In last Monday’s tripartite declaration by France, Germany and Russia on how to disarm Iraq, French President Jacques Chirac said the debate should be carried out “in the spirit of friendship and respect that characterizes our relations with the United States.”
Fat chance.
The anti-French feeling in the news media–both in the United States and its closest ally on Iraq, Britain–has since reached fever pitch. The French found themselves portrayed as a bunch of yellow-bellied turncoats without an ounce of gratitude toward America for having liberated them from the Nazi jackboot.
“Monstrous ingratitude,” “wimps,” “cowards” were typical of the insults. French reporters translating the onslaught for their readers struggled to capture the full force of slurs that translated as “cheese-eating surrender monkeys” and “axis of weasels.”
The virulence of the response to their head of state speaking up for what a large majority of them believe in has taken many here by surprise.
OK, everyone accepts the cliches: the French smell of garlic and overripe cheese, drink too much wine and cannot follow rules. But is it fair to accuse them of appeasing Saddam Hussein just because they have called for more effort to be spent on disarming him by means other than bombardment?
France’s view is simply this: The threat posed by Hussein does not outweigh the risks of initiating a war, which could carry far-reaching and unforeseen consequences for the Middle East, as well as for East-West relations. “Honestly, the Elysee finds it hard to see how Iraq presents an imminent danger,” said one diplomatic insider.
So France and the United States agree on the objective–the disarmament of Iraq–but disagree on the means to achieve it. Paris’ position is that war is the worst solution: civilians will suffer, the region risks becoming destabilized and there is every chance of a terrorist backlash. Instead, it has suggested doubling or tripling the number of UN weapons inspectors and giving them more time to carry out their mission.
True, France’s position is inspired as much by pragmatism as altruism.
French businesses are poised to move into what would be a huge post-Hussein market where, after 20 years of war, embargo and bombing, everything is in need of renewal. About 60 French companies currently trade with Iraq, including car manufacturers Peugeot and Renault, telecom giant Alcatel, and engineering group Schneider.
But far from being perfidious or devious, the French see their hold off on war position as fundamentally reasonable.
75% unconvinced by Powell
A recent poll indicated that 3 in 4 French people were unconvinced by the arguments U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell put before the UN Security Council. The view that sufficient proof has not yet been furnished is borne out by those on the ground in Iraq. Corinne Heraud, a French missile expert and one of the UN weapons inspectors in Iraq who was interviewed last week by Le Monde newspaper, said that “nothing has yet been established and the investigation continues.”
Meanwhile, other recent polls have consistently indicated that 70 percent to 80 percent of French are opposed to military action against Baghdad. Public opinion in most other European countries is comparable.
The French media, for their part, have taken great delight in mocking the so-called proof that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, notably the British “intelligence” report of which large chunks were lifted from a thesis by an American postgraduate student.
It is intriguing to observe the different historical analogies that have been dreamt up in the European media to describe the “prewar” situation, with inevitable comparison to the situation in Europe in the late 1930s. For some, Hussein is in the role of Adolf Hitler. For others, it is President Bush, because his stance is the more bellicose.
Letters to French newspapers accuse Bush of turning into “a world dictator” and encourage Chirac to hold his ground. “The United States wants to wage war on Iraq to secure their oil supplies and to allow Israel to finish off the Palestinian Arabs,” was the analysis of one reader.
Many French people consider military strikes against Iraq to be a personal obsession of Bush’s and the hawks in his administration, and they are proud that Chirac has been the first statesman with the couilles to stand up to the U.S.
Worst of all, the French scarcely can believe the schoolyard language Bush employs when talking about a matter as serious as war. In response to Bush’s assertion that “The game is over,” France’s soft-spoken prime minister, Jean-Pierre Raffarin, riposted: “It’s not a game, and it’s not over.”
War expected regardless
But few really believe that Bush will not get his war. “He’s not going to want to bring back all those missiles and troops without using them,” opined a French acquaintance.
Despite the hyperbole in the Anglo-Saxon press, there is little doubt that relations between France and the United States are at a low not seen since Gen. Charles de Gaulle took France out of NATO’s military apparatus in 1966.
Chirac’s ideology is inspired by de Gaulle, notably the latter’s willingness to say “screw you” to the rest of world opinion and take France down its own path. Witness Chirac’s first major decision after being elected president in 1995–the resumption of nuclear testing in the South Pacific, which triggered international condemnation.
The renewed testing sent French wine exports plummeting at the time. There already are signs that France’s lonely stand is having an impact on the country’s exports, particularly of emblematic products. One French online cheese vendor whose trade is mainly with the United States has seen sales dip significantly.
Chirac has hitherto been the most pro-American of France’s postwar presidents.
But some observers have started to note a growing anti-Americanism in him. At a dinner last week for parliamentarians, Chirac reportedly spoke of the “excessive nature” of the U.S. position on Iraq, calling Bush’s ambitions for a democratic post-Hussein regime “unrealistic.”
Chirac is playing a perilous game of global diplomacy.
He wants to assert France’s independence and reinforce its position at the heart of Europe, at the risk of seriously damaging relations with the United States. His gamble is that by being seen to be the man who stands up to Bush, he will gain prestige at home and, notably, in the Arab world, which is important for France given that it has the largest Muslim population in Europe.
On the domestic front, so far his tactic is working. Chirac rarely has enjoyed such a high popularity rating in the eight years he has been president.
