by Dick Morris
Critics of President Bush say he has failed to
rally our "traditional allies" - like France - to support his aggressive efforts
to disarm Saddam Hussein. But since the Gulf War, in which France had token
involvement, Paris has never been our ally where Iraq is concerned. Indeed, it
has been more allied with Iraq than with us.
Throughout the '90s, France constantly pushed for
the lifting of economic sanctions against Iraq. Bemoaning the fate of the Iraqi
people, the French pushed to allow Saddam to sell oil on the global market (the
so-called oil-for-food program). When America and Britain demanded tough
controls on the funds from oil sales to be sure they did not go for arms, France
objected that such controls would undermine Iraqi sovereignty.
Largely as a result of French pressure, the
oil-for-food program was implemented, allowing Saddam to sell 500,000 barrels
per day on the open market (about a sixth of his pre-war production).
But Saddam couldn't do much rearming with the oil
money, because U.N. inspectors were looking over his shoulder. So in November
1997, he announced that he would bar Americans from the 77-member inspection
team. The other inspectors withdrew in protest and solidarity with their
American mates. The world was plunged into crisis. Once again, France took
Saddam's side.
President Bill Clinton sent two aircraft carriers
to the gulf and vowed that Saddam "must comply unconditionally with the will of
the international community." French Foreign Minister Hubert Vedrine criticized
Clinton for giving Saddam the impression that "there would never be a way out of
the tunnel [of sanctions]," even if he got rid of all his weapons programs."
France demanded an end to all sanctions and called
for unlimited oil sales by Iraq. Then suddenly Saddam seemed to back down in the
face of Clinton's pressure and admitted the U.S. inspectors back in.
Had there been concessions to Saddam? Oh no, said
Deputy National Security Adviser Sandy Berger: "There's no deal. There's no
concessions."
But the French knew better. As Vedrine said, "The
Americans bent a little." Pushed by France, the United States agreed to let
Saddam increase his oil sales, ultimately letting sales grow to 2 million
barrels per day. A concession to Iraq? No way, said Clinton's people: It was a
concession to France; we were not giving in to Saddam.
Then, the next year, Saddam barred all U.N.
inspectors. The final nail in the coffin of controls on Iraq came in 1999 when,
again as a result of a French initiative, all limits on Iraqi oil sales were
lifted. With no U.N. inspectors to inhibit him and $20 million a day in oil
revenues, Saddam could build whatever weapons he wanted. Courtesy of France.
The only consistency in French policy toward Iraq
since the Gulf War has been support for Saddam Hussein to weaken U.N. and U.S.
measures against him. To hinge U.S. action on Iraq on French acceptance is like
asking for the approval of the old Soviet Union before we moved against
communism.
Why is France so pro-Saddam? It's the motive
(wrongly) ascribed as behind U.S. enmity toward him: oil. French commercial
deals with Middle East terrorist states dominate its foreign policy. It was a
French company that risked U.S. sanctions by investing in Iranian oil production
and it is French interests that benefit from the tie with Saddam.
Some ally!
Eventually, France will cave to the U.S. position:
To fail to do so would be to consign the Security Council, France's only forum
for the exercise of global power, to irrelevance. Bush's people said as much
over the weekend, noting that a new U.N. resolution approving force was OK with
them, but it's not high on their agenda.
France needs the United Nations to appear to be in
charge, so that the French veto can appear to be important - and France can
appear to still be a world power.
