7 Major Axes for Building Peace

Donald Trump's election accelerates the course of history. The world order has been upended, with war as its driving force. Clémentine Autain calls for the awakening of the "public spirit" against the law of the strongest.

It takes time to digest and absorb the rupture that has just occurred in the world order. And yet, there is an urgent need to defend a strategic perspective of peace, and therefore of justice and democracy. That is why I am sharing these 7 major axes. As with domestic policy, they rest on the awakening of what I call the public spirit, that is to say, solidarity, cooperation, and democracy against the law of the strongest, predation, commodification, and authoritarianism:

1. We must affirm our solidarity with the Ukrainian people who are being attacked by Vladimir Putin's Russia and who are scorned by Donald Trump, who encourages the massacre of Ukrainian civilians and the Russification of occupied territories. Our plumb line is in defending the principle of self-determination of peoples and borders recognised by international law. We cannot accept that the law of the strongest and the seizure of resources prevail over international law and democracy.
2. This support for the Ukrainian people must be translated into action, far from any Munich-like spirit and without a spiral of war. It is a narrow path, but it is the only one that can halt the mechanism leading to a third world war. In other words, it means concretely helping Ukrainians who are fighting for their rights, not entering into direct war with Russia.
3. Neither Putin nor Trump, this rallying cry brings people together. Although the regimes in the United States and Russia are not the same, these two presidents both harbour a hatred of democracy and imperialism. Both are fighting to seize rare resources in a brutal fashion on a planet whose limits are becoming tangible. Fighting Putin and Trump means that we must end both Atlanticism and campism – no, the enemies of our enemies are not our friends. It also means that we do not subscribe to the logic of camps. Against the power of force, we oppose the force of principles, the rule of law, the logic of common goods. We must break with predation, the law of profit and unbridled productivism, to defend a profound change in the development model, one that is sustainable for the ecosystem and promotes peace. Insatiable capitalism leads to war for access to resources.
4. Taking the measure of the upheavals in a world that is no longer that of yesterday means seeking to forge alliances across the international stage to advance justice and democracy, and therefore peace, through diplomacy and multilateralism. Faced with brutal imperialist powers, we need to build convergences based on the defence of specific principles and objectives. We must advocate for a new world order based on law, not force. For there is no longer a West. Nor is there a Global South. That is why seeking allies within the European Union and beyond to counterbalance imperialist powers is a necessity. This requires moving beyond the culture of blocs.
5. The war in Ukraine and the threat of its extension imply that we must be able to defend ourselves. It is now clear to everyone that Trump's United States cannot in any way ensure our security. And then, will Putin stop there? Nothing indicates so. It is therefore up to us to strengthen our defence system because we must show that no one has an interest in waging war against us. But military expenditure cannot be made by compressing spending that serves the essential needs of the population. Nor is it intended to substitute for a diplomatic strategy or to serve the needs of capitalism. Its financing must come through a contribution from the ultra-rich and large groups and through European coordination – the EU could also begin its aid by a partial cancellation of state debt by the ECB to allow them to invest. How is it that when it comes to defending the public spirit, the welfare state and the ecological transition, there is no money, and when it comes to armament, the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, immediately finds 150 billion euros and announces guaranteeing 800 billion euros in total? When we break from the Maastricht criteria, it's to invest in armaments! But let everyone be clear: we are not rebuilding our military capabilities to fill the gap left by the United States, on which we have long depended, in a few weeks or even months. Nor do we share nuclear deterrence among 27 countries, especially when these 27 include Orban's Hungary and Meloni's Italy. And one does not build an army without a shared common foundation and without proper democratic control. All the more reason to equip ourselves above all with a strategy of alliances on the international stage and to invest in the field of diplomacy.
6. Rearmament does not make a strategy. We do not only want to defend the interests of France but also principles, a certain geopolitical vision based on law, democracy and justice that serve peoples throughout the world. That is why international law is fundamental. If the world organisation resulting from the 1945 compromise no longer corresponds to the coordinates of our time, we must work towards a new balance, a new international edifice.
7. In this context, Marine Le Pen's victory or defeat in France is also an issue of world peace. That is why the rallying of left-wing and environmentalist forces to offer a perspective of victory, to open up hope for progress in the face of the rise of the National Rally, is a responsibility fraught with gravity. Faced with the tragedy of history, the time has come to get to work on building the alternative to the brown wave in our country. And it involves a geopolitical doctrine common to the left-wing and environmentalist forces.