You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Europe
No more US unilateralism in Afghanistan: France
2009-03-04
PARIS: The new French special envoy to Afghanistan, Pierre Lellouche, said in an interview published Wednesday that NATO allies fighting on Afghan soil must not revert to the unilateral approach taken by former US president George W. Bush.

"It is normal that we act as co-pilots in the international strategy in Afghanistan," Lellouche told the daily Le Monde. "We must not again fall into the American unilateral excesses of the Bush administration, which provoked a deep gulf between the United States and its NATO allies.

Lellouche said Paris would "test" the dialogue proposed by President Barack Obama. "Let us hope that it works. The stakes are too great," he said, and added: "We will not stay in Afghanistan indefinitely."

French officials have repeatedly declared that they had no intention of deploying more soldiers to Afghanistan. France currently has some 3,300 troops there, including military instructors.
And yet they want to be 'co-pilots' ...
However, Obama has said he intends to increase the US troop strength in Afghanistan, and has frequently asked NATO members to provide more soldiers as well.

Lellouche said that the conflict in Afghanistan was a war, and not an "international police operation", as French Defence Minister Herve Morin described it last autumn. "The proof is that France spends nearly 200 million euros ($250 million) a year on its army in that country," while spending only 11 million euros on civilian aid, he said.
Posted by:GolfBravoUSMC

#10  #8 Correction, bgrebel - the French "leaders"/gummint are utterly worthless.

Not all of the French are.


Not all? Damning with faint praise, Barbara?
Posted by: Mizzou Mafia   2009-03-04 23:19  

#9  The french routinely forget who's side they are on.

Au contraire. The French always know whose side they're on.
Posted by: Pappy   2009-03-04 22:07  

#8  Correction, bgrebel - the French "leaders"/gummint are utterly worthless.

Not all of the French are.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut   2009-03-04 21:01  

#7  Typical.. the French are utterly worthless
Posted by: bgrebel   2009-03-04 20:53  

#6  Could anyone explain what value NATO has today? Any organization that does not include France is better for it.
Posted by: balthazar   2009-03-04 19:04  

#5  unilateral means literaly "one sided"

The french routinely forget who's side they are on.
Posted by: flash91   2009-03-04 18:45  

#4  If the plane is in Afghanistan, and the French are note, how can they be the co-pilot?

Or is this French logic of the ethereal order?
Posted by: Halliburton - Mysterious Conspiracy Division   2009-03-04 18:17  

#3  The term co-pilot would seem to have one believe that the pilot and co-pilot are equal. The fact is the co-pilot is subserviant to the Pilot. Deal with it, Pierre.
Posted by: Deacon Blues   2009-03-04 17:56  

#2  You can add this to the list of reasons (ie causes) why we will fail in Afghanistan.
Posted by: phil_b   2009-03-04 16:17  

#1  Have another glass of wine, Pierre. When you sober up and earn the position of copilot, then we'll talk. Better to just sleep off your fantasies for now. Nightie night!
Posted by: Richard of Oregon   2009-03-04 14:58  

00:00