Some Thoughts
On France:
Mr. Douste-Blazy told reporters yesterday,"In the region, there is of course a country such as Iran — a great country, a great people, and a great civilization, which is respected and which plays a stabilizing role in the region."
There is much gnashing of teeth and grinding of gears over that particular statement right now, and I thought I would explain.
Look, it's not shocking, and it's not dumb. Think about it. If you were France, and you were trying to create a diplomatic breakthrough with Iran, it's naive to think it wouldn't be necessary to meet a certain amount of conditions precedent. Now, that could mean a negatively-reinforced condition as well as any other kind; it does not mean mere appeasing. But you would have to give something if you were asking of your interlocutor what France is asking Iran. Because fundamentally, France is asking Iran to lose face in the international arena, respect and maybe even honor in the domestic one.
It was the Iranians themselves who made this into such a Definitive Issue and Big Deal (and in a very real and worrying sense Iran committed early on to go all the way), and they are not going to give up until it is brought home that the alternative is much, much better.
Right now might be the time that rethinking is going on (with their proxy Hezbollah on the ropes), and if it is, you can be sure that the Western countries know about it. The amount of tension it would take to make the Mullahs really, actually think about giving up their nukes would definitely be enough to register on the radar screens of the West. An "increase" in meetings, perhaps, or irrational behavior. Or maybe if we are good (and sometimes we are), an informant or two on the inside. We can suck up information in an unprecedented number of ways, and move the analysis up at historically breakneck speeds. If the Iranians are getting fidgety, you can be sure we know about it.
And what better way to help that process along than for France to issue this statement? Firstly, she's allowing the Mullahs to make an informed decision: she's helping the rulers feel like rulers who have futures being rulers, and such a message might, just might, sway them at a moment of weakness. And when one complains that the statements are false and condemns them, what must be understood is that the statements are not meant to be true (they aren't true), they are meant to do something. They were said for effect, to affect, and they must be analyzed in that light. Otherwise, we are simply projecting a type of personalized shading on France's very-clearly-diplomatic action.
Secondly, France has set herself up to be the Wink Wink Nod Nod great power, the softer landing into modernity when you can't match the piety of the Great Uncle Sam. While America goes to church at eight in the morning, France is the chick in the bar at the end of the night. She's the girl flaunting her wares and playing to ego, with lipstick on the the rim of her third martini.
And there she is, and it's closing time. She's sort of cute, but she's not as hot as that blond who left an hour ago. Now she was hot. Unfortunately, she was also unattainable.
The bartender calls last call, and you know time is running out. You don't want to do it, but it's just so easy.
[Update: 8-2-06 11:47]
France to boycott talks on international force in Lebanon. I guess Iran couldn't take the hint. So long, Hezbollah, and thanks for all the fish.
[Update 2]
Question: Would France sell out Israel to buy a nuclear free Iran? Would she allow Hezbollah to survive militarily and politically if it bought her a diplomatic coup with the Mullahs?
Of course she would. And it looks like she's been turned down. Iran has decided that nukes are more important than Hezbollah, and will now end up with neither.
On Lebanon (ht Rufus at BC):
If Hezb Allah is totally wiped out, at the expense of Lebanon, I see a bleak future for stability, let alone peace in the Middle East. If Hezb Allah is disarmed and Lebanon left mainly in tact, with wise rehabilitation assistance from the international community, I see a comparatively bright future, though not sunny. Simply and generally put, save Lebanon, save the Middle East.
That agrees with what I wrote here.
Mr. Douste-Blazy told reporters yesterday,"In the region, there is of course a country such as Iran — a great country, a great people, and a great civilization, which is respected and which plays a stabilizing role in the region."
There is much gnashing of teeth and grinding of gears over that particular statement right now, and I thought I would explain.
Look, it's not shocking, and it's not dumb. Think about it. If you were France, and you were trying to create a diplomatic breakthrough with Iran, it's naive to think it wouldn't be necessary to meet a certain amount of conditions precedent. Now, that could mean a negatively-reinforced condition as well as any other kind; it does not mean mere appeasing. But you would have to give something if you were asking of your interlocutor what France is asking Iran. Because fundamentally, France is asking Iran to lose face in the international arena, respect and maybe even honor in the domestic one.
It was the Iranians themselves who made this into such a Definitive Issue and Big Deal (and in a very real and worrying sense Iran committed early on to go all the way), and they are not going to give up until it is brought home that the alternative is much, much better.
Right now might be the time that rethinking is going on (with their proxy Hezbollah on the ropes), and if it is, you can be sure that the Western countries know about it. The amount of tension it would take to make the Mullahs really, actually think about giving up their nukes would definitely be enough to register on the radar screens of the West. An "increase" in meetings, perhaps, or irrational behavior. Or maybe if we are good (and sometimes we are), an informant or two on the inside. We can suck up information in an unprecedented number of ways, and move the analysis up at historically breakneck speeds. If the Iranians are getting fidgety, you can be sure we know about it.
And what better way to help that process along than for France to issue this statement? Firstly, she's allowing the Mullahs to make an informed decision: she's helping the rulers feel like rulers who have futures being rulers, and such a message might, just might, sway them at a moment of weakness. And when one complains that the statements are false and condemns them, what must be understood is that the statements are not meant to be true (they aren't true), they are meant to do something. They were said for effect, to affect, and they must be analyzed in that light. Otherwise, we are simply projecting a type of personalized shading on France's very-clearly-diplomatic action.
Secondly, France has set herself up to be the Wink Wink Nod Nod great power, the softer landing into modernity when you can't match the piety of the Great Uncle Sam. While America goes to church at eight in the morning, France is the chick in the bar at the end of the night. She's the girl flaunting her wares and playing to ego, with lipstick on the the rim of her third martini.
And there she is, and it's closing time. She's sort of cute, but she's not as hot as that blond who left an hour ago. Now she was hot. Unfortunately, she was also unattainable.
The bartender calls last call, and you know time is running out. You don't want to do it, but it's just so easy.
[Update: 8-2-06 11:47]
France to boycott talks on international force in Lebanon. I guess Iran couldn't take the hint. So long, Hezbollah, and thanks for all the fish.
[Update 2]
Question: Would France sell out Israel to buy a nuclear free Iran? Would she allow Hezbollah to survive militarily and politically if it bought her a diplomatic coup with the Mullahs?
Of course she would. And it looks like she's been turned down. Iran has decided that nukes are more important than Hezbollah, and will now end up with neither.
On Lebanon (ht Rufus at BC):
If Hezb Allah is totally wiped out, at the expense of Lebanon, I see a bleak future for stability, let alone peace in the Middle East. If Hezb Allah is disarmed and Lebanon left mainly in tact, with wise rehabilitation assistance from the international community, I see a comparatively bright future, though not sunny. Simply and generally put, save Lebanon, save the Middle East.
That agrees with what I wrote here.
posted by John Aristides at 8/01/2006 01:49:00 AM
2 Comments:
very much enjoyed your thoughts on the France/Iran dance,
aristides.
especially Updates 1 & 2.
I think you're probably right about France's approach toward Iran, but I do not think the U.S. and France are tightly coordinating diplomatic moves.
It's definitely quite possible that I am wrong on this. Way back towards the beginning of the diplomatic dance, I assumed that the EU-3, Israel, US, and to some extent Siniora's government were on the same page, since they all had the same enemies. Given that Iran is the center of gravity, and given that Iran has diplomatically abused the EU-3 over the past few years, I assumed that the game would be played out at the UN (and NATO) with coordinated disagreements between the allies to extend Israel's window of opportunity.
Of course, that may be a theory too far, since it was no secret that US and France were going to have different views on this matter. Therefore, predicting such differing views as conspiratorial collusion is to all practical effects unfalsifiable. But I have been reliably told that France and US coordinate much more willingly than the public perception accounts for.
Post a Comment
<< Home