<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
   <title>shdejong&apos;s Blog</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/shdejong/" />
   <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/shdejong/atom.xml" />
   <id>tag:www.talkingpointsmemo.com,2008:/talk/blogs/shdejong//3638</id>
   <updated>2008-06-25T08:37:58Z</updated>
   
   <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type Pro 4.21-en</generator>


<entry>
   <title>France Adopts a Multilateral Defence Policy</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/06/france-adopts-a-multilateral-d.php" />
   <id>tag:tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com,2008:/talk//17.201501</id>
   
   <published>2008-06-25T08:37:58Z</published>
   <updated>2008-06-25T08:37:58Z</updated>
   
   <summary>The 2008 White Paper sets the tone for the next decade of French defense policy. Although France&apos;s &quot;loss of independence&quot; is controversial, many welcome the progress towards synchronization of the French, European, and transatlantic security and defense strategies.The French White...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>shdejong</name>
      
   </author>
   
      <category term="Cafe" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/shdejong/">
      <![CDATA[The 2008 White Paper sets the tone for the next decade of French defense policy. Although France's "loss of independence" is controversial, many welcome the progress towards <a href="http://www.atlantic-community.org/index/articles/view/France_Adopts_a_Multilateral_Defense_Policy">synchronization of the French, European, and transatlantic security and defense strategies</a>.<br /><br /><p>The French <a href="http://www.ambafrance-uk.org/New-French-White-Paper-on-defence.html">White Paper</a> on defense and national security presented
by President Sarkozy on June 17 provides the country with a new military and
security strategy intended to modernize and rationalize the French approach to
defense, security, and foreign policy.<br /><br /> Despite undergoing revision in 1994, France's
military strategy was still organized as a response to the challenges of the
Cold War. In an attempt to address the threats of this century and adapt to a
new international order, France
is now moving away from its distinctive independent course. There is no plan,
however, to relinquish control of the nuclear deterrent or the command of armed
forces.<br /><br />
The new policy
includes plans for a reduction of defense personnel, a restructuring of
the
defense estate, and an improvement of coordination. The focus is on
national defense and intelligence activities. Yet from a foreign policy
perspective, the paper's most important provisions concern the
reintegration of
France
into NATO 's military command structure and the furthering of European
defense policy and cooperation.<br /><br />
The commentaries and
analyses listed below discuss the military, diplomatic and financial
implications of the French White Paper and shed light on some of
the controversies that have arisen. The opinions are drawn from a
selection of French, American,
British, and German sources. <br /><br /> <b><br />Le Monde</b><b>:</b><i> <a href="http://www.lemonde.fr/opinions/article/2008/06/18/la-defense-entre-recentrage-et-alignement-par-louis-gautier_1059721_3232.html">La defense entre recentrage et alignement</a></i><br /><br />
In a critical
assessment of the French White Paper, Louis Gautier argues that despite
providing for more coherence in practice, other
aspects of the Paper, such as the articles concerning NATO
reintegration and European integration, are merely products of
political maneuver.</p>
<ul><li>Instead of offering guidelines for future decisions, the White
Paper reflects the President's present position. He consistently
influenced and disrupted the commission with his public announcements
regarding NATO, dissuasion, Afghanistan, Africa and the French approach
to terrorism. </li><li>Yet the White Paper does provide for a
     more coherent policy. When compared to the earlier approach of which the
     scope was too broad, the new strategy will enable concentration on major
     issues, a better screening of priorities, and a focus on strategic
     interests.</li><li>Although European defense should be prioritized, the articles dealing with this dimension of French defense policy
     do not do justice to European ambitions in this field.</li><li>In contrast, due to its symbolic significance, France's much less
important intention to reintegrate NATO has been paid a great deal of
attention. In fact, this move does not even present any concrete
interest for either party at this stage.<br /></li><li>As a matter of fact, rejoining NATO may be counterproductive since this move bears heavy
     meaning for those in Moscow and Beijing who still
     perceive NATO as the West's spearhead. From this perspective, the White
     Paper merely appears as a tool for Sarkozy to zealously attempt
     transatlantic alignment.</li></ul>
<p><b><br />The New York Times</b><i>: <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/17/world/europe/17france.html">In defense policy, France
turns to US and Europe</a></i><br /><br /> This editorial
welcomes France's
adoption of a more modern, effective, and outward looking defense strategy which
should allow for increased collaboration.</p>
<ul><li> The White Paper outlines a plan for a smaller,
     more efficient, and increasingly cost-effective French army. France will be better equipped to
     address new threats. </li><li>The outcome of the new strategy should
     enable France and the EU to act alone and be taken more seriously on the
     international stage. France
     should therefore adopt a less bilateral approach and intensify cooperation
     with the EU, NATO, and regional organizations even if it maintains its
     independent nuclear program on the side.</li><li>The fact that Sarkozy wanted progress and rapprochement within NATO
to run parallel to progress within EU was initially a problem for the
US. The last few months have shown the EU and NATO are best
complementing rather than competing with one another.<br /></li></ul>
<p><b><br />Financial Times</b><i>: <a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1a213a74-3d4a-11dd-bbb5-0000779fd2ac.html">Knowledge
holds the key to French defence</a></i><br /><br /> For Francois Heisbourg, France's downsizing
of field operations in favour of intelligence activities presents advantages
both for France's approach to new threats and its cooperation with partners.</p>
<ul><li>While prevention is meant to enable a more cost-effective defense
     and security policy, increased focus on intelligence is intended to turn France into
     a valuable asset for international partners. </li><li>The setting of new priorities does not mean nuclear deterrence
     is going to end. In the words of Sir Michael Howard: "the nuclear dragon may be sleeping, but
     it is certainly not dead."</li></ul>
<p><b><br />Time:</b><i> </i><a href="http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1815385,00.html?xid=rss-world"><i>Sarkozy makes eyes at NATO</i></a><br /><br /> Leo Cendrowicz
interprets the French White Paper as a strategy to strengthen EU defense and an
attempt to substantially reduce French defense expenses.</p>
<ul><li>Sarkozy's move to reintegrate NATO is merely
     strategic since it will allow France to capitalize on its
     transatlantic approach and "find stronger backing for EU defense projects
     among NATO's European members." </li><li>At the same time however, this decision
     has been met with the French public's opposition - a <a href="http://www.lemonde.fr/politique/article/2008/06/19/un-groupe-de-generaux-denonce-l-imposture-du-livre-blanc_1060566_823448.html?xtor=RSS-3208.">vehement group of
     army generals</a> in particular, are argueing that France will be weakened by the
     reduction of its armed forces.</li><li>He quotes Daniel Korski who argues that the establishment is not
prepared to admit the real reason for renouncing so-called
independence: France's inability to shoulder alone any longer the
financial burden of an independent defense policy. </li></ul>
<p><b><br />Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung</b><i>: <a href="http://www.faz.net/s/Rub7FC5BF30C45B402F96E964EF8CE790E1/Doc%7EEFD5D7962150A4B24BEFFC1056798BCAD%7EATpl%7EEcommon%7EScontent.html?rss_aktuell">Eine neue Verteidigungsdoktrin</a></i></p>
<p>France's new White Paper will enable France to cut military costs
and modernize its army. Progress on the European front is promising in
theory but could prove disappointing in practice.</p>
<ul><li>France's new defense and security strategy will
     enable the country to meet the new challenges of transnational terrorism
     and nuclear proliferation. Since the White Paper does not provide for an
     increase in military budget, the new approach is an attempt to effect the simultaneous modernization and rationalization of
     the army. </li><li>Having secured US approval for progress on
     the level of European defense, France has agreed to reintegrate
     the NATO command structure. Regarding European defense, however, progress
     needs to be made at the level of implementation because the concept
     remains much more impressive on paper than in reality.</li></ul>
<p><i>This press round-up was prepared by members of the <a href="http://atlantic-community.org">Atlantic Community</a> editorial team.</i></p><p> </p>
<p> <br /></p><br />]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Is France Becoming More American?</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/06/is-france-becoming-more-americ.php" />
   <id>tag:tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com,2008:/talk//17.201342</id>
   
   <published>2008-06-24T13:11:19Z</published>
   <updated>2008-06-24T13:11:19Z</updated>
   
   <summary><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt; PRO:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;ul&gt; &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pro-American Rhetoric&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;br /&gt;Braving the current of French popular opinion, Sarkozy acknowledges that France has little to gain from systematically opposing the United States. A pro-American approach enables France to voice its visions of the international...]]></summary>
   <author>
      <name>shdejong</name>
      
   </author>
   
      <category term="Cafe" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/shdejong/">
      <![CDATA[

<p>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;
PRO:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</p>

<p>&lt;ul&gt;</p>

<p>&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pro-American
Rhetoric&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;br /&gt;Braving the current of French popular
opinion, Sarkozy acknowledges that France has little to gain from
systematically opposing the United States. A pro-American approach enables
France to voice its visions of the international order. The shift was made
explicit as early as &lt;a
href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6631125.stm"&gt;May 6,
2007&lt;/a&gt; on the evening of his electoral victory: &amp;ldquo;I want to
reach out to our American friends to tell them they can count on our friendship
[&amp;hellip;] I want to tell them that France will always be on their side
when they need her &amp;hellip;&amp;rdquo; Sarkozy&amp;rsquo;s visit to the
United States in &lt;a
href="http://www2.nysun.com/article/66054"&gt;November 2007&lt;/a&gt;
gave the president the opportunity to express his admiration for the US and
emerge as the new central partner for Washington in Europe after
Blair&amp;rsquo;s departure. His advisory and parliamentary staff has
contributed to the political rapprochement. His foreign minister, &lt;a
href="http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9946947"&gt;Bernard
Kouchner&lt;/a&gt;, is famously transatlanticist. The president&amp;rsquo;s
major foreign policy advisor, Jean David Levitte, spent the last years working
on calming the transatlantic storm in his capacity as French ambassador to
Washington and has successfully helped the president rebuild strong
transatlantic relations.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;/li&gt;</p>

<p>&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Geostrategic
Conversion&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Rapprochement of the two nations has been
facilitated by Sarkozy and Kouchner&amp;rsquo;s support of the United
States&amp;rsquo; tough line regarding &lt;a
href="http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/08/27/europe/france.php"&gt;Iran&amp;rsquo;s
nuclear program&lt;/a&gt;. This contrasts with other European
leaders&amp;rsquo; positions as well as Chirac&amp;rsquo;s earlier cautious
approach to conflicts and tensions in the Greater Middle East. Sarkozy
additionally shares Washington&amp;rsquo;s serious take on security threats to
Israel and its critical posture towards &lt;a href="http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/08/27/europe/france.php"&gt;Russia
and China&lt;/a&gt;, especially with regard to their human rights records and
their perceived unfair and imbalanced trade policies.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/li&gt;</p>

<p>&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Military
Rapprochement&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Sarkozy has agreed to increase
France&amp;rsquo;s contribution to the war effort in Afghanistan by adding 1500
to 1700 to the existing French contingent of 1600, sending combat troops to the
East, and providing military arsenal. Yet the main new element of French military
cooperation with the United States is&nbsp;
Sarkozy&amp;rsquo;s commitment to reintegrating France into &lt;a
href="http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/france_159/discovering-france_2005/france-from-to-z_1978/defence_1983/france-and-nato_1435.html"&gt;NATO&lt;/a&gt;&amp;rsquo;s
military wing. He announced this bold step at the NATO Summit in Bucharest in
early April. In exchange for rejoining, Sarkozy is likely to demand France be
granted control of a key NATO command. &lt;/li&gt;</p>

<p>&lt;/ul&gt;</p>

<p>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;
CON:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</p>

<p>&lt;ul&gt;</p>

<p>&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Sarkozy
the &amp;ldquo;Old European&amp;rdquo;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;One element of
continued French &amp;ldquo;Anti-Americanism&amp;rdquo; is Sarkozy&amp;rsquo;s
alignment with the policies of &amp;ldquo;Old Europe.&amp;rdquo; At the &lt;a
href="http://www.ambafrance-uk.org/President-Sarkozy-speaks-at.html"&gt;NATO
Summit in Bucharest&lt;/a&gt;, he sided with Germany, Britain, and Spain in
their opposition to Bush&amp;rsquo;s plan to offer MAPs to Ukraine and Georgia
which revealed the limits of his support to Washington. He does not ignore that
&amp;ldquo;Old Europe&amp;rdquo; remains tied together by common geostrategic
challenges and interests that can conflict with America&amp;rsquo;s
international objectives. The breach between the Bush administration and
&amp;ldquo;Old Europe&amp;rdquo; is particularly evident regarding climate
change. The war in Iraq also remains a thorn in the relationship between France
and the United States since Chirac&amp;rsquo;s applauded rejection of military
involvement in 2003. In addition, Sarkozy holds Washington responsible for the
&lt;a href="http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/article2827809.ece"&gt;weakness
of the dollar&lt;/a&gt; and blames the US for not acting to combat the crisis
efficiently enough, thereby harming French foreign trade.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br
/&gt; &lt;/li&gt;</p>

<p>&lt;li&gt;
&lt;strong&gt; A Split Commitment: NATO-ESDP&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Despite
Sarkozy&amp;rsquo;s praise of NATO, it can be argued that he merely views the
Alliance as a tool to strengthen France&amp;rsquo;s military capacity and
global involvement. By endorsing full membership of NATO, he may be hoping to
restrict it to a role which leaves room for the development of a parallel and
counterbalancing European Security and Defense Policy. This is why Sarkozy
demanded US endorsement of the &lt;a
href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/27/opinion/main3972145.shtml?source=RSSattr=Opinion_3972145
"&gt;ESDP&lt;/a&gt; in exchange for France rejoining the military
structures of NATO. A few days before the Bucharest Summit, Sarkozy paid a
short visit to the UK to secure Gordon Brown&amp;rsquo;s endorsement of the
ESDP. Committing to NATO proved necessary to negotiate with the Americans and
the British since both fear that the ESDP could become a rival to NATO if
France did not rejoin.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;</p>

<p>&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;French
Unilateralism&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Sarkozy's unilateral foreign policy has
hindered transatlantic progress within the last year and antagonized both his
European and international partners. Among other things, Sarkozy acted in
Darfur before the international community could decide on a common strategy; he
carried out nuclear agreements with states such as the United Arab Emirates
without involving the US; and finally, he welcomed the &lt;a
href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/10/AR2007121001375.html"&gt;Libyan
Colonel Gaddafi&lt;/a&gt; in Paris although the dictator&amp;rsquo;s
credentials are still highly questionable. On the European level too, many of
Sarkozy&amp;rsquo;s initiatives have been unilateral. These include the
proposal of a mini-treaty instead of the European Constitution in September
2006, the re-discussion of the Turkish question, and the forcing of the &lt;a
href="http://www.euractiv.com/en/future-eu/sarkozy-mediterranean-union-plans-irk-merkel/article-169080"&gt;Mediterranean
Union&lt;/a&gt;. In the light of Sarkozy&amp;rsquo;s prioritization of national
interests, these elements of his foreign policy seem less dictated by the
intention to revive transatlantic relations or the promotion of multilateralism
than by the aim of restoring France&amp;rsquo;s great power status.</p>

]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

</feed>

 

