· 46 comments · Save ·
News & Current Events Apr 25, 2026 at 3:47 PM

Macron says EU joint defense clause is 'stronger' than NATO one

Posted by pierrepaul

www.lemonde.fr
Client Challenge
🚩 Report this post

46 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
TemporarySun314 Apr 25, 2026 +142
i mean in principle it is. but unlike nato there is no structure or real procedure in place for it, so it might be hard to actually execute it should the need arise.
142
DreadPiratePete Apr 25, 2026 +77
The strenght of a treaty is not in the wording, but in the willingnes of it's signatories to uphold it. The structure exist and are mostly staffed by Europeans. It's just that the office has a sign saying NATO on it instead of EU. It's not like a french and polish general would be floundering over how to cooperate with each other because you changed the sign on the door. The main difference is that one includes the US and the other doesn't.  What matters here is whether we wish to exclude the yanks now, or just muddle through until the orange one is replaced by someone who isn't ruling the place from the dementia ward.
77
EmptyVolition242 Apr 25, 2026 +12
We should close as many as possible and then use them as leverage when the Orange guy gets kicked out.
12
Koala_eiO Apr 25, 2026 +10
Sorry, I don't understand your comment. Close as many as possible what?
10
rapsoulish Apr 25, 2026 +5
Probably military bases, but I'm not 100% sure.
5
Koala_eiO Apr 25, 2026 +5
Ah maybe. The way it's phrased, it sounds funny like we should close as many dementia yards as possible.
5
ledasll Apr 26, 2026 +1
You threat US in Nato same way as Turkey
1
Hogglespock Apr 25, 2026 +1
If the Germany army were needed to defend Europe , where would it be deployed, on Germany’s border or polands? Obviously gut feel answers. Now repeat the same for the French.
1
DreadPiratePete Apr 26, 2026 +1
I dont see how the answer differs for EU vs NATO? In either case the army is controlled by the leadership of the respective nations?
1
ElizBorneopentowork Apr 26, 2026 +3
Eu countries beint part of NATO, they could use the same channels no?
3
2shayyy Apr 26, 2026 +1
Copy paste.
1
hatzaflatz Apr 25, 2026 +33
Thats because 42.7 is requiring a country to take action and nato artikel 5 is free of will.
33
Capable_Kiwi2514 Apr 25, 2026 +16
No, Article 5 is a requirement. The meaning of article 5 has decades of interpretation behind it --- any reading that it doesn't require mutual defence that meets the standard of 'an attack on one is an attack on all' is rooted in revisionism. 
16
Vier_Scar Apr 26, 2026 +1
From the treaty text of Article 5: > each of them, [...] will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area. While it's a requirement to act, what action must be taken is up to the country itself. So a country can decide sending a strongly worded letter is the "action it deems necessary" and meet it's obligation under Article 5. The clause for EU Charter 42.7 (thanks /u/hatzaflatz): > If a Member State is the victim of armed aggression on its territory, the other Member States shall have towards it an obligation of aid and assistance by all the means in their power, ... This seems a lot stronger requirement.
1
frosthowler Apr 26, 2026 -2
You don't always respond to attacks on you. One could just as easily tell them to open negotiations or give aid Ukraine style. No provision requires any military deployment. That's the real concern. I sincerely doubt the people of Britain, Germany or France have any spine left in them to go to war. They'll send a few thousand volunteers and call it a day. A draft to defend Eastern Europe? Paris will burn. Europe is bereft of any will to defend itself, it is the sad reality. The west is fat and lazy in the 21st century besides the US, and its backward and jealous enemies know it. That's why Russia invades every decade, and it will find a new target in the 2030s.
-2
ThoughtShes18 Apr 25, 2026 +6
Exactly, and the people not knowing about it and still commenting are awfully many
6
Extension-Toe-7027 Apr 25, 2026 +3
It's a sub point, not even grandiose enough to be a stand alone clause.
3
SPQR-Tightanus Apr 25, 2026 +4
>is requiring a country And what happens if a country does not take action?
4
Serpace Apr 25, 2026 +1
Diplomatic pariah. Your credibility takes a hit for decades atleast, hurting future relations on international stage.
1
SPQR-Tightanus Apr 25, 2026 +6
>Your credibility **takes a hit for decades** atleast, hurting future relations on international stage. For decades? It took 4 years for Russia to be invited to G20. And they started the invasion, not just "didn't take action". Who is going to make Western European states "pariah" for not joining war with Russia? The US? China? Brazil? India?
6
Boomning Apr 25, 2026 +3
Invited by…. Exactly.
3
Several-Zombies6547 Apr 25, 2026 +14
The problem is that there isn't a consensus. Some Eastern EU countries reportedly don't have much interest in a stronger EU mutual defense clause because of the fear of suggesting they are turning away from NATO. Others, like France, Spain and Greece want the EU clause to be stronger. Greece and Cyprus actively push for a stronger clause, because Cyprus can't join NATO so EU defense is the only one covering it.
14
Inevitable-Push-8061 Apr 25, 2026 +13
The EU, as it is, is not a military cooperation organization. NATO and the EU are not comparable.
13
Fast-Satisfaction482 Apr 25, 2026 +10
Yeah they are not comparable, because EU can actually spend money on defence. NATO has only very modest funds of its own. 
10
Elean Apr 26, 2026 +8
On the contrary, this is exactly why they are comparable. You compare the difference. NATO is only a military cooperation and article 5 is a scam. The US have a history of abandoning their allies, and they won't defend any country if it's not in their own interest. Article 42.7 of the EU is much stronger, because any attack on a EU member will damage the others and compel them to intervene.
8
Beerboy01 Apr 25, 2026 +7
Shouldn't be allowed to opt out the way Austria and Ireland has.
7
Medallicat Apr 25, 2026 -7
> Shouldn't be allowed to opt out the way Austria and Ireland has. G’Day mate.
-7
pepe_acct Apr 25, 2026 +13
Sure but NATO has a unified military structure that’s trained together for decades. What united command structure does EU have?
13
Philo_Publius1776 Apr 25, 2026 +18
NATOs. The EU can trigger NATO in response to 42.7 obligations.
18
Fast-Satisfaction482 Apr 25, 2026 +4
Do you believe EU forces will be unable to use their established paths of cooperation via NATO if the US don't come to help? very unlikely. 
4
blurr90 Apr 25, 2026 +3
Tne same. What difference does it make?
3
SPQR-Tightanus Apr 25, 2026 +5
Both are as strong as the willingness of EU/NATO members to fight Russia. Which is not there.
5
Subject-Dealer6350 Apr 25, 2026
Yes, because the US has become a liability rather than a ally. The US has shit on 25 years of European blood sacrificed in the Middle East and presented it as a burden. He has actively tried to weaken Europe , like a domestic partner is making us weaker so they can abuse us. Hungary old president has been conspiring with Russia behind our backs and sabotaged us with its Veto to tie our hands. JD Vance went there to try to keep that president elected. With friends like that you don’t need enemies.
0
Cultural_Meeting_240 Apr 25, 2026 +1
Macron been saying this for years, maybe now people will actually listen.
1
CurtisLeow Apr 25, 2026 -1
Cyprus is an EU member. Turkey occupies eastern Cyprus. Let me know when the EU goes to war with Turkey.
-1
KillerPalm Apr 25, 2026 +3
The EU also willingly accepted Cyprus into the union while the North was occupied. Maybe they should've pushed harder for a solution instead of letting Greece blackmail them into willingly inheriting the problem.
3
MalestromeSET Apr 25, 2026 -12
NATO article 5 has been evoked and NATO has done real military command structure for decades. The entire idea of EU military action is non sense. This is why Russia is ok with Ukraine in EU but not NATO. End of EU defence clause in war does not mean end of western alliance. But if NATO fails to act, it actually will mean end of Eastern Europe.
-12
Koala_eiO Apr 25, 2026 +3
> NATO article 5 has been evoked That was a great evocation.
3
DnA_Singularity Apr 25, 2026 +4
I'm sorry what is this Russian bot talking point doing here? Putin's reason for invading was literally because Ukraine started trading more freely with the EU.
4
MalestromeSET Apr 25, 2026 -2
Yeah you’re right. Putin doenst care about nato Sorry.
-2
radek432 Apr 25, 2026 +1
What Russia is ok with should be our least concern.
1
irondethimpreza Apr 26, 2026 -5
Cool. Can we (the US) just leave NATO already then? They don't want us there, and we don't want to be there.
-5
Infamous_Gold4641 Apr 26, 2026 +2
Trust me, nobody wants you to f*** off into oblivion once and for all more than europeans.
2
Artyparis Apr 26, 2026 +1
Bye 
1
Gierni Apr 26, 2026 +1
This is a reaction to Trump trying to leave Nato, not the opposite. But yes the US can leave anytime it wants. You just need your congress or your senate approval to withdraw from NATO, which you will never get.
1
Perfect_Opposite2113 Apr 26, 2026
Kbye
0
← Back to Board