Posted on 07/29/2004 1:55:15 PM PDT by BushisTheMan
BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) - France dropped its objection to having a NATO training mission inside Iraq but refused Thursday to accept Washington's demand that its commander be an American.
A French diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, described the issue as the "last hitch" holding up agreement on the mission at NATO headquarters. After two days of debate, NATO officials said they were optimistic the 26 NATO countries would reach a consensus by Friday on how the training both inside and outside Iraq would proceed. Ambassadors broke up Thursday night but planned to resume meeting early Friday.
"We are very close," a NATO official said.
Acknowledging that Washington was unlikely to back down on its demand for an American commander, Paris suggested postponing that aspect of the decision.
A U.S. official declined to comment. Washington has been adamant that the NATO mission commander be part of the U.S.-led coalition's chain of command, saying it is the best way to ensure the safety of the NATO mission. It also wants a decision now so that training can begin quickly in response to urgent pleas from the new Iraqi government.
NATO leaders agreed to the missions at their summit a month ago, but left details vague.
Although French President Jacques Chirac maintained he never agreed to a NATO footprint inside Iraq, those objections seemed to have dissipated.
In Paris, Foreign Ministry spokesman Herve Ladsous said France agreed to sending a mission to Iraq in August. But he added the "nature of the link with the multinational force present in Iraq" remained unresolved.
"It would be abnormal and regrettable for this point to block the sending of the NATO mission," he said in a statement, suggesting the decision be put off until NATO receives another report in mid-September.
The French diplomat said about "five or six" other countries supported France's position. NATO decisions are made by consensus.
The delays echoed the alliance crisis before the Iraq war, when France, joined for a time by Germany and Belgium, blocked agreement for weeks on defensive aid to Turkey because of their opposition to U.S. military action.
Another outstanding issue had to do with whether the mission should be commonly funded by all allies, like the NATO peacekeeping mission in Afghanistan, or only by those sending troops. Diplomats said they thought that was easier to solve than the command question.
The command issue is especially sensitive for Paris and a handful of other countries that opposed the U.S.-led war and have refused to send troops to help with the aftermath.
The French fear that tying the NATO mission too closely to the U.S.-led forces could result in NATO becoming a "subsidiary of the coalition," and they worry that Washington will use the NATO force as an "exit strategy."
He pointed to Afghanistan and Kosovo, where protection is provided for different international forces without formal command links.
The "pre-mission" NATO intends to send Aug. 6 would include only 30 or so people, and report back to NATO headquarters Sept. 15.
So far NATO's role in Iraq has been limited to providing logistical backup to a Polish-led division working with the American troops. Although 16 NATO members already have some troops there, they are not under the NATO flag.
They never change.
We should start the "France objects to..." drinking game. Every time some jackass French diplomat objects to something we propose at the UN, we take a drink.
We'll all be drunk by noon.
Dear France: What Dick Cheney said....
France is afraid that the Iraqis will not learn fundamental French military doctrine: "don't fight, surrender."
The French would dearly love to see US forces under a French general. Barring that, a general chosen by the UN, and you can bet your bippie he wouldn't be American.
Why would the Iraqi military need to be trained by a French general? They already know how to surrender.
Heyzeus Christo...
If the f'in French command their training, Iraq'll have the same POS army they took into the last two wars. Although, the commander of the French Contingent in Gulf War I said that the Iraqis really set a high bar for the French Army in using leaflets to surrender and pleading for their lives while doing so.
The French also admired the manly way that weapons were laid down, not thrown or dropped per French Army doctrine in place at the time.
If they continue to behave badly....we should declare war against the backstabbing sonsofbitches, and be done with it...
Semper Fi
We should have let the NAZI's keep France!
My exact thoughts, only you beat me to it be a few seconds. In fact, we could offer a compromise to the hosers: the day that we Americans are ready to surrender to someone, anyone -- we'll put a French expert in charge of the entire operation. Until then, "don't call us; we'll call you".
On second thought, I, for one, wanna keep the statue; so I guess we will until there's someone big enough to take it away from us.
FRANCE: Acronym for F---ing Rude A-holes Now (a) Communist Empire...
Your right but maybe a logo on it reading,"France once believed now your mine".
Oui, zer eez a short pier over which zey can take a long walk . . .
Oui, zer eez a short pier over which zey can take a long walk . . .
We'll all be drunk by noon.
OH HOW FUNNY!!!!
Ask Chirac, maybe Poland would be good? Hehe It would be interesting ,see his reaction for such proposition.
Can't someone rid us of this meddlesome country?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.