|
|
 |
JAMES HILL/GETTY IMAGES
IN HIS OWN WORDS: France is obviously not anti-American
|
|
 |
 France is not a Pacifist Country  |
 |
|
French President Jacques Chirac discussed the Iraq crisis with TIME’s Paris bureau chief James Graff and correspondent Bruce Crumley. Excerpts:
|
|
|
|
|
 |
TIME: Do last week's U.N. inspectors' reports mark a turning point in the debate over Iraq?
Chirac: In the preceding two days, I received phone calls from several heads of state, both members and nonmembers of the Security Council, and I came to the conclusion that a majority of world leaders share our determination to search for a peaceful solution to disarming Iraq.
TIME: If there is a war, what do you see as the consequences for the Middle East?
Chirac:
The consequences of war would be considerable in human terms. In political terms, it would destabilize the entire region. It's very difficult to explain that one is going to spend colossal sums of money to wage war when there may be another solution yet is unable to provide adequate aid to the developing world.
TIME: Why do you think fallout from a war would be so much graver than Tony Blair and George Bush seem to?
Chirac:
I simply don't analyze the situation as they do. Among the negative fallout would be inevitably a strong reaction from Arab and Islamic public opinion. It may not be justified, and it may be, but it's a fact. A war of this kind cannot help giving a big lift to terrorism. It would create a large number of little bin Ladens. Muslims and Christians have a lot to say to one another, but war isn't going to facilitate that dialogue. I'm against the clash of civilizations; that plays into the hands of extremists. There is a problem—the probable possession of weapons of mass destruction by an uncontrollable country, Iraq. The international community is right to be disturbed by this situation, and it's right in having decided Iraq should be disarmed. The inspections began, and naturally it is a long and difficult job. We have to give the inspectors time to do it. And probably—and this is France's view—we have to reinforce their capacities, especially those of aerial surveillance. For the moment, nothing allows us to say inspections don't work.
TIME: Isn't France ducking its military responsibilities to its oldest ally?
Chirac:
France is not a pacifist country. We currently have more troops in the Balkans than the Americans. France is obviously not anti-American. It's a true friend of the United States and always has been. It is not France's role to support dictatorial regimes in Iraq or anywhere else. Nor do we have any differences over the goal of eliminating Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. For that matter, if Saddam Hussein would only vanish, it would without a doubt be the biggest favor he could do for his people and for the world. But we think this goal can be reached without starting a war.
But you seem willing to put the onus on inspectors to find arms rather than on Saddam to declare what he's got. Are there nuclear arms in Iraq? I don't think so. Are there other weapons of mass destruction? That's probable. We have to find and destroy them. In its current situation, does Iraq—controlled and inspected as it is—pose a clear and present danger to the region? I don't believe so. Given that, I prefer to continue along the path laid out by the Security Council. Then we'll see.
TIME: What evidence would justify war?
Chirac:
It's up to the inspectors to decide. We gave them our confidence. They were given a mission, and we trust them. If we have to give them greater means, we'll do so. It's up to them to come before the Security Council and say, "We won. It's over. There are no more weapons of mass destruction," or "It's impossible for us to fulfill our mission. We're coming up against Iraqi ill will and impediments." At that point, the Security Council would have to discuss this report and decide what to do. In that case, France would naturally exclude no option.
How Many Inspectors? >>
 |
 |
|
|
L A T I N A M E R I C A
The Next Terror Nexus?: Colombian leaders fear the I.R.A. and ETA may be using the country as a base for weapons testing and training
M U S I C
The Brits Are Alright: U.K. pop gets a life after export
|
E N V I R O N M E N T
Coming Unstuck: London's controversial experiment with congestion charging could lead the way for other cities plagued by the tyranny of traffic
B U S I N E S S
More Hang-Ups: From health to privacy, a fear of mobile phones |
|
|
 |
|
