Chirac Warns Britain of Modern Imperialism
By Andrew Grice
History will tell who was right on Iraq
Jacques Chirac warned George Bush and Tony Blair yesterday that their plans to spread democracy around the world must not turn into a modern-day colonialism based on America??s military might.
A week ago in Washington, President Bush and Mr Blair joined forces in a crusade to extend democratic and human rights to those countries that denied them. Yesterday, on a visit to London, the French President called for a ??strong Europe? and rejected the go-it-alone approach of American neoconservatives.
While backing the principle of democracy, M. Chirac warned: ??We must avoid any confusion between democratisation and Westernisation. For although our memory is sometimes short, the peoples submitted to the West??s domination in the past have not forgotten and are quick to see a resurgence of imperialism and colonialism.? However, Mr Blair and M. Chirac sought to ??move on? after two years of wrangling over Iraq as they discussed plans to step up Anglo-French co-operation on other issues.
M. Chirac was in a conciliatory mood at two hours of talks with Mr Blair at Downing Street to mark the 100th anniversary of the Entente Cordiale. At a joint press conference, they agreed to disagree on Iraq but stressed their unity on issues such as the Middle East peace process, defence co-operation, climate change, Africa, Iran and Afghanistan.
Recent meetings between the two leaders have been overshadowed by their dispute over the Iraq war. They adopted a different approach yesterday, openly admitting differences but saying they wanted to look to the future rather than the past.
Mr Blair said: ??The differences at the time were well known. But both of us are now working under UN resolution 1546, both of us want to see a stable and democratic Iraq. And both of us will do what we can to ensure that that happens.?
The President said Iraq was the ??one and only issue? over which France and Britain disagreed. ??As to who is right or wrong, history will tell,? he said. He said the two nations were working ??hand-in-glove? on other issues, adding: ??Where there is difference of opinion, it should be addressed in a spirit of solidarity, not conflict.?
Although he repeated his view that global terrorism had increased since the Iraq war, he softened his criticism by saying he was not making a direct link. He acknowledged Britain??s role as an an ??honest broker? between Europe and America because of its historical ties with the US, saying this was ??an advantage for Europe?.
In a speech to the International Institute for Strategic Studies, M. Chirac called for a ??new world order? based on a revival of multilateralism and respect for international law rather than ??a logic of power?.
He said neither Europe, the US nor any other political player could meet the challenges facing the world alone. ??It is by recognising the new reality of a multipolar and interdependent world that we will succeed in building a sounder and fairer international order,? he said.
French officials insisted he was not calling for the EU to challenge the power of the US but merely recognising the ??new reality? of today??s world. They stressed the points of agreement with Mr Blair, who rejected ??unilateralism for its own sake? in a major foreign affairs speech on Monday.
Peace
Chirac Warns Britain of Modern Imperialism
Summary: Former colonial power France is now scolding its economic rivals not to use American military power to create a neo-colonial bloc. And while it is easy to laugh at the site of Chirac, whose visage so perfectly embodies the corrupt republique francaise, he is still right about Iraq. It is an occupation built on State lies and willful ignorance on the part of the public. As British historian Felipe Fernandez- Armesto reminds us in GNN??s book True Lies:
??What was the reality of Iraq at the time of the start of the conflict? It was a very, very modest regional power, incapable of winning a war against any of its neighbors except Kuwait, which is a rather disproportionate conflict. A regional power, not to mention, that had been suffering a decade of economic recession, the central command of which had been eroded by devolution to the Kurdish autonomous region in the North which was barely able to control the restlessness of its own minorities, especially the Kurds and the Shia; which was in a state of? more approaching disintegration, which was ruled in an ad hoc fashion by a dictator with no real provision for the future or for succession. A state that had a notoriously inefficient armed forces, which had neither the resources nor the equipment to fight a significant war, which had weapons that were antiquated, virtually rusting away.
??And yet, you know, it could be convincingly sold to ignorant publics ?? the United States and Britain ?? as a major threat against world peace and a direct threat to the security of countries that are thousands of miles away, beyond the reach of its weapons and, indeed, beyond the reach of its agents. The consequence of that was a war, and that just attributes to the power of lies.?
Peace
