Wild speculation time:

Something about Macron’s troop deployments seems very performative.

Perhaps performative in the more obvious sense that he wants to boil the frog and sending in “trainers and advisers” is the thin end of the wedge before sending in troops to make NATO intervention in Ukraine a fait accompli.

But what if it’s performative in another way?

We all know what the outcome of this war looks like. Russia takes the eastern provinces and maybe more, perhaps up to the Dnieper in the south but probably not that far in the north, probably also takes Cherson but probably not Odessa, and maybe Kharkiv maybe not, depending on how good a resistance Ukraine puts up before the negotiations really start. Ukraine won’t be allowed to join NATO and no NATO bases but probably will be allowed to have some security guarantees with the major western players and perhaps even a relationship with NATO that stops short of allowing forward deployments.

So a few significant uncertainties, sure, but the broad shape of it is clear now.

Zelenskyy probably needs to go before this deal can really happen, and there would need to be some force that the Ukrainian public trusts that can prevent the Nazi faction from simply installing another Zelenskyy.

France is in conflict with Russia and has lost out big in Africa and is being poked in the eye in New Caledonia, but is also hitting back to some extent in Armenia.

The UK is a wreckage and Germany is not very strong. Poland is already taking an antagonistic posture towards Ukraine that will probably only get worse especially after the conflict is over and Ukraine has a settlement with Russia.

We don’t need to talk about Italy or Spain or anyone else in Europe.

Leaving France.

They are hostile to Russia and engaged in an active “great game”.

But this great game has at least some ground rules and operates mostly as a struggle over spheres of influence while respecting national borders. It’s constrained great power shit between two second tier military powers.

Germany would continue to be the US’s most loyal dog in Europe and will lead the Central European & Baltic alliance, funding strong defensive works but also putting the brakes on the more rabid Russophobia because Germany even today is against actually getting directly involved in shit and definitely against doing anything that isn’t preapproved by Washington.

France as the regional power delegated control of the rump Ukrainian state would be advantageous to the US by keeping Europe still split between two deeply linked but identifiably distinct power blocs, it would place a power hostile to Russia as the designated subhegemon in southern Eastern Europe and would complement French influence in Armenia to a degree by inserting France into the Black Sea making it the obvious choice for Georgia if Georgia decides to throw down again or in the event of another color revolution. And France has at least historical links with the general region, having recently been a colonial power in the area and having shoved its Gallic nose into the Middle East again and again since the crusades.

France as subhegemon in a rump Ukraine would be an adversary to Russia, but still it would probably be acceptable to Russia to divide Ukraine into two spheres of control, assuming that Russia does not want or cannot occupy all of Ukraine - or both it doesn’t want and actually cannot occupy all of Ukraine which seems to be the case in fact.

So assuming Russia will realpolitik this and accept it both cannot and strategically should not occupy all of Ukraine then it needs to accept that rump Ukraine will be within the western sphere of influence.

And if they don’t want that sphere of influence to be NATO itself, and since they likely both cannot and don’t want to completely dominate Ukraine militarily, then they need to accept some kind of western presence / sphere of influence that stops short of NATO.

What’s more while France is definitely a dog of the US empire, it’s a bit of a Husky. It doesn’t like to do what it’s told. It’s not Germany and will prioritize French interests over US interests, which makes it a good compromise position for Russia since a French presence is Ukraine is actually very different to a NATO presence in Ukraine while still being a western anchor. It also doesn’t hurt that Macron does the same macho bullshit that Putin does and they speak a similar language.

French “advisers” in Ukraine could fairly quickly gain key influence over the military and promote the more pragmatic military faction to force the hard nationalists to accept a compromise and they would be a friend of Ukraine while doing it.

Escalation from “just a few dozen advisers” to actual boots on the ground is a process that will take at least the rest of this year and into next, which is also when the new round of western military aid will start to run out, meaning this is the window for Ukraine to cut a deal.

6-12 months to cut a deal, a suitable western subhegemon that will reliably maintain hostility to Russia while still playing the “great game” and accepting realist compromise in a rules-of-the-jungle based world order.

Acceptable to Russia as preferable to nato, acceptable to the US, acceptable to Ukraine as saviors. Choreographed.