This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/31/world/europe/in-turnaround-its-france-backing-arms-while-britain-sits-on-syria-sidelines.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
In Turnaround, It’s France Backing Arms While Britain Sits on Syria Sidelines In Turnaround, It’s France Backing Arms While Britain Sits on Syria Sidelines
(about 5 hours later)
LONDON — In the 2003 Iraq war, France refused to join the American-led coalition against Saddam Hussein, while Britain, as usual, fought fiercely alongside the Americans.LONDON — In the 2003 Iraq war, France refused to join the American-led coalition against Saddam Hussein, while Britain, as usual, fought fiercely alongside the Americans.
Many Americans made fun of the French, speaking of “cheese-eating surrender monkeys,” and “freedom fries” became the nom de guerre of French fries in Washington.Many Americans made fun of the French, speaking of “cheese-eating surrender monkeys,” and “freedom fries” became the nom de guerre of French fries in Washington.
Ten years later, however, France is pressing for military action in Syria and happy to fight alongside the Americans, while the British, in a stunning turnaround after a badly managed vote Thursday night in Parliament, will not take part in any military action, joining the Germans on the sidelines.Ten years later, however, France is pressing for military action in Syria and happy to fight alongside the Americans, while the British, in a stunning turnaround after a badly managed vote Thursday night in Parliament, will not take part in any military action, joining the Germans on the sidelines.
The outcome is especially bizarre because Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain joined President François Hollande of France in strongly pushing President Obama to act more boldly in Syria — to provide arms to the rebels, to consider a no-fly zone, to strike hard in response to the alleged use of chemical weapons. His activism far outstripped Britain’s teamwork with the United States on the Iraq war, for which bitter Britons referred to Prime Minister Tony Blair as President George W. Bush’s poodle.The outcome is especially bizarre because Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain joined President François Hollande of France in strongly pushing President Obama to act more boldly in Syria — to provide arms to the rebels, to consider a no-fly zone, to strike hard in response to the alleged use of chemical weapons. His activism far outstripped Britain’s teamwork with the United States on the Iraq war, for which bitter Britons referred to Prime Minister Tony Blair as President George W. Bush’s poodle.
“On this issue Britain wasn’t Obama’s poodle but his Rottweiler,” said Robin Niblett, the director of Chatham House, the Royal Institute of International Affairs. “We and the French were pushing Obama on Syria to arm the opposition, lift the embargoes and strike back.”“On this issue Britain wasn’t Obama’s poodle but his Rottweiler,” said Robin Niblett, the director of Chatham House, the Royal Institute of International Affairs. “We and the French were pushing Obama on Syria to arm the opposition, lift the embargoes and strike back.”
Vincent Desportes, a retired French general and former director of the French École de Guerre, said that “the United States and France are truly in the same boat, in the same difficulty, and this difficulty is that of the credibility and place of the West in the world.” For France, he said, it is an occasion to tell the Americans that “we weren’t with you in Iraq because we didn’t believe in it, but now we are going with you because we do.”Vincent Desportes, a retired French general and former director of the French École de Guerre, said that “the United States and France are truly in the same boat, in the same difficulty, and this difficulty is that of the credibility and place of the West in the world.” For France, he said, it is an occasion to tell the Americans that “we weren’t with you in Iraq because we didn’t believe in it, but now we are going with you because we do.”
Britain, however, has degraded its position and credibility, he said. While France is reasserting its claim to be a global power, Britain, he said, appears to be stepping back.Britain, however, has degraded its position and credibility, he said. While France is reasserting its claim to be a global power, Britain, he said, appears to be stepping back.
Syria is clearly not Iraq. As Mr. Obama and other Western leaders have emphasized, any military action against Bashar al-Assad’s government and military would be short, punitive and meant to dissuade Mr. Assad from using any further chemical weapons. The strikes would almost surely rely on cruise missiles, and would not involve troops on the ground or any stated intent to remove the country’s president, Mr. Assad.Syria is clearly not Iraq. As Mr. Obama and other Western leaders have emphasized, any military action against Bashar al-Assad’s government and military would be short, punitive and meant to dissuade Mr. Assad from using any further chemical weapons. The strikes would almost surely rely on cruise missiles, and would not involve troops on the ground or any stated intent to remove the country’s president, Mr. Assad.
And while Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair told the world, mistakenly, that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, there is no question that Mr. Assad has them and that his forces have used them, even if Moscow and others question the American certainty on his authorship of the devastating attack last week.And while Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair told the world, mistakenly, that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, there is no question that Mr. Assad has them and that his forces have used them, even if Moscow and others question the American certainty on his authorship of the devastating attack last week.
But the British-French turnabouts raise questions about whether the European strategic landscape has changed, especially after both Britain and France led the way in Libya in 2011 and the French took on the fight against Al Qaeda and its associates in the former French colony of Mali this year.But the British-French turnabouts raise questions about whether the European strategic landscape has changed, especially after both Britain and France led the way in Libya in 2011 and the French took on the fight against Al Qaeda and its associates in the former French colony of Mali this year.
For Mr. Niblett, the answer is no for the French, but less clear for the British.For Mr. Niblett, the answer is no for the French, but less clear for the British.
“If there were one place in the world where the French would go along with the United States,” he said, “it would be Syria,” a former French mandate territory next to Lebanon. “The French have been bullish on Syria and on Iran, via Syria.” Paris has been forceful in demanding that Iran live up to Security Council resolutions on the nuclear issue and believes in defending international norms, like the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Chemical Weapons Convention.“If there were one place in the world where the French would go along with the United States,” he said, “it would be Syria,” a former French mandate territory next to Lebanon. “The French have been bullish on Syria and on Iran, via Syria.” Paris has been forceful in demanding that Iran live up to Security Council resolutions on the nuclear issue and believes in defending international norms, like the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Chemical Weapons Convention.
“And this is limited,” Mr. Niblett said. “This not a George W. Bush let’s remake the Middle East moment, and would represent a strong defense of an international treaty and norms on chemical weapons.”“And this is limited,” Mr. Niblett said. “This not a George W. Bush let’s remake the Middle East moment, and would represent a strong defense of an international treaty and norms on chemical weapons.”
As for Britain, however, he is more troubled, while noting that Mr. Cameron’s defeat in Parliament was partly self-inflicted and came from bad management of his majority. He lost by 13 votes on a meaningless motion, but 95 legislators did not vote.As for Britain, however, he is more troubled, while noting that Mr. Cameron’s defeat in Parliament was partly self-inflicted and came from bad management of his majority. He lost by 13 votes on a meaningless motion, but 95 legislators did not vote.
For Britain, “this reflects a deep scarring from Afghanistan and Iraq, where British forces were key and fought hard,” Mr. Niblett said. “There is a strong view in the commentariat, perhaps not a majority, that says that we can’t fix these bloody, intractable problems in the Middle East, so why are we trying to do it? And there’s a skittishness of politicians about getting too far ahead of the public.”For Britain, “this reflects a deep scarring from Afghanistan and Iraq, where British forces were key and fought hard,” Mr. Niblett said. “There is a strong view in the commentariat, perhaps not a majority, that says that we can’t fix these bloody, intractable problems in the Middle East, so why are we trying to do it? And there’s a skittishness of politicians about getting too far ahead of the public.”
Still, he said, “for the U.K. to step back from being the U.S. wingman on deterrence issues is important.”Still, he said, “for the U.K. to step back from being the U.S. wingman on deterrence issues is important.”
The British decision not to participate will also leave the French more exposed, argued Nigel Sheinwald, a former British ambassador to both Washington and the European Union. There would be some embarrassment for British diplomats in Washington. But the British decision could also make things more difficult domestically for Mr. Hollande, he said. “It’s better for everyone to do things together.”The British decision not to participate will also leave the French more exposed, argued Nigel Sheinwald, a former British ambassador to both Washington and the European Union. There would be some embarrassment for British diplomats in Washington. But the British decision could also make things more difficult domestically for Mr. Hollande, he said. “It’s better for everyone to do things together.”
Mr. Hollande was clear, telling the newspaper Le Monde that the British decision would not stop Paris from acting. The chemical attack “must not go unpunished,” he said. “Otherwise, it would be taking the risk of an escalation that would normalize the use of these weapons and threaten other countries.” A military strike against government targets would have a “deterrence value” and urge the government toward a negotiated “political solution” to the conflict, France’s explicitly stated goal.Mr. Hollande was clear, telling the newspaper Le Monde that the British decision would not stop Paris from acting. The chemical attack “must not go unpunished,” he said. “Otherwise, it would be taking the risk of an escalation that would normalize the use of these weapons and threaten other countries.” A military strike against government targets would have a “deterrence value” and urge the government toward a negotiated “political solution” to the conflict, France’s explicitly stated goal.
What surprised some, given France’s emphasis on international law, was Mr. Hollande’s willingness to circumvent the United Nations Security Council, on which it sits.What surprised some, given France’s emphasis on international law, was Mr. Hollande’s willingness to circumvent the United Nations Security Council, on which it sits.
Denis Bauchard, a former French ambassador and Middle East expert now at the French Institute for International Relations, said Mr. Hollande’s willingness to circumvent the Security Council appeared “utterly contrary to our traditional policy” of bolstering the body’s legitimacy, particularly in the Middle East.Denis Bauchard, a former French ambassador and Middle East expert now at the French Institute for International Relations, said Mr. Hollande’s willingness to circumvent the Security Council appeared “utterly contrary to our traditional policy” of bolstering the body’s legitimacy, particularly in the Middle East.
Jonathan Krause, a lecturer in strategic studies at the Royal Air Force College, said France and Britain did not always have the same interests. People “underestimate how important France has been as a military force in the Mediterranean and in its fight against Islamism in Mali,” he said. “The French did a lot of heavy lifting in the operation in Libya. Combined with the successful operation in Mali, this seems to have emboldened them.”Jonathan Krause, a lecturer in strategic studies at the Royal Air Force College, said France and Britain did not always have the same interests. People “underestimate how important France has been as a military force in the Mediterranean and in its fight against Islamism in Mali,” he said. “The French did a lot of heavy lifting in the operation in Libya. Combined with the successful operation in Mali, this seems to have emboldened them.”
France has changed, he said. “France is no longer as isolationist or Gaullist as they were a decade ago — there seems to be a renewed French effort to fulfill their desired role as a major European power.”France has changed, he said. “France is no longer as isolationist or Gaullist as they were a decade ago — there seems to be a renewed French effort to fulfill their desired role as a major European power.”
What helps Mr. Hollande, like Mr. Obama, is a presidential system, unlike the British one. The executive has a relatively free hand in foreign and military policy except for formal declarations of war, which are rarely made.What helps Mr. Hollande, like Mr. Obama, is a presidential system, unlike the British one. The executive has a relatively free hand in foreign and military policy except for formal declarations of war, which are rarely made.
“You inform the Parliament, but you don’t consult it,” Mr. Bauchard said.“You inform the Parliament, but you don’t consult it,” Mr. Bauchard said.

Kimiko de Freytas-Tamura contributed reporting from London, and Scott Sayare and Aurelien Breeden from Paris.