European state who defend a war that was caused exclusively by America. Because if there are wars, if there are a million Ukrainian deaths in Ukraine, it is only because of America, things are clear.
So, I’m telling you why I’m saying it can be very fast. I think if patriotic parties ever… Maybe it can go faster than some people think, or maybe it won’t pass, because, as you say, the system will defend itself to the end and I don’t know what we’ll do by then. I’m a geopolitician, I don’t act politically, and it can absolutely go very fast. I am thinking of Germany’s example.
I think the people of AFD[12] in Germany (when they are not far from the 30%)…
S.E.M. Jean-Pierre VETTOVAGLIA
At 30% but still far from power.
M. Marc ROUSSET
So, what is possible and then it can go even fast enough in Germany, since I know Germany very well, I know this world very well, I speak German besides… At that point, what I’m saying is that I think people in AFD could practically write, things can go very fast. The AFD is pro-Russian, things are clear. Everything I told you, AFD takes power tomorrow, you have the gas pipeline, everything is in place. And I always thought, I always thought, that the problem was to know which is the first country that was going to approach Russia, because not only do I not share your opinion, but I, my third question, is which is the first intelligent country, which will make the gesture, intelligent, futuristic, to get closer to Russia. If we had intelligent people in France it could have been France, I fear that it is Germany, contrary to all that people can claim, because it is more affected, directly, and because at present people are much more prepared in Germany, if only because of East Germany.
That’s my answer, I’m not going to go any further. And here I answer you, not out of desire to defend my theme, because I am fatalist and my book will succeed, will arrive, peace to his soul, no matter, but in terms of the possibility that what I say is realized in a more or less rapid way… I do not agree with you, Ambassador, and I have told you why.
S.E.M. Jean-Pierre VETTOVAGLIA
We’ll see in five years.
M. Marc ROUSSET
Of course, I hope we can see each other again. I am fatalist you know, to each one his truth as said…
M. Ismaël PAIENDA, Co-founder and member of the Executive Committee of the Assembly of Specialists and Experts of Afghanistan, consultant in Tourism, Sustainable Development, Investment, and International Relations
Hello, everybody. I begin with a well-known quote from Mr. Rastbeen, from Saadi (Persian poet and storyteller), who says that we are all of the same origin, and we are all human beings, members of one body, and the suffering of one of the members cannot leave others indifferent. Another thing is that, in relation to what you say, you must of course set a goal and then go, which does nothing happens to nothing. Often, when we say things that others don’t have the level of understanding of what we’re saying, they make us look like a utopian… without forgetting that utopists can be the realists of tomorrow, like Galileo at the time. Another French proverb says that to neutralize your enemies, it is better to turn them into friends, rather than turning friends into enemies.
You mentioned, Mr Rousset, many very important, intelligent things, and for the future of our children, it is extremely important that we wake up. So, should we go in the sense of complementarity, or in the sense of domination, and consider each other enemies, while we are on a very small Earth? What pushed Russia to China? Is the Ukrainian war the beginning of the invasion of Europe, as is often shown? And finally, does this rapprochement with Russia mean a distance from America, or find a solution in the sense of complementarity with China, America, Europe? Thank you very much.
M. Marc ROUSSET
Yes, I agree with your point of view, but I am a man of Realpolitik, and you also know what the philosopher Georges Gusdorf had said, that ” in life everything is only strength ” Politically and geopolitically, everything is only strength and balance of power, with regard to geopolitics. On the human level, I fully agree with you. I think you speak very well, and that’s the whole problem. (…) The thought of the left is people who often speak very well, always with good intentions, and ultimately bring only misfortunes. I think you need to know how to make a choice, but before you make a choice, a geopolitician must see in what direction geopolitical history is penetrating, leaning on civilizational things. If you do something against the current, one day or the other there will be a problem, that’s why when I say that there is the rapprochement between Europe and Russia, it is the common sense itself, it is not seeking war, it is seeking, it is seeing geography. We have someone next to us who has wealth, they are European, they have spoken French for two centuries. They didn’t talk English-American under the tsar, did they? So it’s common sense that invites me. In other words, we do not build political alliances with human wishes for rapprochement or distance, to find virtus stat in medio. We need to build something that has every chance of lasting in a natural way.
In geopolitics, you can have all the best wishes in the world, as soon as in a community, whatever it is (and there I have travelled around the world dear sir), you have more than one population whose language… For example, I’ve had problems with Koreans in China… in all the countries of the world you have a problem, whether religious… It is inherent in human nature. You can be a priest, you can be a Muslim, you can be a Buddhist, you won’t get out. It’s a human thing you deny. So wanting to deny human realities… also because man wants good things, as you say, even if there is the word (…) We can’t stop. So if you want, to find peace, you have to find solutions that are valid in the long term. Now, to answer your question, we are, foolishly, in a stupid situation because, in 1989, we Europeans stayed in NATO when there NATO should have jumped. And we didn’t have the strength to leave America’s claws.
Currently, China, Russia, are right, and the alliance is defensive, it is solid, real, sincere. A geopolitician had found a formula, I forgot the name of this boy, he had spoken of “false allies” between China and Russia. I quoted it when I spoke on Russian television. The problem is that Putin and Gorbachev were intelligent people, and then I defended the idea, that when I am in Russia, I defend Gorbachev, because obviously, for him (Putin), he is a naive. But I always say to the Europeans: Gorbachev was not as naive as it is claimed. He wanted peace, the good man! He said, he went to see Mrs. She and Thatcher said, “Ma’am, I want Europe to become a common house and not be the scene of military operations.” The problem is the Europeans. If the Europeans, when they were reached out, had the reaction to say ” U.S. go, go back to New York and leave us alone, look at your dollars and then come back where you come from,” we would never have had the war in Ukraine. So here’s the mistake that was made.
There are two reasons for the war. It is that we Europeans did not want with the hands of the Russians, since Putin and Gorbachev reached out to us, and we did not want, in the end. And second, Putin even wanted to be part of NATO, he did everything to reach out, the great Putin. So it’s not Hitler at all. Putin is the Russian de Gaulle, nothing else!
I want to tell you one thing, now it’s coming back to me, I’ll be judged for what I am and I want to say that sometimes, though, I see things pretty well, and I’ll tell you why even if I shock some people. It’s a truth, but it only engages me. One week before military intervention in Ukraine – you can test and go listen to me, I was on Freedom TV with two people – I said publicly, and I keep my words today, it was a week… I think I was perhaps the only geopolitician in France (tell me another) and while everyone said that there would be no military intervention in Ukraine… (Sometimes I have ideas coming up faster than expected) Well, not only did I say that I thought military intervention in Russia was probable, but I added that if Mr Putin did not have the courage to intervene militarily in Ukraine, for me, Marc Rousset, a petty politician of (…), he would no longer be a great statesman. That’s what I said publicly, a week before the military intervention in Russia. Find me another geopolitician in France who could have said that or someone who could have brought him, which could have brought some consideration to his remarks, and all the people who are dimming our ears, well, they may not have had the correctness, the view I might have had at the time.
Because for me as a geopolitician, Putin was right to wage war, he defended his country, he avoided doing the same fault as Daladier and Gamelin in 1936, when Hitler occupied Rhineland. If at the time we had the courage to intervene militarily in Rhineland, we wouldn’t have had Hitler and the 50 million dead, would we? Putin did the same thing, he’s in pre-emptive war because if he hadn’t intervened in Ukraine, it was the end of Russia. The end of Russia! Russia is fighting back to the wall, which is what people in Europe do not want to accept. Putin has waged forced and forced war. Because first, the war started in 2014, in Ukraine, with the coup d’état of Maidan, because then people like Mr Hollande, who acknowledged that there had been the coup d’état of Maidan, they publicly acknowledged, Mr. Holland was caught on the radios and Mrs. Angela Merkel publicly acknowledged that if the famous Minsk Treaty was not respected it was because we wanted to give Ukrainians time to prepare for war. That is, the war had been prepared in 2014. And now they say, why don’t the Russians move so fast? But yes, why? They are not moving so fast because this war, Ukrainians have been preparing since 2014.
In fact, the Russians are not fighting Ukraine, they are fighting NATO. Why did the intervention fail from the start? Because it was the CIA that informed the Ukrainians, so there was a small failure for the airport, in the north, but the Ukrainians… and congratulations to the CIA on what happened. So, you see, Putin fought a war to prevent his country… (…) I am convinced, and Putin said, that if Russia loses the war in Ukraine, then it is the end of Russia. Russia is fighting for its survival, it is an empire state, if it loses the war, there is no more Russia.
Intervention around the table (not presented)
Mr Rousset, I agree with your political position, with regard to an alliance with Russia and with regard to the independence of the United States, but I would like to nuance your proposals on the United States a little. I’m gonna make myself a little American devil’s lawyer… I think the United States is basically a European state. I even think that a Frenchman is closer to an American than a Russian, even though Russians are Europeans in their own way, but Americans are also Europeans, on a civilizational level.
Then you said, in parentheses, you don’t really… deep into the subject, you said: Christianity has two lungs, Catholicism and Orthodoxy, but you forget Protestantism. Protestantism was not born in the United States, it was born in Europe. So, in my opinion, it would have to grade your position on the United States. The United States, for me, is not the enemy, but a competitor, it is an unbearable trusteeship that must be independent, liberated, but it must be recognized that the United States is as European as Russia, of course. Russia and the United States are two major European states, and we could discuss them together. That’s what I meant.
M. Marc ROUSSET
Yes, so I’ll answer you as a geopolitician, dear sir. … big as a house, to tell you that I do not share your opinion at all, and I will tell you why. Because you forget geography. It is that between Europe and the United States there is the Atlantic Ocean, sir. Anglo-Saxons always talk about pondFrom “duck pond,” right? But the duck pond, my dear sir, it took Christopher Columbus and Europeans centuries before it was crossed. And it is not at all a duck pond, vis-à-vis the United States, which separates us, it is an Atlantic ocean that separates us, while Russia is right next to us.
The second thing is that if you first look at my image, the United States, it’s an Anglo-Saxon state, it’s a state that makes war on us, that never gives us gifts. Look what was the opinion of General de Gaulle, this is the title of my chapter, De Gaulle, who is a fairly intelligent man, he spent 40 years fighting against America, read the famous book American Friend of my friend[13]. For this reason alone, concerning the Atlantic Ocean, already from the beginning the dice are punctured.
And I point out that in addition to this there is a geological phenomenon today, a famous flaw that is to Iceland I believe, and which makes that in an irreversible way – what I tell you is very serious – the two tectonic plates (eurasian and North American) are moving away from one another. I’ve been thinking, if you want, given all that has happened in the United States, you’re thinking of Wilson, what does America really want, especially in terms of culture, because as Georges Pompidou, France, said, what is his great speciality dear gentlemen? It’s the French language. He said, he understood very well, Pompidou. We’ve been rolling because we have our president… Know that if we speak English today at the European Union, it is because of President Emmanuel Macron, I pass you the details. America is the continuation of England, the Anglo-Saxons want to destroy French culture. In Algeria we speak in English, things are clear. Russians don’t want to talk Russian in Algeria, see? And the English are currently fighting against Algeria by English… I’m listening.
M. Jacques CHEMINADE, President of Solidarity & Progress (S&P) and New Solidarity, presidential candidate (1995, 2012, 2017)
First of all, I am not a geopolitician, because I am thinking of Mackinder, who is a British agent, and his thesis was that of the British imperial system. Smart, too.
M. Marc ROUSSET
He was still British, Mackinder.
M. Jacques CHEMINADE
Of course, an imperialist vision, to dominate the world. And so Alexander Douguine, it’s upside down, Douguine is tellurocracy against thalassocracy, and he reverses the thing. I think we’re getting out of this. I have a journalist friend who met Putin, a little man, in the Sotchak office in Petersburg, at the top of (…). And what’s very interesting is that Putin was born pro-Western, it was the most pro-Western we could dream of! And so it was until 2007-2008. With in 2004 something that made him jump, like me: in Ukraine we recognized Stepan Bandera as national hero. So now we’re promoting a Nazi, you have to say, it’s true. That’s the first part.
Putin, at that time… And that I wanted to ask you, because I’m not competent enough to follow him, it’s Ivan Iline’s book, Nos missions, which is the book Putin had read throughout his administration. And he had the remains of Iline returned to the United States, and he also had all his manuscripts repatriated. So, what does Iline say? That’s all I can say because…
M. Marc ROUSSET
Je ne l’ai pas lu.
M. Jacques CHEMINADE
Il dit : « There is a moment in Russia when all the history that has been carried by the Soviet system, and all the history that has been carried by the Tsar, will come together I think Putin is that man, who will gather them in the name of the nation’s interest. So it’s very interesting to read Putin’s recent statements. We don’t read it! We don’t read anything anymore.
M. Marc ROUSSET
There we are.
M. Jacques CHEMINADE
Putin said: ” The future world must not, of course, be unipolar. It’s over. And colonization is something finished. Nor should it be multipolar. He must be more than that. ». Alors, il a dit « polycentriste in some speeches, and ” polyphonique In others. Polyphonic, it’s very strong, because it’s nations, each, as in a choir, that gather, each have their way of thinking and saying, but can unite, with what Ledizov calls ” coincidence of the opposites at a higher level ” This is exactly what Putin thinks, between the history of Soviet Russia and the history of Tsar Russia. So I think that here we are approaching this, and that the Russians and the Chinese are discussing this. It is the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), it is the BRICS, the Eurasian Economic Union (UEEA), which we do not think about enough. And I, in Russia, know someone very well, who was with my American friend Lyndon LaRouche and (…) who is called Sergey Glazyev, who is now in charge of the political alliance between Belarus and Russia. (…) much more than that, he thinks of a financial and monetary system for the future that is based on the real physical economy, and not on financial speculation.
So, what do we have today in the United States? A Trump, who says “I want to make peace”. As far as we can get into Trump’s brain, I think he thinks so, but he did it on the moving sands of a completely crazy system, which is the system of the stable coinsAnd they called it GENIUS in Parliament. So it’s completely crazy, and the thinking that is currently in Russia, and I would like to have your point of view on that, as on Iline and Glazyev, is how to make an international financial and monetary system that is not based on an exorbitant dollar, but that is based on exchanges between nations in their national currency, but there will be surpluses and deficits, so how to solve them? And he says that it can be solved with a basket of raw materials in long-term contracts that will not be fixed by the markets, but will be fixed between nations. So I believe that we in Europe are completely unaware of this Russian aspect, and that the Russians, seeing that we ignore them, we lose, let’s say, all respect for the European countries in the current situation and they expect something else. And I believe that reality is this other thing that we have to provide, and I would like to have your opinion: what else can we provide, quickly, so that we do not ally to what you said earlier, that we never reach an agreement? And in my opinion, if we do not reach an agreement, there is a real danger of world war.
M. Marc ROUSSET
Your question addresses several problems. I’ll tell you only two things.
I think Putin understood very well. He is a man of synthesis, a moderate man, and for me he is a centrist in Russia. And then, there is one thing that Europeans completely forget, is that if you put a man, even in good faith, with European principles in Russia, after six months there is no more Russia. Russia is an empire, isn’t it? So, if you don’t have a strong man at the head of Russia, there’s no more Russia. Here too, it is not to leave in intellectual concepts. There must be a strong power in Russia, otherwise there is no more Russia. So I have a lot of empathy, respect, even admiration. I say well that if Putin wins the war in Ukraine, which is very likely elsewhere and in my opinion it is likely to be won, he may become the greatest statesman (Russian) and he will surpass Peter the Great, if he arrives in 2036. The Ukrainians, good… the front will collapse in 2030. But man as such is a man of synthesis, an intelligent man.
He said, moreover, about the dream of making Russia’s union again, like what it is crazy but otherwise the man who would not want it has no heart, and that whoever would like to do it, would want to recreate the USSR would have no head. This shows that this man is temperate. Remember that in 2014 Putin could have taken Odessa! There are many… who blamed him. There’s a lot of people, even now when he’s in the war, the old boss, who died… A long time ago there would have been a tactical nuclear bomb that would have fallen somewhere in Ukraine! If things happen like this, it’s just… Putin took a full face. You know, it’s like dogs trying to win a little territory, we send them rockets, etc. Well, the Russians say, “Well, we’re pretty tough, you can send us as much as you want, anyway we’ll settle their account to your rockets.” But if you want, Putin is a moderate. It’s not going to war at all. He did everything for peace. We Europeans… And besides, I come back a little, excuse me, about the war in Ukraine. It began before 22 February 2022, because Ukrainians began bombing on 16 February. This is noted by the government.
So I’m answering your question. So, Putin, for me, on man, this is not your question, then we will move on to the second part which is the monetary part. I have a lot of admiration for man because he has nerves of steel that I do not have, it is the Russian De Gaulle, but he is with Russia while De Gaulle was with France. So I keep my consideration for man, and who is a very intelligent man, who has read a lot too. You have to know that this is not a little fun. And Putin is a man trying to synthesize. That’s why he also had the wisdom not to attack communism, which is an economic error, a human error. Since we are talking about human error, Putin is aware of all these poor people who died as a result of the horrors of Stalin, Lenin… Who was a real gangster, Stalin, there’s no other term. But on the other hand, Putin can’t talk too much like that, you can’t talk too much if you’re Russian, because at that time it can have serious geopolitical consequences. And I think Putin, deep down, may think the same thing as me, but he says: in the interests of my Russia, I don’t want to make a Nuremberg for Stalin, because it’s still under Stalin that the Second World War was won. So, to answer your question very briefly, Putin is a pragmatic man, who is intelligent and trying to synthesize what history and reality have brought to him, in the interests of his people.
Part two, I answer the question very quickly, here I am the economist who answers you. I have a whole chapter on the problem you’re dealing with, dear sir. For me, the answer is very clear: the international monetary system will be based on gold.
I’ve known very bright people, who have the Nobel Prize and all that to make the “good” economy… Besides, the more you have a Nobel in France, the more you will notice that the French economy collapses… It is simple arch, the history of the international system. It is enough to decree that the only valid reserve currency is gold. And so, you know, a lot of theorists are talking for hours: we’re going to make some cash to promote international trade… I remember, I had a friend from Columbia who had Polytechnique, who was pretty brilliant, and then I said “there’s something you’re forgetting,” because we did Columbia together, “it’s that to create liquidity you just have to re-evaluate the price of gold!” And that’s what’s happening right now. You will notice that in the amount of international reserves, you have the dollar and the gold that are equal. (…) 19%. Central banks are increasingly buying gold and the value of gold is increasing. That is what is happening now. So if you want, the answer to your question is that for me, in the long run, the international system must be based on gold. China has a lot of gold, it claims to have 8000 tons, (…). I pretend, and I put it in my book, that there’s a lot of gold, the Chinese are smart and everything, I think there’s about 30,000 tons of gold in China.
So for me, in a word, the future rests on gold. Just re-evaluate the gold. This is the path he takes. And that all currencies, be it the Yuan, the Euro – which in my opinion will certainly burst one day – or the Dollar, will have to be based on gold, and the currencies that will be accepted as international currencies will be currencies that can be convertible into gold, you see, and from the moment the gold is convertible, at that time the system will be peaceful, but it will involve a re-evaluation of the gold price. This is my simplistic reasoning, and I am not called Jean Tirole, the latest brilliant economist who will see the phenomenon in France… Did I answer your question?
Jacques CHEMINADE
No, because the price of gold will have to be raised to extremely high levels in order to get the credits.
Marc ROUSSET
The price of gold can go up to 10,000, 15,000 dollars a ounce!
Jacques CHEMINADE
Even more, if we really want to have a system…
Marc ROUSSET
Yes, but we are now on our way! We have to let everyone talk.
Speaker around the table (not presented)
I’ll start with the question. First of all, I thank you for your presentation, of course I agree with everything, and that is why I ask the question. Do you have an answer? I don’t have one. That’s why Europeans (I distinguish European and European) do that? That is to say, adopt this conduct which is totally against any intelligence, as the gentleman said, against common sense, simply. And, I’m developing a little. You talked about the demographic threat to Russia, but it is also a demographic threat for Europe to want to maintain this war. Because the million Ukrainians who were killed, the 100,000 Russians who are killed, is a demographic threat to European civilisation, to Europeans. On the other hand, the aim of dismantling Russia from the RAND Corporation, Americans, do we Europeans have an interest in it? Do we have an interest in Russia being transformed into small principalities (…)? And from which we can plunder all the wealth and raw materials, what the Americans actually want, for a long time, and that’s still the goal, and they will continue? If, simply, Trump is seen today, “well, it didn’t work this time, we’re going to put it back on,” well, that’s something else, but we, what do we need to continue when we can’t, we’re not going to dismantle Russia, it’s no use to us, better to buy cheap gas.
Eurasia. You talked about Eurasia, and bravo. But actually I when I participated in associations, groups with the Russians on the idea “from Lisbon to Vladivostok”, they talk about Lisbon, I of the East, it’s the same, well today they talk about Eurasia. They have to let us down because they don’t take us seriously anymore. And it’s true that Douguine, and I think that the “polyphonic” acceptance comes from Douguine in fact, a little behind Goumilev, you know all this.
And I think there’s another aspect that’s important to us, it’s the Islamic power side. Because that, on the other hand, Russia also has immigration problems, especially in Central Asia, which is under the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood from Turkey, since it is the Turkish world, Central Asia, and there is, indeed, influence by Erdogan, especially the Muslim Brotherhood, etc. They have this problem. But for us Europeans there is a great contribution that the Russian Muslims can make, that is to bring some tolerance to the apostasy, which is the great problem today of our coexistence with the Muslims who exist in France. And they do not question apostasy, since they cannot, it is in the Qur’an. But I spoke with Muftis in Russia, they say, “But in practice, we have to do it and accept mixed marriages,” etc.
China is the same. With Eurasia, with the fact that Russia was actually pushed to China, and you’re right the Russians are European, but they’re still aware of something else, is that the eagle has two heads, and the second head in Asia. And that today economic growth is in Asia. They can’t give up. But it’s also a chance for us. Why are we giving up this?
On the other hand, have you heard of the idea – precisely you talked about it a little bit and that’s why I allow myself – the idea that Americans, and that’s what was mentioned in Anchorage. They would have talked to Trump, according to Russian sources, I wouldn’t put my hand in the fire but they would have talked about a “Theran 1943”, if you want, i.e. it’s not Yalta, but it’s already dotted sharing of the world. And Trump was not against, which is why he summoned Zelenski the next day and the Europeans, you know, when they were sitting in (…). So (…) he is taken as a trumpist, that is, he started to press India to stop buying oil, so that he could sell oil to Europeans, and that Europeans were completely obliged to give in to the proposals Trump could make, while he was actually considering negotiations with China and Russia. The fact that he put so much pressure on India made Narendra Modi go to Beijing on September 3. It reversed everything. But from this point of view, it is no doubt a path towards peace and lasting peace as you say. As for lasting peace on the Ukrainian ground, it is very simple. Once Odessa is released, whether by referendum or in a military way, the Russians stop everything.
Marc ROUSSET
I fully agree with everything that can be said, sir. That’s exactly what you said.
Speaker around the table (not presented)
No one knows me here, I think, but at last I worked for the European Commission in Russia, together with Mr Rousset we have long known each other. I approve 99% of what has been said. I would just like to recall a few figures. Russia is 17 million square kilometres. It is just over 140 million inhabitants. It is a GDP of just over 2000 billion. It’s nothing! Our own GDP, the European Union, is 23 000, America, 29 000. Russia is 2000… with which they have a military budget of 130 billion. And again, it’s recent, because it’s only two years ago, it was 60 billion. So my question is very simple, is: Does Russia have an alternative to a long-term rapprochement with Europe? Can Russia bear the jealousy of the whole world, with so little population, and so little GDP, and so little military budget?
Thaison NGUYEN, Ex-diplomat, geopolitologist at Sciences Po
I came here for peace, rapprochement with Russia, only for that. Peace for Europe is a must. I speak Russian, I speak English-American, so I don’t take sides. I think our interest is to have peace, but there are major obstacles. Peace between Europe and Russia. Does Europe exist? France does. Europe is 27 states: no one decides. It’s unanimity, so nothing decides.
Second, Russia, today, because of the Ukrainian war, is fully aligned with China. I am well placed to know it, I have been in China several times, I know China as my pocket, friendship for a thousand years between Russia and China is a reality, a necessity. We couldn’t change the situation until the war lasted. That’s why it’s our interest to do anything to stop this war. If we stop the war, Russia could have some room for manoeuvre, and Europe too, thanks to France, because I do not believe in Europe: Europe is not yet done, it is not done and it does not even exist.
Marc ROUSSET
I confess that with all the questions, my little brain just went off.
Speaker around the table (not presented)
I’ll try to pick up my question. The restoration of lasting peace on our good European continent is the prerequisite for a return to the prosperity of our European societies, as you pointed out. You have been a senior corporate leader, Dr. Rousset, can you tell us how long, in your opinion, the rational French and European economic and social players will bear the threat of their production activities and access to their international markets? We can see that the Chinese market is closing, and we can see that the Russian market is now closed. My question, therefore, is to know how long the rational, economic and social actors of our French and European society will accept the political conduct we know today?
Mme Patricia LALONDE, Vice-President of Geopragma, former European MP
America is changing, though, with Trump’s arrival, and it’s not Trump who was behind the war in Ukraine, is it okay? We agree that Trump in any case is driven by the deep state that continues, behind (…), and my question is: Do you think that with Trump’s America we are more likely to reach a rapprochement with Russia, Europeans with Russia? Do they not, in any way, indirectly push us indirectly towards rapprochement?
And then the second thing I had to say, because I was in the Committee on European Foreign Affairs, and I can tell you that all the meetings of the Committee on Foreign Affairs began with “the enemy was the Russian”. We were already making the enemy. It’s to go along with what you said.
Speaker around the table (not presented)
About the Kaliningrad enclave and the Suwałki corridor, which unites the enclave to Belarus, does NATO, therefore customers of the Saxons and the United States, not seek to open a second front, to the north, towards the Baltic countries?
Marc ROUSSET
I could say yes right away. I think that at present there are going-in-war, they do everything to… I wonder what sent them, if it’s not the CIA or if it’s not Poland… (…). And then as for the planes entering Estonia’s airspace, I think… The corridor is so narrow… All this is bullshit. Those going into war, trying to create false evidence. What’s the point of drones? Besides, you notice one thing, it’s that we don’t send missiles, we send drones. They leave Russia to get to Denmark… Finally, really, this is all part of the Danesque world in which we live. There are intelligent people, soldiers who know more about things, who doubt the origin of drones, than they come from Russia. It is one of the (…), mounted like the Boutcha massacre. Ladies and gentlemen, I say that it is the same thing as the famous Račak massacre, which triggered the bombing of Serbia for 70 days, but it is now publicly recognized that it was mounted from scratch by Germany, the American military intelligence services, and that these brave deaths, allegedly civilians, were simply Kosovars who had been shot in a way… on the military ground. That is the case with Račak. I say that Boutcha is the same thing, and the best evidence is that Ukraine has still not been able to list the deaths that have fallen in Boutcha. But if you read the papers… For me, these are simply Ukrainian braves who must have tended to be cooperating, who must have had the misfortune to give other things to Russian soldiers and who were simply massacred by Ukrainian militiamen. And these people were picked up as dead, decreed as dead, and killed by Russia… This only involves me, but I’m convinced, I think these deaths are people who have been killed by Ukrainians. In any case if there is Boutcha today, Račak took place, and Račak is even recognized by The Diplomatic WorldIt’s one of the most appalling scandals. I’m not talking about the massacre of Kuwaiti babies in Iraq either, are you, you have the daughter of the ambassador… I’ll take a second. You have the daughter of Kuwait’s ambassador to the United States who goes to the United States Senate to tell you that the Iraqis were killing babies, who had been trained for a few days by the United States media. At the end (…) They were Iraqis killing babies in Kuwait… That is what the United States is capable of doing. I say “my eye”! But it only involves me, I do not claim to have universal truth. I’m just saying that if we lived in a truly free world, everyone could say what they think. Now in Europe we cannot say what we think.
On the other hand, I am unable to answer all the questions, simple humility, I am speaking to my friend for whom I have a deep respect, Dimitri de Kochko, who was to intervene: dear Dimitri, I agree 100% with everything you could say, and I am also responding globally to what Mrs. There is one that I defend, it is the gentleman who destroys, in short, the reasons for the decadence of the West, attacks values. This Trump, I defend him, because he ultimately defends traditional values. On the other hand, there’s a Trump I’m fighting, it’s Trump Imperialist. Besides, I don’t know how you judge him, but as far as man is concerned, I think he’s way too imbuished of himself, and personally I’m very happy that he didn’t get the Nobel Prize, even if he deserved it, because he really makes him put some gilding in his office, there’s a really impotent side of the person that displeases me. General de Gaulle was a man who had much more values.
But, Trump, it must be recognized that he is relatively effective, much more than our president, that is absolutely certain. But I have no respect for Trump because I think he’s too imbuished of himself. So there are two Trumps, the dangerous Trump, it’s the imperialist posted, and then the other Trump, which I defend, because I think he’s leading a fair fight. He also leads the fight against ecology. It is madness, the fight against global warming. Trump has the courage to say: (…). And then he moves the world forward. And at this level, I’m pro-Trump. And in my book, all this is updated, I want to tell you. I apologize for being passionate about things, and it’s just me.
Someone in the room
On 21 November there will be a conference on “Europe, Russia, a thousand years together” which will take place at Quai Branly, the Russian spiritual and cultural centre, with free admission.
[1] Castex Raoul (Amiral), “Moscow, rampart of the West”, in National Defence Review (RDN), No. 122, February 1955, pp. 129-143, link: https://www.defnat.com/e-RDN/vue-article.php?carticle=847&cidrevue=122 (accessed October 17, 2025).
[2] Mahan Alfred Thayer, The Influence of Sea Power upon History, 1660-1783, New York, Little, Brown & Co, 1890 ; Mahan Alfred Thayer, The Influence of Sea Power upon the French Revolution and Empire, 1793-1812, Boston, Little, Brown & Co, 1892 ; Mahan Alfred Thayer, The Interest of America in Sea Power, Present and Future, Boston, Little, Brown & Co, 1897.
[3] Brzezinski Zbigniew, The Grand Chessborard : American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives, New York, Basic Books, 1997, 237 p. For translation into French: Brzezinski Zbigniew, The Great chessboard. America and the rest of the world, Paris, Fayard/Pluriel, reed. 2023, 288 p.
[4] See the quote at the beginning of the text.
[5] Soutou Georges-Henri, The Great Break, 1989-2024. From the fall of the wall to the war in Ukraine, Paris, Tallandier, 2024, p. 48 (368 p.).
[6] Guillemard Véronique, “Up in power from China, superiority of SpaceX… The world battle for space is raging”, Le Figaro, 21 août 2025, lien : https://www.lefigaro.fr/conjoncture/ariane-6-spacex-guowang-la-bataille-mondiale-pour-la-conquete-de-l-espace-fait-rage-20250821 (accessed October 17, 2025).
[7] Navis Christian, “War against Russia, next hot spot: the North Pole”, Riposte Laïque, 6 juin 2023, lien : https://ripostelaique.com/guerre-contre-la-russie-prochain-point-chaud-le-pole-nord.html (accessed October 17, 2025).
[8] Guillemain Jacques, “The Far East is the strategic priority of the Tsar”, Riposte Laïque, 16 septembre 2023, lien : https://ripostelaique.com/lextreme-orient-est-la-priorite-strategique-du-tsar.html (accessed October 17, 2025).
[9] Barluet Alain, “How Vladimir Putin draws the new ‘strategic roads’ of Russia”, Le Figaro, 2 octobre 2023, lien : https://www.lefigaro.fr/international/comment-vladimir-poutine-dessine-les-nouvelles-routes-strategiques-de-la-russie-20230930 (accessed October 17, 2025).
[10] Mackinder John Halford (Sir), “The Geographical Pivot of History”, in The Geographical Journal, Vol. XXIII, No. 4, April 1904 (read to the Royal Geographical Society on January 25, 1904).
[11] Fitoussi Samuel, Why intellectuals are wrong, Paris, ed.
[12] Alternative für Deutschland (Alternative for Germany).
[13] Branca Eric, American friend. Washington vs. De Gaulle: 1940-1969, Paris, Perrin, 2017, reed. 2022, 528 p.
Leave a comment