WHAT HAVE THEY DONNEZ FOR US LATELY?

Weird political science (Ed Quillen, Denver Post, 5/25/2003)

I am disappointed that I have not read of a French politician delivering a speech that went something like this:

"It brings me sorrow to find fault with one of our oldest allies, but I have no choice but to criticize the American ingratitude.

"If had had not been for French blood and treasure - the four regiments under Comte de Rochambeau in 1779, the millions of livres of financial assistance for arms and food for the army of General Washington, the fleet under Admiral de Grasse in 1781 - then the Americans would never have gained their independence.

"And if we had not in 1803 given them one of the best real-estate deals known to history - three cents an acre for the Louisiana Purchase - then they might still be a minor middling nation, not a superpower.

"Further, we might have advanced our own commercial interests in 1862. We could have formally recognized the Confederacy, whose cotton exports were vital to our textile industry. We could have dispatched our navy to destroy the Union blockade, and their nation might have been permanently divided.

"The Americans would not even have a country without our support, let alone a single nation of continental dimensions, and yet they now toil day and night to denounce our people - what sort of ungrateful wretches are they?"

Mr. Quillen might note that:

* Rochambeau arrived in America in 1780, and spent his first year dancing: "Rochambeau established his headquarters in Newport and settled into the social life with considerable success. The French military bands were a particular success at the many balls which Rochambeau hosted." The only action the French saw in the war was at Yorktown, where little French blood was shed.

* Talleyrand thought he got an excellent deal for Louisiana, which the French could not defend and preferred in American to British hands.

* The fact that France decided not to go to war with us in 1862 is something we should be grateful for -- why? Isn't not going to war what nations are supposed to do? If this kind of argument works, the U.S. deserves French gratitude for not fighting alongside Prussia in 1871.

But, aside from the shortage of causes for gratitude, the biggest defect of Mr. Quillen's argument is that it fails to tote up all items on the other side of the relational balance sheet. Jews might be grateful to Zola and allies for eventually getting Dreyfus freed, but they would not ignore Vichy collaboration in assessing their debt of gratitude to France. So too with the Franco-American balance sheet: France's assets with us are antique and depreciating, her liabilities are growing quickly, and the bottom line is close to insolvency.

Posted by Paul Jaminet at May 27, 2003 1:09 PM