There has been some discussion of the U.S. bulling or bribing countries to support war in Iraq. This is not a thread on that subject. It is instead to discuss the recent bullying by France of the eastern European states in order to threaten them into silence concerning Iraq by calling into question their entrance into the EU.

Thoughts on the subject?

Why is France doing this?


Chirac blasts EU candidates

When France actually was somewhat of a significant country they were arrogant. Now that they are no longer signifcant they're even worse.

They have very little standing in the UN, although that body itself is on its way out as having any significance. And they have even less clout in NATO and the EU.

Hey, when you never have anything to bring to the table you can't expect to set the menu.

Why wouldn't they - the US set the dye a long time ago

Oh I see. Well so much for moral consideration...
They did it! Why don't we?!

I agree with turnea, Brunie. I don't think your explanation serves to seriously answer his question.

I am pleased to note that the countries involved aren't taking this sitting down...





Just a sample...
'New Europe' hits back at Chirac
Bulgaria Preserves Iraq Stand after Chirac's Attack

I think this is just EXACTLY what we were doing: alienating allies

Chriac just alienating allies & hurt France's chances of being respected

More updates...
Apparently Chirac is not alone


French People "Share" Chirac's View on Bulgaria

Wow finally France is getting what it deserves.

Brunie,

May I ask you to elucidate on your comment. I mean surly there is more substance to your side of this than those few words.

Thanx for bringing this to us Turnea...


GBY
Aahz

Now that would be a whole other thread

But quite seriously I do find it funny that Europe is being accused of bullying (well just France actually) when a good chunk of US foreign policy is essentially nothing more than bullying - it seems to be that's what passes for diplomacy nowadays.

The United States is not Bullying anyone. We are insisting that they (The United Nations specifically) live up to their creed & punish Saddam for not complying to UN inspectors


Chriac is mad because the EU is not on his side anymore

Thats not quite what I meant - and I dont want to take the thread off topic - so we'll have to save this for another time I think.

Wow! You'd think they'd stop, but no...


Me too!

France Expects Solidarity from EU Applicants, Sarcozy Implies
So, I think it is quite clear that France has a rather large interest in there being no war in Iraq. It is possible that they feel it is a security threat. Otherwise, I think we may need to look for economic interests for the answers to this question.

So what Chriac is saying is that EU applicants are jepordizing their chances to get into the EU just because they support the United States?

Can he threaten them like that??



I agree that Chirac has no right to tell Bulgaria what their Foreign Policy should be.

Just as Bush has no right to tell France and Germany what their Foreign Policy shiuld be. Both leader are, in my opinion, in the wrong. Both are attempting to coerce and bully other nations and I don't see how that can be justified in either case.

Chirac is also telling Bulgaria whom they can't support

Bush hasn't done such a thing

Chirac is getting angry that support on his side is losing steam

Goamerica, this is just a rehash of your last post, do you have any new information or links to add to the debate?

I would call this an attempt at bullying through economic coercion: -

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2753669.stm

Do as we say or we will harm your economies.

I fully support the idea of the EU, but if one nation like France has the gall to think it speaks on behalf of Europe, then the EU is doomed.
It is particularly amusing to note that today (20 feb) Chirac stood and welcomed Robert Mugabe to the French African summit. Instead of having Mugabe arrested and dragged off to face human rights charges, Chirac shook his hand and smiled.

I am beginning to wonder if Chirac would not shake hands with the devil himself if he thought it would further his ambitions for France.

And what exactly are these vague ambitions of France?

He DID that??!!

I would have had him handcuffed & shipped to the Hauge

Chirac would probably welcome Saddam into France with open arms for exile if he let Mugabe set up home in France

My take on it is this.

1. France (or maybe just Chirac) obviously wants dominance over European opinion, hegemony is the term I believe....

2. France does have oil concerns and is one of Iraq's top trading partners, possible reason...

Other reasons? I'm not sure...

I came across this article at the Rush Limbaugh site.


"As the New York Times put it in 1986: "Chirac has said many times that he is a personal friend of Saddam Hussein." "
Friends?

http://rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_02...ctor.guest.html

I understand that this is basically an editorial but it has several interesting quotes and sources.

So maybe he would?????

PS I am sorry Danya, I know that you hate Rush, but this is the only place I have seen this.

I personally would love it if Hussein exiled himself in France tomorrow. Also we were friendly with Hussein in 1986.

I am no Chirac fan. But I'll take an exiled Hussein anywhere tomorrow. (I would think he wouldn't trust the U.S.)

The world would be a better place.

GoAmerica



I'm afraid you misunderstand me. Mugabe is only in Paris for a summit on Africa. He was invited by the French, despite an EU ban. They did a deal to get permission just for this one summit in exchange for an extension of the travel ban.
In itself this is such a joke, that only a French politician could miss the point.

I'll agree with that

And to nudge the thread back on topic...

Other reasons? Okay, here's a good one:

As in the post-war period, the US is again exerting its hegemony - though much more aggressively (and militantly) this time around. France and Germany are seeking to create something of a balance (attempting to fetter the power, if you will). The Bush administration is doing a number of things to try to ensure that there is no balance so that the rest of the world (most importantly our biggest potential rival, a unified Europe) must eventually ask "How high?" when we tell it to jump. These would include:

1. Opposing the European Union's Rapid Reaction Force and encouraging NATO members to develop "niche" military capabilites lest Europe develop autonomous capabilities beyond dirsct US control.
2. Promoting NATO expansion in the hope that the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Romania will support the US against Rumsfeld's "old [moneyed] Europe".
3. Encouraging an enlargement of the EU itself (to include countries like Turkey) under the assumption that the larger the EU, the more unweildy its management - and the less capable of presenting a unified front against the international policies of the Bush regime.

Perhaps France is merely trying to ensure that any of the newer members of the Union are more aligned with Europe than with the United States - a very sensible move for any country concerned about the American hegemon and its increasingly transparent agenda for irresistable domination of the world stage. Were I the president an EU member nation, that would certainly be one of my chief concerns. Indeed, were I a European head of state right now, I might see the Bush dynasty's war-mongering on my doorstep (and its potential for even greater economic dominance following "regime change") as an equal threat to Saddam Hussein, who has at least been relatively pacifist for the past decade or so. "You're either with us or you're with the violent, expansionist monolith." It may be a hard line, but we've seen harder of late...

*Please note my editing of Wertz's quote... you can read the text in its entirity directly above.

I think Wertz touches on an important aspect of the whole mess. I think the EU was set up to counter, and try to at least limit, U.S. hegemony. As was brought up on another post not too long ago, the currency of the EU could, if managed properly, pose a potential risk to the value of the American dollar, which currently sets the standard across the globe. Clearly, it would be in the interest of our government's plans to undermine the EU through whatever back door means necessary.

No doubt regular contributors have already seen me reference (at least once) our National Security Strategy and the PNAC report it's predicated on. Not to beat a dead horse, but I'd like quote a report summarizing some of the concerns and objectives which went on to be included in our National Security Strategy, supporting the statements of Wertz and others:

The report regarding the PNAC document can be found HERE
The document was drawn up in September of 2000 before we had any call to war against terrorism, Afghanistan or Iraq... no axis of evil talks, no insinuations of irrelevency directed to the U.N., and the list continues.

It may behoove France to bully or bribe, but that seems to be what diplomacy is all about these days:

"You're either with us or you're against us..." W.

"They missed a great opportunity to shut up..." Chirac

Wertz...no offense but that is bordering on the edge of paranoia....but it does make sense

Very clever we yanks

Making the EU spread so far out that it can't maintain it's self is like the problem with what the Roman Empire had when it spread it's self all over the place

I think that is why the EU turned Turkey down....they learned our stragey

No offense taken. I tend to define "paranoia" as "having all the facts". I'll take your posting as a compliment.


Edited to add:
Oh - and for those interested in the PNAC issues raised by Abs, a little more can be found on this in the American Hegemony thread.

I, see...
France is trying to ensure the European countries they help admit into the European Union are more aligned with Europe.

Never mind the fact that they are part of Europe...

I think moif put it best...


I don't see the reason why this should be interpreted as strengthening the power of Europe as a whole rather than strengthening the power of the country making the threats, France.

Right. They are worse then what people see the United States as doing: Deciding a country's foreign policy for them. Chirac says Bulgaria CAN'T support the U.S. or if it does, it's application for EU membership will be put in the shredder. While he's trying to insult Bulgaria's intelligence, Bulgaria is telling Chirac that no matter what he likes, they will support the US in an Iraq war & if he shreds the EU application up, then Bulgaria can just sit back & watch France doom the EU by telling all EU members who they can & cannot support & bossing them around.