France's war president
Sarkozy relaunched
Will a popular Libyan adventure restore the president's fortunes?
Mar 24th 2011 | PARIS | from the print edition
"LET'S savour this moment when France overturned history," cooed a Sunday newspaper. "France has pulled off a masterstroke," chimed in Libération, a leftish daily. The French intervention in Libya was universally applauded, in a sign of cross-party unity not seen since they opposed the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Dominique de Villepin, a Gaullist rival to President Nicolas Sarkozy, said France had "lived up to its ideals". Even Jean-Marc Ayrault, the Socialists' parliamentary leader, applauded his country's "decisive action" and "commitment to the Libyan people".
As the television beamed images of fighter planes taking off from Corsica and the aircraft-carrier Charles de Gaulle steaming out of Toulon, there was a sense of restored pride but also giddiness at the abrupt turnaround in France's policy on north Africa. Only two months ago the French offered another Arab autocrat, in Tunisia, help in containing street riots. Earlier this month Mr Sarkozy's impulsive decision to recognise Libyan rebels surprised even his new foreign minister, Alain Juppé. Now France has put an air force behind its fine words, with military strikes against an Arab leader that would once have been unthinkable. So far, 66% of the French approve, according to one poll.
Will this be enough to lift Mr Sarkozy from his record low level of popularity? The president has sunk so far in public esteem that many praise his decision but doubt his motives. Mr Sarkozy faces a tough presidential election next year. With the far-right National Front resurgent, recent polls suggest that he might struggle even to make it into the second round. Humanitarian considerations have hardly guided his foreign policy so far, as Bernard Kouchner, his first foreign minister (and a human-rights advocate), found. Indeed, this week the French were flying the same Rafale fighters over Libya that they had recently been trying to sell to Muammar Qaddafi. If not for electoral gain, some ask, how to explain Mr Sarkozy's zeal for military intervention in the name of a "universal conscience"?
It is hard, when it comes to this mercurial president, to disentangle conviction from opportunism. His personal interest in playing the unifying moral leader, doing the right thing in the name of timeless French values, is evident. He leads as much from instinct as from calculation. And there has been plenty of improvisation along the way, not least when Bernard-Henri Lévy, a celebrity philosopher who had visited eastern Libya, brought rebel representatives to the Elysée palace.
But, for once, Mr Sarkozy's personal and France's national interests may coincide. Just across the Mediterranean from Libya, France feels exposed to the immigration a protracted civil war might prompt. Its credibility in the French-speaking Maghreb, its traditional sphere of influence, is at stake. Moreover, much of the French initiative has been led by Mr Juppé, who is not a close political ally of Mr Sarkozy. A former prime minister, and foreign minister in the 1990s, he brings experience and authority to the job. Initially hesitant about going into Libya, he has acted as a useful counterweight to the impetuous president, who has in turn given him space to speak for France. Mr Juppé went in person to plead France's cause at the UN, the only national minister to do so.
Mr Sarkozy has taken a gamble with this mission, which has no clear endgame and which could yet turn out to be messy. In a parliamentary debate this week the government said it had already succeeded in preventing a bloodbath in Benghazi. The real trouble for Mr Sarkozy is that, even if voters approve of the Libyan operation, they do not yet approve of him. In the first round of cantonal elections on March 20th, the day after French jets struck, his party scored just 17%, only two points ahead of the National Front.
from the print edition | Europe
An interesting article from The Economist. Libya could be Sarkozy's Iraq (both in terms of the popularity boost and an eventual national quagmire).
Also, out of the NATO's big three (Obama, Cameron, Sarkozy) he looks like the one with most balls, which is not usual for a French leader. Strange how these things change.
Sarkozy has been jonesing for something to save him from his lies and treason, and if this is enough then the french people deserve their fate.
QuoteAlso, out of the NATO's big three (Obama, Cameron, Sarkozy) he looks like the one with most balls, which is not usual for a French leader. Strange how these things change.
Cameron must hate Sarko. Cameron's the first leader to mention a no fly zone, first one to call for military intervention of some sort, first one to call for Gaddafi to go. It's just that even his self-promotion is nothing compared to Sarko's.
It's also not that weird. It's just that France, generally speaking, is like America. So she finds it difficult to play with others. I think the trouble over a command structure indicates that. For all the talk of Turkey and of France's worries about the Arab response to NATO I can't shake the suspicion that they were more afraid that NATO would mean a dilution of French influence, as opposed to an ad hoc group that occassionally meets in Paris and is dominated by the US, UK and France.
But when France wants to intervene, she does. Whether it's Mitterand flattening Beirut, de Gaulle saying France would nuke first (something Chirac reiterated with relation to Iran) or this. Sometimes their bellicosity is just a pose though, again Mitterand stands out. He feigned moral outrage about Yugoslavia and demanded European intervention, secure in the knowledge that the the British were set against it.
What's really odd is the number of conflicts Britain and America's been involved in. By my count Britain's had 7 over the past 20 years - we're still in 3-4 of them, excluding Libya. Maybe it's a post-cold war thing, or a post-post-Imperial thing, but I'm not sure it's entirely healthy. Of those conflicts the French have been involved in 5, including Libya.
Yeah I think its fairly obvious that Sarko wants this whole conflict to prop up his image and let France look like she matters.
Which will at least provide some hilarity for the upcoming, sad clusterfuck in Libya.
Quote"France has pulled off a masterstroke,"
I'd say so. They got America to do most of the hard work.
Anyways, I'll enjoy a Le Pen victory.
I love Le Pen :wub:
He has praised the Confederacy in the past, and I have unreserved support for him.
In my opinion Sarkozy has acted the most risky of 'the big three' described (Cameron, Obama, Sarkozy). That said, his risks have paid off, and I fully support the French position on Libya.
Quote from: Lettow77 on March 26, 2011, 07:55:46 PM
I love Le Pen :wub:
He has praised the Confederacy in the past, and I have unreserved support for him.
Well, Le Pen has been ruined for me. Go Socialists!
Kind of bad that it took Lettow's endorsement to do that for you.
Quote from: Lettow77 on March 26, 2011, 07:55:46 PM
I love Le Pen :wub:
He has praised the Confederacy in the past, and I have unreserved support for him.
Link or it never happened. It would be quite original for Le Pen...
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 27, 2011, 09:39:38 AM
Kind of bad that it took Lettow's endorsement to do that for you.
Le Pen would have given maximum entertainment value. But the squeetard tainted my fun.
Quote from: Lettow77 on March 26, 2011, 07:55:46 PM
I love Le Pen :wub:
He has praised the Confederacy in the past, and I have unreserved support for him.
Le Pen handed over to his daughter. So it's "she" now as far as running for president is concerned.
That's fine. I'm sure she's been well imprinted on.
She's more presentable, anyway. We like her too.
Quote from: Ed Anger on March 27, 2011, 07:06:54 AM
Quote from: Lettow77 on March 26, 2011, 07:55:46 PM
I love Le Pen :wub:
He has praised the Confederacy in the past, and I have unreserved support for him.
Well, Le Pen has been ruined for me. Go Socialists!
It's his daughter running. She has gone on the record as saying that the Confederacy deserved its fate, as only strong cultures deserve to live.
Quote from: Neil on March 27, 2011, 06:50:08 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on March 27, 2011, 07:06:54 AM
Quote from: Lettow77 on March 26, 2011, 07:55:46 PM
I love Le Pen :wub:
He has praised the Confederacy in the past, and I have unreserved support for him.
Well, Le Pen has been ruined for me. Go Socialists!
It's his daughter running. She has gone on the record as saying that the Confederacy deserved its fate, as only strong cultures deserve to live.
And the irony of the imminent death of the French is probably lost on her.
le mew.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F_fw7iF68JR8k%2FRi7gTtgeUQI%2FAAAAAAAACjc%2Fpy7JcCRwxqw%2Fs320%2Fmario-lemieux.jpg&hash=6a8da91619d74fe250c700181127c00d16c337a0)
Quote from: Ed Anger on March 27, 2011, 06:56:33 PM
le mew.
Quote from: Slargos on March 27, 2011, 06:53:25 PM
And the irony of the imminent death of the French is probably lost on her.
We shall see. In 2001 when this canard was first brought to my attention I was told France would be majority muslim any minute now...yet peculiarly the percentage has gone from an estimated 10% to an estimated 9% of France in that time. Maybe the Muslims are becoming proper non-believing Frenchies?
Quote from: Valmy on March 27, 2011, 07:23:51 PM
Quote from: Slargos on March 27, 2011, 06:53:25 PM
And the irony of the imminent death of the French is probably lost on her.
We shall see. In 2001 when this canard was first brought to my attention I was told France would be majority muslim any minute now...yet peculiarly the percentage has gone from an estimated 10% to an estimated 9% of France in that time. Maybe the Muslims are becoming proper non-believing Frenchies?
Or they're fudging the numbers. Or you are.
Quote from: Slargos on March 27, 2011, 07:30:34 PM
Or they're fudging the numbers. Or you are.
Me? I just read what stats I see on wiki and CIA World factbook.
Quote from: Valmy on March 27, 2011, 07:43:45 PM
Quote from: Slargos on March 27, 2011, 07:30:34 PM
Or they're fudging the numbers. Or you are.
Me? I just read what stats I see on wiki and CIA World factbook.
I'm merely fronting alternative explanations. :P
Regardless, 10% is a horrifying number whichever way you spin it.
Neil, did she..really say such a thing?
Could you cite this? that's a pretty damning indictment of her, if so
Quote from: Slargos on March 27, 2011, 07:00:02 PM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F_fw7iF68JR8k%2FRi7gTtgeUQI%2FAAAAAAAACjc%2Fpy7JcCRwxqw%2Fs320%2Fmario-lemieux.jpg&hash=6a8da91619d74fe250c700181127c00d16c337a0)Quote from: Ed Anger on March 27, 2011, 06:56:33 PM
le mew.
very good.
I applaud the French for taking a lead role in this. Seems the French have more concrete plans for an end game in Libya, and looking to help make some significant change. Won't likely be willing for a scenario of Gaddafi remaining in power, where it seems others are just fixated on preventing the Rebels from being slaughtered en-masse.
Quote from: KRonn on March 28, 2011, 08:49:49 AM
I applaud the French for taking a lead role in this. Seems the French have more concrete plans for an end game in Libya, and looking to help make some significant change. Won't likely be willing for a scenario of Gaddafi remaining in power, where it seems others are just fixated on preventing the Rebels from being slaughtered en-masse.
Seems like the quintessential "wag the Frog" operation. The interesting question is "who will the French bomb when the rebels turn on each other?" As Iraq showed, getting rid of the dictator is the easy part.
Quote from: grumbler on March 28, 2011, 11:35:54 AM
Quote from: KRonn on March 28, 2011, 08:49:49 AM
I applaud the French for taking a lead role in this. Seems the French have more concrete plans for an end game in Libya, and looking to help make some significant change. Won't likely be willing for a scenario of Gaddafi remaining in power, where it seems others are just fixated on preventing the Rebels from being slaughtered en-masse.
Seems like the quintessential "wag the Frog" operation. The interesting question is "who will the French bomb when the rebels turn on each other?" As Iraq showed, getting rid of the dictator is the easy part.
Yep, exactly. The aftermath is the tough part, and who really are the Rebel factions? The main tribes aren't too friendly to each other, and I think some serious divisions there.
Quote from: grumbler on March 28, 2011, 11:35:54 AM
Seems like the quintessential "wag the Frog" operation. The interesting question is "who will the French bomb when the rebels turn on each other?" As Iraq showed, getting rid of the dictator is the easy part.
I'm guessing they (we? NATO? the Easter Bunny?) will do some quick, half-assed nation-building & declare it a success just before it goes all to hell. Hopefully nobody on our side gets it in their mind that they need to incubate a western-style democracy there. That's going to require an awful lot of hand-holding for short-term success and long-term is probably doomed to failure.
Realistic goals in Libya should be:
1) Get rid of Gadaffi. If he's allowed to remain in power over part of the country for any length of time, he's dangerous to the West. He still has money & can/will sponsor terrorism to get back at us as long as he has any sort of power. We crossed that line when the first bomb dropped & there's no going back.
2) Ensure that whatever power structure succeeds Gadaffi is not a threat to the West, maintains stability, and is at least slightly more responsive to human rights than Gadaffi is (might be tricky to accomplish all three at the same time).
3) Stability. I mentioned it in #2 but it's worth mentioning again. Libya's oil needs to flow freely and it would behoove Europe to re-establish the deal they had with Gadaffi to clamp down on the flow of illegal immigrants headed to Europe.
Quote from: Slargos on March 27, 2011, 07:00:02 PM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F_fw7iF68JR8k%2FRi7gTtgeUQI%2FAAAAAAAACjc%2Fpy7JcCRwxqw%2Fs320%2Fmario-lemieux.jpg&hash=6a8da91619d74fe250c700181127c00d16c337a0)Quote from: Ed Anger on March 27, 2011, 06:56:33 PM
le mew.
It's spelled Lemieux. EPIC FAIL.