French press asks what drives Chirac on Iraq

Reuters | 2/27/03 | Tom Heneghan

[Billthedrill]

"It's high time we weighed up the damage of an Atlantic rupture," Le Point wrote, adding it would be "wiser to save the United Nations and NATO from ruin".

It is fairly clear that Chirac is following the traditional French disdain for what they consider an unduly U.S.-influenced NATO, preferring to place the emphasis on a more closely regional EU structure dominated by themselves. But I don't think Chirac intended to damage the UN, which is turning out to be an unavoidable consequence.

The reason it is unavoidable is that the means Chirac is using to implement this program do not threaten only one component, but collective security as a whole. This behavior by a nominal NATO member, if practiced within the EU by EU members other than France, would be as threatening to that structure as it is here to NATO and the UN. France will probably find herself in the position of attempting to prohibit it for that reason, a course of action which will be as threatening to the EU as a whole as permitting it. This is simply not a well-thought-out policy, even if it is a temporarily popular one.

[Cicero]

"It's high time we weighed up the damage of an Atlantic rupture," Le Point wrote, adding it would be "wiser to save the United Nations and NATO from ruin".

For all their alleged Machiavellian brilliance, it strikes me that the French have been extremely slow on the uptake. First they celebrate Chirac on magazine covers, and then a week later they realize, "Uh oh, this could be trouble."

It seems to me that at this point it's not "high time," it's several weeks too late. The Bush administration and Americans in general will NEVER see France the same way again. It's too late. When some sneak unexpectedly knocks you down and you're lying bloody in the street, and your friend who was walking with you refuses to help, he's no longer your friend. That's the way most Americans feel about this. No self pity, we'll get up and finish the job ourselves, but no friendship. It's gone, finished.

[My back yard]

Chiraq. :)

It is something to flounder on the flounderers. This is like a man cheating on his mistress.

[Arpege92]

Chirac is no "peace warrior".....he's more like a greedy little man who's concern is "oil" and it's not the kind of "oil" you can fry "freedom fries" in either!

[Arpege92]

Chirac is no "peace warrior".....he's more like a greedy little man who's concern is "oil" and it's not the kind of "oil" you can fry "freedom fries" in either!

[winner3000]

They even mention the reason for France's behavior in the article. It's quite plain:
"The argument that France would lose influence if it did not swing behind the war effort holds no water, he added, because Paris is convinced it will have no influence anyway with the United States after an Iraq war, OR WIN ANY CONTRACTS THERE."

Absolutely disgusting.

[disgruntledinCa]

I wonder if Chirac and Scott Ritter have the same after-hours proclivities? Any sightings of Chirac near a Paris BK?

[NotJustAnotherPrettyFace]

Well, let's see here. The French (other than Chirac) are finally realizing their guy may have picked the wrong side to support. Gee............ what got into them? Are their investments in the wine and bottled water and high fashion and cosmetics industries taking a financial hit in the last week or so? Boycott getting to them, pray tell?

[NotJustAnotherPrettyFace]

It would seem that Chirac has more of a Clinton-type problem.

[Rocky]

Everyone should look at the article you referenced. Whoever doesn't have the patience to read the whole thing should just do a search for the word "France" and read each sentence where "France" is highlighted.

[Rocky]

Zee surrender eez like zee fine wine. Eet must not be served before eet eez time.