France’s response to the poisoning of Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal has differed from that of Britain’s other allies: where the US, Nato and EU have lined up back Theresa May’s version of events, Emmanuel Macron’s government has been more careful.
On Wednesday Benjamin Griveaux, a spokesperson for the country’s government, said it was too early to decide on retaliatory measures against Russia, as its involvement was yet to be proven.
“We don't do fantasy politics. Once the elements are proven, then the time will come for decisions to be made,” he told a press conference shortly after Theresa May announced she would be expelling Russian diplomats over the poisoning.
The response has apparently raised eyebrows in Westminster and elsewhere, where Theresa May’s analysis and approach has received stronger support. Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the former Nato chief, told the BBC that “anything short of full solidarity with the UK will be considered a victory by the Kremlin”.
The French government has since put out another statement, this time as an “Elysee source”, which said: “France's solidarity with the UK is unquestionable.
“President Macron denounced as early as Tuesday the Salisbury chemical attack as unacceptable and assured Prime Minister May the UK had France's full support. Both leaders will discuss the matter yet again this Thursday.
“Since the beginning of this week, the UK has briefed its allies thoroughly, and France in particular, that it was highly likely that Russia was responsible for the attack.”
Saying you’ve been told something was highly likely, is of course, not the same as saying you believe it is true.
The French statement also contrasts with the latest from the White House, which despite a slow start is now pretty unequivocal about Russian involvement: “The United States shares the United Kingdom’s assessment that Russia is responsible for the reckless nerve agent attack on a British citizen and his daughter,” a spokesperson said.
Key to understanding the different French response is the strategy taken by Emmanuel Macron to Russia and Vladimir Putin and the background to the two leaders’ relationship.
Mr Macron has always been keen not to isolate Russia on the international stage. He is making his first presidential trip to Russia in May, and has engaged directly with Mr Putin over Syria in a way that some other Western leaders have not, asking the president to help open humanitarian corridors and mooting the return of peace talks.
Last month the two leaders had a comprehensive discussion over the telephone in which they pledged to cooperate more closely, including on Syria. They have also tried to put the Ukraine conflict behind them. Mr Putin visited France in May of last year.
Diplomatically, preventing a leader from becoming isolated is a fairly standard approach to preventing the escalation of a conflict. But there are also increasingly important economic ties between the two countries, too.
Russian state media outlet RT reported earlier this month that trade between the two countries is booming, having risen by around a fifth in 2017 despite sanctions. France buys minerals from Russia, while Russia buys chemicals, machinery, and food from France.
Russian ambassadors are also keen to note that French investment in the Russian economy is growing, having reached more than $14 billion, while Russia's direct investment in France is $3.2 billion, according to figures put out on Russian state media.
More straightforwardly, French scepticism of the claims of British intelligence is nothing new, as anyone who remembers the run-up to the Iraq war will know. But for France, the stakes of alienating Russia are simply higher.
Britain’s economic relationship with the country mostly involves Russian big money coming to London, a relationship that doesn’t seem likely to be endangered by anything Theresa May says about Vladimir Putin. This is arguably not the case for France, and it is being more cautious.
