SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: FaultLine who started this subject2/14/2003 12:39:40 PM
From: carranza2  Read Replies (4) of 281500
 
Anyone given any thought to the French exit strategy after (perhaps) uselessly using a veto to preclude Security Council approval of the use of force?

The scenario as I see it:

1.- France vetoes weekend resolution by the US.

2.- The US goes in unilaterally and successfully.

3.- The French veto is worthless and France is perceived as a paper tiger. French prestige sinks and Franco-American relations go to a new low.

4.- French oil interests are given the cold shoulder by US occupation administration so the veto is worthless even from a purely commercial standpoint.

What does France have to gain from a veto, except casting the US in a bad light, a bad light that will be erased once the invasion is successful and Saddam's butchery of his own citizens hits the worldwide media circus?

Is the damage to the UN and NATO worth it from a French standpoint? I presume NATO is essentially irrelevant to France but surely an intact UN has some value.

I'm having a hard time seeing the upside to the veto for the French. I see no exit strategy that is worth a damn. If it doesn't veto, all its puffery will be worthless as French prestige will plummet. Given its statements, France simply has to veto.

Anyone have different view?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext