| Submit your comments on this article |
| Europe |
| France rules out troop reduction in Afghanistan |
| 2004-12-09 |
| Credit where credit is due. Thanks, France. |
| Posted by:Seafarious |
| #18 Contracts are the real goal, indeed. "Influence" is a means to that end. France's main fear is of economic strangulation by American-led capitalism. Their foreign policy is above all mercantilist, designed to hoard as much industrial production and jobs as possible in France. |
| Posted by: lex 2004-12-09 3:24:52 PM |
| #17 There must still be a contract or two out there for TotalFinaElf or Alcatel that hasn't been signed yet. (OK, I'm cynical....I admit it) |
| Posted by: Desert Blondie 2004-12-09 3:19:41 PM |
| #16 France in the Middle East - their ambassador was actually making nicey-nice in Israel the other day - France is interested in INFLUENCE in the mideast, to the extent that a total diplo boycott of Israel reduces their ability to play a role, and thus reduces their INFLUENCE, they will withdraw from that. Their principle ties are with "moderate" secularist regimes in the region, notably Algeria. Playing with the Iranians, while a useful tool to tweak the US and Israel, ultimately endangers their other relations in the arab world, if take too far. Even in the Mideast, the region where their interests are the most different from our own, their game is subtle. And of course what there game is GLOBALLY is not settled. I dont think Sarkozy is the messiah, as far as franco-US relations, but I dont think he will pursue Chiracs priorities, either. |
| Posted by: Liberalhawk 2004-12-09 12:53:48 PM |
| #15 it was invoked re 9/11, and assistance rendered such as flying Radar planes in CONUS was done under article 5. Euro comnbat forces in Afghanistan, who joined in ousting the Taliban, did so OUTSIDE Nato command, and as "coalition of the willing" INCLUDING France. NATO later took over ISAF, which primarily patrols Kabul. |
| Posted by: Liberalhawk 2004-12-09 12:48:49 PM |
| #14 Not to get pedantic, ZF-- and I promise not to pull an Aris and pursue this further-- but wasn't NATO's Article 5 invoked re Afghanistan? |
| Posted by: lex 2004-12-09 12:08:46 PM |
| #13 When France is around there is always a puddle of pee at the base of the wall tent. We do not know if France was pissing on the inside or the outside of the tent. We just know that they pissed on the tent and left a mess there. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2004-12-09 11:18:14 AM |
| #12 Eh, I think the choice is between having them outside the tent pissing in or inside the tent pissing in pseudo-random directions. At least in the latter case, sometimes they're not pissing on us. |
| Posted by: Dishman 2004-12-09 11:17:58 AM |
| #11 Faire un oeuf. |
| Posted by: lex 2004-12-09 11:10:40 AM |
| #10 Lex, ZF, you are geting semantic. Bottom line is it's better to have them in the tent pissing out than outside pissing in, inspite of the fact that it sometimes seems hard to tell the difference. The betrayal in the Balkins showed everybody exactly where we both stand. And recent posts indicate we learned the lesson. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2004-12-09 11:04:17 AM |
| #9 Moving from legalese to the spirit behind an alliance: Do you think the French consider themselves our ally? I've never met a Frenchman who seriously believes that they are. The formalities of NATO cannot hide the fact that France considers the US hyperpuissance the number one worldwide threat to French interests, integrity and independence. |
| Posted by: lex 2004-12-09 10:51:41 AM |
| #8 lex: An ally honors its treaty obligations. NATO obligations have to do with expelling invading armies. It's not clear what either Afghanistan or Iraq have to do with that, being punitive expeditions. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2004-12-09 10:45:50 AM |
| #7 An ally honors its treaty obligations. France opposed passage of our troops and materiel from Europe to Iraq. France is opposing training of Iraqi soldiers by NATO. Top French military commanders passed information to Serbian thugs during the Bosnian campaign. France is also doing everything in its power to piss on the Allawi government, given that, as PM Raffarin said to Le Figaro's editors, "the Iraqi 'resistance' are our best allies.'" France is no more an ally than Russia. |
| Posted by: lex 2004-12-09 10:35:44 AM |
| #6 lex: Neither is France an ally. France is an ally. But not in the sense that the media use the word ally - to mean friend. We - and most other countries - have very few friends. Among them are the UK and Australia. The rest are just allies in one context or another. The literal meaning of ally is what Rumsfeld called the coalition of the willing. But the media has confused it to mean something completely different. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2004-12-09 10:28:13 AM |
| #5 Neither is France an ally. And in the middle east, they firmly believe that their interests lie with the fascists, mullahs and other anti-American movements. Why keep them in NATO? |
| Posted by: lex 2004-12-09 10:24:54 AM |
| #4 I beleive Henry Kissinger said we have no permanent friends, or permanent enemies, only permanent interests. And he was talking about North Viet Nam, USSR and China, when thinking of permanent enemies. France is no permanent enemy - when our interests coincide, as they will from time to time, we should work together. When they do not, we should move forward without worrying about it. |
| Posted by: Liberalhawk 2004-12-09 10:15:04 AM |
| #3 Success has a thousand fathers, failure is an orphan. |
| Posted by: Don 2004-12-09 9:43:44 AM |
| #2 Hey, it ties them up there so they're not making mischief elsewhere. Works for me. |
| Posted by: anon 2004-12-09 8:16:44 AM |
| #1 What they are not saying is they are on the Taliban's side. |
| Posted by: Ol_Dirty_American 2004-12-09 12:49:23 AM |