I have been kicking this idea around for a while and thought I would share it. I have no intention of defending it but I would offer it for discussion and I will return to read comments but I may not respond.
It was obvious to everyone including the French that the only possible outcome would be the removal of Saddam from power. The French could have one of two motives for opposing us. They hope to appear to be the leader of the opposition or they really wanted Saddam killed and removed through an exercise of Western military power. Suppose it appeared that Saddam was about to capitulate and go onto exile then the French opposition could make it appear to Saddam that he might have a chance to survive if he just held out. His only hope would be to appear to be the victim and that America would back off when the battle again looked like a slaughter as it had in 1991. If Saddam had gone into exile it would have been impossible for us to justify a war with Iraq. The French like the U.S. wanted a demonstration of military power in the middle east as a deterrent against Islamic terrorists and they played their part to insure that Saddam would hold out and allow a war.
I don’t believe the French were in on the game but their history of backstabbing and underhanded conniving would lend itself to such a manipulative strategy.
I thought about that too. But it doesn't make sense. France could have sided with us and voted to remove Saddam by force. Then the war would have had the blessing of the UN.
That would have had the same effect, the only difference is that France and the UN would have had to shoulder some of the cost of the war.
I have to believe that France's economic interests, Total ELF, the debt and ongoing contracts as well as French violations of UN sanctions that are being discovered prompted Chirac to try his best to block the war.
The only way that possibly makes sense is if France cooperated in a concerted effort to undermine the UN. Even more sinister would be if by undermining the UN now, they hope to make it stronger in the future. But I don't see it either way.
I think France just backed themselves in a corner and now Chirac is calling Bush wanting to know what he has to do to get the wine and cheese flowing again.
If Saddam had gone into exile it would have been impossible for us to justify a war with Iraq.
Given his advanced stage of paranoia, the likelihood was slim to none. I was going to say "delusional paranoia," but considering the atrocities committed by him and his lackeys, the man is not realistically safe from retribution anywhere in the world. Even if he had abandoned ship, it's likely an equally corrupt croney (or his son) would have filled the void, which would not have invalidated a war based on the stated goals.
The French like the U.S. wanted a demonstration of military power in the middle east as a deterrent against Islamic terrorists and they played their part to insure that Saddam would hold out and allow a war.
Not likely. In addition to vast profits earned through oil and other contracts with the Iraqi regime, the French political elite are committed to a policy of appeasement due to the large, violent and vocal Muslim minority which has settled within their own borders. Witness the weak response to anti-Semitic violence committed by Muslims within France, the French government's animosity toward Israel and their support of Arab dictatorships. France is in the final moments of its twilight as a world power, and the United Nations was the perfect vehicle to inflate their importance, not to mention the benefits reaped by French banks in the corrupt UN "Oil for Food" program. Further proof of France's deep opposition to the war exists in their obstructionism in NATO, their lobbying of the Turks to deny us access through Turkey, and their berating of potential eastern European EU members for their support of the war.
France had much to lose in this war, and they acted accordingly.