Pave: War Talk

Le jour 152 de Sarko

J’ai dit qu’il fallait tout faire pour éviter le pire. On m’a demandé : le pire c’est quoi ? J’ai dit : le pire c’est la guerre. Le pire, ce n’est pas ce que je souhaite. Je n’ai pas dit : le meilleur c’est la guerre ; je n’ai pas dit : mon choix, c’est la guerre. J’ai dit que c’était le pire, ce qu’il ne faut jamais faire. Je ne suis pas un va-t-en-guerre, je suis un "va-t-en-paix", "va-t-en-paix" depuis 40 ans ! J’ai connu beaucoup de guerres, pour les dénoncer, pour les adoucir, pour les empêcher.

[I said that it was necessary to do everything to avoid the worst. I was asked: what is the worst? I said: the worst is war. I did not wish the worst. I did not say: war is best; I did not say: my preference is war. I said that it was the worst, which never should be done. I am not go-to-war, I am "go-in-peace", "go-in-peace" for 40 years! I have known many wars, to denounce them, to soften them, to prevent them.]

Bernard Kouchner,
Minister of Foreign and European Affairs,
explaining what couldn't be any plainer
PARIS September 19, 2007
(Ministère des Affaires étrangères)

For most Europeans, for most French, war is an absolute evil. It cannot -- cannot -- be extenuated by desirable ends. And to avoid war most Europeans, most French, will accept threats, bad faith, suffering, and the deaths of others so they can live in a minatory, duplicitious, miserable, and pernicious world of peace. An evil world of peace trumps the evil of war.

There are many reasons Europeans embrace pacifism -- a loss of nerve, a dread of sacrifice, a culture of submission or indifference or indulgence or fear or gloom or defeat.

But there is one practical reason: Europa -- or any lesser combination of EU buddy states -- cannot wage decisive war. The EU, which aspires to a nostalgic 19th century greatness, manages only 54% of the American military spend while boasting an equivalent GDP (USD $13.08 trillion). France, which styles herself America's equal, is a distant 12%* of the American spend. In NATO America (USD $489.2B) outspends 4¼-to-1 over the other 25 member states combined (USD $112.2B). And while the business of the American military is to fight wars, EU militaries are more inclined to hold coats and pose as window dressing and ask pretty please. Or simply do nothing.

France with a scattered deployment of less than 36,000 troops abroad is spent:

That's it. Sorry. Couldn't possibly manage more. Really need to cut back. Would love to be a big important world power, but not today, thank you. Already gave our mite at the UN. Sorry.

So when M. le Ministre talks of war, well, whole swaths of Euro politicos, academes, self-styled intellectuals, television personalities, and assorted glitterati faint dead away.

French philosophe and essayist André Glucksman offers insights into M. le Ministre's daring use of plain talk.

Iran, France And The Bomb
DID YOU REALLY SAY 'WAR'?

PARIS October 4, 2007 (IHT/TMS) - It is said that when the wise man points to the moon, imbeciles only see his finger. When Kouchner talks about "war," many Europeans feel that it is a dirty word fired like a handgun into the subdued atmosphere of respectful negotiations. Iran's clandestine and illegal efforts to transgress the threshold toward military nuclear capabilities were first revealed in August 2002. Since then and in spite of multiple breaches documented by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the negotiations, mainly led by Paris, London and Berlin, have yielded no results.**

It is now high time to assess the risks openly and frankly. Is there a real threat? All experts agree on Iran's technical capabilities. Two to four years will be sufficient to reach the point of no return. Therefore, time is of the essence. But is the prospect of a nuclear Iran enough to scare the Western democracies into urgently mobilizing to prohibit Iran from crossing the ultimate threshold? Or should one rather consider, as Jacques Chirac did in January 2007, that one nuclear power more or less should not lead to so much fuss?

The idea that an Iranian nuclear bomb would be without consequences for world peace emanates from the most ignorant fantasies, as Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Egypt would not bow to the nuclear hegemony of Iran. Beware of the damage! In the dime-sized Middle East, with its ill-defined borders, its theological disputes and its oil, a potential nuclear civil war is painted on the horizon.

... The sacrifice of one's own and oneself, the systematic self destruction of a whole people, are not a new and unknown pathology in history. However, none of these butchers, in their fury, had our modern nuclear toys at their disposal.

To recognize this reality is to recognize why Kouchner was right to talk of war.

Well worth the full read.

------------------------------------
* This includes the cost of maintaining the National Gendarmerie (99,000 officers, or 28% of military personnel), puffing out its military budget with costs that in America are found in local, municipal, and state budgets.

** As is our wont, we invite you to follow the string of EU/French tea parties and climbdowns that have given cover to the Iranian nuclear-arms program, starting here (11.23.04), then here (11.30.04), here (08.08.05), here (08.08.05), here (08.12.05), here (08.14.05), here (09.19.05), here (10.30.05), here (01.25.06), here (02.15.06), here (02.22.06), here (03.05.06), here (03.14.06), here (04.14.06), here (04.15.06), here (04.19.06), here (04.25.06), here (04.25.06), here (08.01.06), here (08.04.06), here (08.04.06), here (08.31.06), here (08.31.06), here (09.01.06), here (09.02.06), here (09.02.06), here (09.03.06), here (09.08.06), here (09.10.06), here (09.18.06), here (09.19.06), here (10.04.06), here (10.09.06), here (10.18.06), here (01.17.07), here (02.02.07), here (02.03.07), here (02.06.07), here (02.07.07), here (02.15.07), and here (02.22.07).

PFFT (What is this?): Crashing the Euro peace party 4 | Rayonnement français 3½