Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

French Propose Their World Order
Insight Magazine ^ | Aug. 29, 2003 | Kenneth R. Timmerman

Posted on 08/29/2003 1:09:27 PM PDT by Jean S

French Propose Their World Order

By Kenneth R. Timmerman



In an Aug. 25 speech that was almost surreal for its flighty idealism, French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin called for a "new world organization" to replace the United Nations as it is currently structured.

At an annual conference in Paris bringing together 200 top French diplomats and Foreign Ministry officials, de Villepin reiterated his view that the United States must cede power to a new "collective-security" organization. "[B]uilding a new world, founding a new order" was "urgent," he insisted, "an immense task that is incumbent upon us." It was France's role to lead Europe to become "one of the founding pillars" of the new system, he said.

The new collective-security system should be "founded on collective responsibility and world democracy," de Villepin said. In particular, he said that France was now looking favorably to the idea of enlarging membership of the U.N. Security Council and vesting it with expanded powers. While he provided no specifics in his speech, aides later said that he believed Germany, Japan, India, Brazil and a major African power such as Nigeria all should be given permanent seats on the council, along with veto power over all Security Council resolutions, including those authorizing the use of force.

In a direct dig at the Bush administration, de Villepin insisted that no nation should be allowed to use force, even in the defense of its own interests, without specific approval from the Security Council. "Using force is often tempting," he said, but "can only be justified if collective security or urgent humanitarian needs require it." Force must be "a last resort," and "only when the international community, through the Security Council, decides."

France rarely has asked for Security Council approval when it has intervened militarily in Africa, and in 1999 had no problem in joining a NATO coalition that bypassed the United Nations, rather than face the threat of a Russian veto, to wage war against Serbian strongman Slobodon Milosevic in Albania. But when the United States assembled a "coalition of the willing" to oust Saddam Hussein, after France blocked U.S. efforts to win U.N. support, that was "unacceptable."

A senior adviser to de Villepin tells Insight that France is hoping to patch up relations with the United States, but it is not quite sure how to proceed. For one thing, the adviser said, the French had failed to understand the depth of anger among ordinary Americans over French behavior at the United Nations during the Iraq crisis, and they don't appear to have learned from that failure. "The anti-French campaign in the United States was all led by right-wing pressure groups, and it was regrettable," the adviser said.

In what was intended as a sop to the United States, de Villepin said that no country should take umbrage at the French insistence on a new "multipolar" world order. Sweeping aside the record of his own diplomacy, de Villepin said, "[T]he French vision of multipolarity does not aim at organizing rivalry or competition, but responsibility, stability and initiative."

Therese Delpech, a strategic-affairs adviser to the French Atomic Energy Commission, which designs and builds French nuclear weapons, is one of the rare officials who has publicly criticized de Villepin for his multipolar vision. "Those in Europe who are promoting this notion of a multipolar world are not always aware that the term itself tends to further split the Western camp at a moment when we should be closing our ranks," she wrote in a recent article in Politique Internationale, the premier French policy review. "Besides, what new 'poles' are we talking about? Russia? Japan? A stronger China?"

De Villepin hinted that France was preparing a new showdown with the United States and Britain over Iraq, this time disguised as an effort to transfer authority for the post-war military occupation from the United States to the United Nations. "The new structures that eventually will be put in place cannot be simply an enlargement or adjustment of the current occupation forces. Instead, we must put in place a veritable international force under a U.N. Security Council mandate," he said.

According to the center-right daily Le Figaro, the French intend to demand, as a condition for sending their own troops or approving any expanded U.N. role in Iraq, that the new U.N. force "not be placed under American command." That condition will meet with strong resistance from the White House, since President George W. Bush promised voters during his election campaign that he would not allow U.S. soldiers to be placed under U.N. command.

De Villepin's vision of French grandeur and primacy on the world scene is widely shared by his subordinates, who unlike top officials at the U.S. State Department, are mostly foreign-service bureaucrats. "There were only five or six advisers who challenged his handling of the Iraq crisis," one official told Insight.

"What France is looking for is independence from the United States," says Delpech, while Germany wants to escape its world responsibilities. In both cases, "multi-lateralism is a rhetorical formula more than a guide to political action [and] is weakening European integration."

Kenneth R. Timmerman is a senior writer for Insight.



TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: devillepin; france; kennethrtimmerman; newnwo; un
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last

1 posted on 08/29/2003 1:09:27 PM PDT by Jean S
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JeanS
Surrender monkeys at it again.
2 posted on 08/29/2003 1:13:02 PM PDT by boomop1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

In a direct dig at the Bush administration, de Villepin insisted that no nation should be allowed to use force, even in the defense of its own interests, without specific approval from the Security Council. "Using force is often tempting," he said, but "can only be justified if collective security or urgent humanitarian needs require it." Force must be "a last resort," and "only when the international community, through the Security Council, decides."


Globalist puke.

3 posted on 08/29/2003 1:14:30 PM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JeanS
I'm trying to figure out what the U. S. would possibly gain from this. All the nations of the world combined aren't worth the security provided by the U. S. Marine Corps alone, let alone the other service branches.

I like the idea of replacing the U. N. though. Let's just replace it with a nice plaque or something, instead of a new "supersized" U. N. designed by France.

4 posted on 08/29/2003 1:15:24 PM PDT by Snuffington
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JeanS
...de Villepin insisted that no nation should be allowed to use force, even in the defense of its own interests, without specific approval from the Security Council. "Using force is often tempting," he said, but "can only be justified if collective security or urgent humanitarian needs require it." Force must be "a last resort," and "only when the international community, through the Security Council, decides."

The sad thing is that are multitudes in the U.S. that will agree with this.

5 posted on 08/29/2003 1:16:04 PM PDT by raybbr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: boomop1
He is trying to make us emulate them.
6 posted on 08/29/2003 1:16:35 PM PDT by Corporate Law (<><)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JeanS
de Villepin insisted that no nation should be allowed to use force, even in the defense of its own interests

At least they aren't hypocrites.....

7 posted on 08/29/2003 1:22:09 PM PDT by Onelifetogive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: boomop1
Yea but to have the guts to demand we surrender that takes a lot of nerve or few brains.
8 posted on 08/29/2003 1:22:19 PM PDT by Gkubly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: boomop1
I'm sorry, when I first read the Headline I thought it said French Propose their own world ODOR.
9 posted on 08/29/2003 1:23:02 PM PDT by anoldafvet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JeanS
De Villipen gives a new location to living in Lala Land, now it's in France.

Ah, la bellyacher France, which has defied EU for 3 years now in regard to it's deficits. And France that will become Al-France is 50 years or less. Notre Dame, that will have a mosque built on top of it.

France, that marveleous place that is clinging to it's Offal Tower demanding that French be the world's leading language in spite of all the Chinese, Spanish speaking, and not to mention, the hated English speaking peoples.

It does remind one of the band still uselessly playing on on the poop deck while the Titanic sank.

10 posted on 08/29/2003 1:23:12 PM PDT by xJones
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
The hypocrisy of it all. France uses its force numerous times in Africa.
11 posted on 08/29/2003 1:23:44 PM PDT by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JeanS
de Villepin insisted that no nation should be allowed to use force, even in the defense of its own interests...

Should nations be allowed to bend over and take it up the tailpipe from every dictator that comes along... Does France still advocate this posture???

12 posted on 08/29/2003 1:25:00 PM PDT by Onelifetogive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JeanS
In the French New World Order, more people die of heat in a Western 'Democracy'(France: 11,000) than die of war against murderous dictators(Iraq: ~6,000).

Way to go, ingrates.

13 posted on 08/29/2003 1:25:54 PM PDT by Uncle Miltie (Gainfully employed in World-Class American Exporting Companies since 1984!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JeanS
In a direct dig at the Bush administration, de Villepin insisted that no nation should be allowed to use force, even in the defense of its own interests, without specific approval from the Security Council...

We should send half a dozen or so Marines (should be plenty) to invade France and then veto any action by the security council...

14 posted on 08/29/2003 1:27:46 PM PDT by Onelifetogive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Snuffington
I like the idea of replacing the U. N. though. Let's just replace it with a nice plaque or something...

LOL!

15 posted on 08/29/2003 1:28:20 PM PDT by ExpatCanuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: JeanS
...Force must be"a last resort," and "only when the international community, through the Security Council, decides."

Only one way to read this, I suppose.

The French want the world, and specifically the United States of America, to be ruled a global government--one that is backed up by armed force that exceeds any other on the planet.

Them's fightin' words.

Come get us, Dominique...and bring your friend Kofi...

16 posted on 08/29/2003 1:29:03 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JeanS
Time to make some changes at the UN.

There is no room for anyone but the United States on the Security Council. No one else is important enough to rate a seat.

Because American Counties are about equal to other nations, every American County should have a seat in the General Assembly

So9

17 posted on 08/29/2003 1:31:14 PM PDT by Servant of the Nine (Put some ice on that)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Corporate Law
Insufficient hospital staff due to mandatory max hours limits for all government workers including medical staff in a socialized system.

Leaving the elderly relatives home to die as families go on a month-long vacation and the whole country except the tourist resorts and the funeral homes shut down.

Facing every problem by making the crucial decision of who or what to surrender to.

Adoration of, and abject submission to, the State. No appreciation of the importance of individual freedom as against the interests of the State as determined by the whims of the mob or the Robespierre or Napoleon of the moment.

Yes. France is the model to follow.

18 posted on 08/29/2003 1:31:42 PM PDT by Montfort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Brad Cloven
You do have a point. In France's world, everyone could ship all their old relatives to Paris and then go on vacation. The French know how to handle these things.
19 posted on 08/29/2003 1:32:11 PM PDT by xJones
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: JeanS
So, if the French are proposing this, would this plan be known as "Le Pew World Order"?
20 posted on 08/29/2003 1:33:39 PM PDT by Choose Ye This Day (Moving to Turkmenistan, where all the jobs are.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson