Analysis of: Macron says Europe facing ‘profound geopolitical rupture’ amid changes in world order – Europe live
The Guardian | February 10, 2026
TL;DR
European powers scramble to assert independence as US-China rivalry reshapes global order, while workers face expanded surveillance. The ruling class debates which imperial bloc to align with—not whether to challenge imperialism itself.
Analytical Focus:Contradictions Historical Context Interconnections
French President Macron's declaration of a 'profound geopolitical rupture' reveals the deepening contradictions within the transatlantic alliance and the broader capitalist world order. As US-China competition intensifies, European capital finds itself caught between maintaining its subordinate partnership with American imperialism and asserting autonomous interests—particularly regarding energy supplies from Russia and market access to China. This is not a crisis of diplomacy but of material interests: European capitalists face the prospect of being squeezed between competing blocs while their working classes bear the costs through military spending, surveillance, and economic disruption. The article reveals several overlapping dynamics. First, the fracturing of Western unity as US Vice President Vance conspicuously skips Munich while Rubio visits Hungary and Slovakia—two EU states maintaining ties with Russia. This signals competing factions within the imperial core over how to manage the Russia question. Second, the expansion of US surveillance powers over European travelers demonstrates how security cooperation serves to extend American state power into allied territories, with German officials reduced to warning citizens about data risks rather than challenging the policy. Most significantly, Macron's call for Europe to avoid becoming 'vassals' while simultaneously proposing to 'reopen diplomatic channels with Moscow' illustrates the contradictory position of European capital. Unable to fully break from US hegemony or build independent military capacity, European leaders oscillate between subordination and autonomy—always within the framework of inter-imperialist competition, never questioning the system that generates these conflicts.
Class Dynamics
Actors: European political elite (Macron, Merz, von der Leyen), US state apparatus (Rubio, Vance, Trump administration), Russian state (Putin, Lavrov), Chinese state (Wang Yi), European working class (German travelers, Ukrainian civilians), Military-industrial capital (Franco-Ukrainian weapons production), Energy capital (Russian oil/gas interests, Naftogaz)
Beneficiaries: Defense contractors benefiting from increased military spending, Energy capital positioned to profit from supply disruptions, Surveillance technology firms, Political elites who can present geopolitical maneuvering as 'leadership'
Harmed Parties: Working-class travelers subjected to expanded US surveillance, Ukrainian workers and civilians enduring continued warfare, European workers who will fund rearmament through austerity or taxation, Refugees and migrants likely to face tightened controls amid security rhetoric
The article depicts inter-elite competition among imperialist powers, with European capital attempting to carve out space between US and Russian/Chinese interests. Working-class agency is entirely absent from the discourse—workers appear only as objects of surveillance (German travelers) or casualties of war (Ukrainian energy infrastructure attacks). The framing naturalizes elite decision-making about war, trade, and security as 'geopolitics' rather than class-interested policy.
Material Conditions
Economic Factors: Control over energy supplies (Russian oil/gas sanctions), Military production (Franco-Ukrainian weapons manufacturing), Trade relations (US tariffs, EU regulatory conflicts), Data as commodity (ESTA surveillance expansion), Defense spending increases across Europe
The announcement of joint Franco-Ukrainian weapons production reveals how warfare serves capital accumulation—Zelenskyy explicitly frames arms exports as generating 'badly needed funds.' European rearmament represents a massive transfer of social wealth toward military-industrial capital. Meanwhile, Russian attacks on Naftogaz infrastructure demonstrate how energy production itself becomes a battleground, with workers bearing the consequences of capitalist resource competition.
Resources at Stake: Ukrainian territory and resources, Russian oil and gas access, European defense contracts, Control over data flows and surveillance infrastructure, Greenland (referenced by Macron as 'wake-up call')
Historical Context
Precedents: Pre-WWI inter-imperialist rivalries among European powers, Cold War bloc competition and European subordination to US hegemony, 2014 Crimea annexation and inadequate Western response (cited by Romanian FM), Post-WWII Marshall Plan establishing US-European dependency
This moment represents a potential transition in the post-Cold War unipolar order dominated by US hegemony. The contradictions visible here—European capital seeking autonomy while lacking independent military capacity, US attempts to discipline wayward allies (Hungary, Slovakia) while courting them simultaneously—mirror patterns from previous periods of hegemonic transition. The reference to 'permanent instability' signals recognition that the neoliberal period of relative US dominance is ending, without clarity on what replaces it. Estonia's intelligence assessment noting Russia's economy entering 'downturn' without 'total collapse' suggests a prolonged period of neither victory nor defeat for any party—conditions ripe for continued conflict.
Contradictions
Primary: European capital seeks strategic autonomy from US hegemony while remaining materially dependent on American military power and unable to build independent capacity quickly enough. Macron calls for Europe to 'decide for ourselves' while the Coalition of the Willing still requires Franco-British leadership operating within NATO frameworks.
Secondary: US demands European alignment against Russia/China while its own administration signals willingness to negotiate with Moscow unilaterally, Germany warns citizens about US surveillance while maintaining the alliance that enables it, European leaders call for 'peace talks' while simultaneously announcing expanded weapons production, Romania warns against giving Russia 'small wins' while Macron proposes reopening diplomatic channels
These contradictions are unlikely to resolve cleanly. More probable is continued oscillation—European powers will neither fully subordinate to US demands nor achieve genuine autonomy. The material pressures (energy needs, defense gaps, economic competition) will push toward pragmatic deals that satisfy no faction completely. The danger is that these unresolved tensions create conditions for escalation, as each power tests limits. For workers, this means continued militarization, surveillance expansion, and economic disruption regardless of which elite faction prevails.
Global Interconnections
This European crisis is inseparable from the broader restructuring of global capitalism. The US pivot toward great-power competition with China requires disciplining European allies who might prefer profitable neutrality. Russia's war in Ukraine serves US interests by binding Europe closer to American energy supplies (LNG replacing Russian gas) and military structures, even as it creates European resentment. China's foreign minister visiting both Munich and Budapest illustrates Beijing's strategy of exploiting Western divisions. The expanded US surveillance requirements for European travelers reveal how the 'war on terror' infrastructure now serves great-power competition—data collection justified by security becomes a tool for monitoring allied populations. This connects to broader patterns of surveillance capitalism merging with state power. Meanwhile, the proposed EU sanctions targeting Georgian and Indonesian ports handling Russian oil show how the sanctions regime extends imperial reach into the periphery, forcing smaller states to choose sides in conflicts not of their making.
Conclusion
The 'geopolitical rupture' Macron identifies is real, but his proposed solutions—more European integration, autonomous defense capacity, independent diplomacy—remain confined within the logic of inter-imperialist competition. Workers have no stake in whether European or American capital dominates, whether Russian or Western energy interests prevail. The task is to identify how these elite conflicts create openings: military spending diverts resources from social needs, surveillance regimes threaten all workers' freedom, and the instability itself delegitimizes ruling-class claims to competent management. The absence of any working-class voice in this discourse—no unions, no anti-war movements, no labor perspective—reveals how thoroughly elite media naturalizes these as 'geopolitical' rather than class questions. Building that independent working-class position, opposing all imperialisms while defending workers across borders, remains the strategic necessity.
Suggested Reading
- Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism by V.I. Lenin (1917) Lenin's analysis of how capitalist development leads to inter-imperialist rivalry and war directly illuminates current US-EU-Russia-China competition over markets, resources, and spheres of influence.
- The New Imperialism by David Harvey (2003) Harvey's concept of 'accumulation by dispossession' helps explain how the Ukraine conflict and sanctions regime serve to reorganize global capital flows and resource access.
- The State and Revolution by V.I. Lenin (1917) Lenin's analysis of the capitalist state as instrument of class rule clarifies why European states cannot simply 'choose' independence—their form is shaped by their function in managing capital accumulation within the imperial system.