-Caveat Lector- Paris dispatch http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,891036,00.ht ml
Chirac's dilemma France does not want war but nor can it risk international isolation. Give it time and its compliance with America is almost assured, writes Jon Henley Jon Henley Friday February 7, 2003 The Guardian So how far will France actually go? When the chips are down, will it - as the White House, Downing Street and most commentators seem to think - pull back from the brink, cave in to US and British pressure, and vote for (or at least not against) a new UN resolution authorising the use of force against Saddam Hussein? The answer is almost certainly no now, and yes later. The timing, in this, will be all. If Paris is forced into a decision in the next few weeks, it is very difficult to see how even someone of Jacques Chirac's balletic abilities could pirouette his way out of saying no to war: anything else would lose him all credibility. If, on the other hand, the UN weapons inspectors are allowed to continue their work for several more weeks, or preferably months, and if (as seems likely) they conclude that Baghdad has probably been concealing banned arms or at least refusing to cooperate actively, then other factors will start to weigh on the French president's mind. France's present position, or at least its perceived position, has lumped it in with Germany in a non- existent "no war under any circumstances" alliance. It is a false perception created by Mr Chirac's ill- advised remark, during the pomp and ceremony of the 40th anniversary of the Franco- German friendship treaty, that the French and German stance on the Iraqi question was identical. But Mr Chirac most definitely does not want to be in the same camp as Germany on this one, for several reasons. For a start, a resolutely pacifist France would infuriate America, at a time when improving transatlantic relations is a cornerstone of the newly elected president's foreign policy. Second, any genuine Franco-German anti-war axis on Iraq would antagonise most of the rest of France's EU partners - witness the famous pro-American letter that was the immediate and violent (in diplomatic terms) response to the Chirac-Schröder love-in. France's baseline position, the one that it trumpeted so successfully throughout last year and which resulted in Washington accepting the principle of a second resolution, is that a war will always be the worst possible solution and that, in consequence, only the UN security council is qualified to launch one. It was a moderating and conciliating position, not an obstructive one, and it earned widespread support among UN members. This is the position to which France is now plainly trying to return, after its probably unintended little diversion up Berlin's blind alley. Wednesday's security council intervention by Dominique de Villepin, the French foreign minister, was clearly aimed at easing transatlantic and cross-Channel tensions. He suggested the inspectors should be radically reinforced: a smart halfway house which means France can be accused of being neither pro-war nor anti-action. France believes that as long as the inspectors are in place and doing their job, the situation cannot be worsening. The so-called Iraqi threat, if it exists, is frozen as long as the UN teams are operating. To consider any attack before the inspectors themselves say they have finished their task (or are being prevented from doing so) is simply wrong: that is France's basic position. Mr Chirac will without doubt do all he can to avoid a war in Iraq. He seems genuinely to believe that it will have unforeseeable but probably horrendous consequences on Iraq's civilian population (who have a tough enough time of it as it is); on Arab world opinion (turning moderate Arabs into anti-westerns Arabs); on the stability of the Middle East (a region that really does not need another conflict); on the international fight against terror; and on Islamic opinion in France (a nation that numbers up to six million Muslims). For all those reasons he is against war. But perhaps most importantly of all, he is also driven by a desire to be a heavy-hitter in the international rink after five years in the shadows of cohabitation. He wants France's voice not just to be heard but to be respected and, if possible, followed. And he knows that isolating himself completely from Washington, and ruining for decades the credibility of the United Nations (which is what a French security council veto would do), will not take him very far towards that goal. The final wording of last year's UN resolution 1441 can legitimately be seen as something of a French diplomatic triumph: a compromise that respected international law and, as Mr Chirac always (and rather cornily) says, "gave peace a chance". As the endgame nears, France now has to show that was not a flash in the pan. The weeks ahead will be crucial, and not just for Paris's diplomatic credentials. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2003 Forwarded for your information. The text and intent of the article have to stand on their own merits. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe simply because it has been handed down for many genera- tions. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumoured by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is written in Holy Scriptures. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of teachers, elders or wise men. Believe only after careful observation and analysis, when you find that it agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all. Then accept it and live up to it." The Buddha on Belief, from the Kalama Sut <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
