October 26, 2004
PHILO-AMERICANISM SWEEPS PARIS
France eyes 'new alliance' with White House (Colin Randall, The Telegraph, October 26th, 2004)
The French government said yesterday that it would seek a "new alliance" with whomever won the US presidential election next week.A diplomatic chill has characterised exchanges between Paris and Washington over the past two years as a result of French opposition to the war in Iraq. But the French foreign minister, Michel Barnier, said that the two countries needed to forge a new alliance. This alliance "must be based on mutual respect, which is not allegiance", he said.
Mr Barnier declined to express a preference between President George W Bush and his Democrat rival, Senator John Kerry. His brief remarks on French television indicated both the importance Paris attached to building a better understanding with America, and the likely limitations of any immediate improvement.[...]
The Left-wing newspaper Libération yesterday said that victory for Mr Bush would maintain America as an arrogant, imperialistic super-power guided by "a handful of ideologues hungry for adventure but deaf to the planet". Putting Mr Kerry in the White House would "perhaps" mean a more multilateral approach.
I was talking to the wife the other day and suggested we should forge a new alliance–one based upon mutual respect rather than those tiresome old promises of allegiance. Party time!!
What has France done since Napoleon that should entitle it to respect?
Posted by: Bart at October 26, 2004 7:00 AMWe respect their ability to stab us in the back, and they respect our ability to nuke them to the Stone Age. I think that's what he means.
Posted by: pj at October 26, 2004 8:31 AM[D]eaf to the planet...
Even if it were true, why would, or should, it matter ?
It's a charge often heard, but after two years of asking people making it why it matters, I've yet to hear a convincing response. They assume that it's self-evident, and requires no more explanation than "love your mother".
However, although it's nice to be liked, it's not essential. The major nations who didn't send troops in support of the US' Iraqi adventure wouldn't have sent troops if America had been more understanding of their position; and all of them contributed money to help Iraq rebuild.
I fail to see what the US has lost by not being universally liked.
If anyone has a concrete example of something positive that was occuring before Iraq, that isn't now happening because of Iraq, I'd love to hear about it.
Posted by: Michael Herdegen at October 26, 2004 10:44 AMWhat dream world are they living in? One thing about W is clear: if you cross him, he does not forget and forgive.
Posted by: jd watson at October 26, 2004 2:27 PMTrust but verify.
Posted by: Ptah at October 26, 2004 2:36 PM>What dream world are they living in?
One where the Sun King is still on the throne at Versailles, and all the world comes on their knees to worship France.
Posted by: Ken at October 26, 2004 8:29 PM