The Role of France and Germany in Iraq

This article (registration required) by Ivo Daalder and Robert Kagan in the Washington Post hails the early return of Iraqi sovereignty and questions the role of France and Germany.

The Allies Must Step Up

(...) France and Germany demanded a significant U.N. role, and they've gotten it. They demanded a rapid turnover of sovereignty to the Iraqis, and they got that, too. With the two countries having gotten their way in the negotiations on the resolution, the time has come for them to pitch in and join in the effort to build a peaceful, stable, democratic future for Iraq. After all, French, German and other European officials have insisted all along that the success or failure of Iraq is as much a vital interest for them as for the United States. They've also insisted, understandably, that if the United States wanted their help, it would have to give them a say over policy in Iraq.

Unfortunately, now that the Bush administration has finally acquiesced to their requests, it appears that France and Germany are refusing to fulfill their end of the bargain. Leaders of both countries have declared they will not send troops to assist in Iraq under any circumstances. Still more troubling was French President Jacques Chirac's declaration at the Group of Eight summit last week that he opposed any NATO role in Iraq, even though the resolution France supported explicitly calls on "Member States and international and regional organizations to contribute assistance to the multinational force, including military forces."

The positions staked out by the French and German governments are an abdication of international responsibility. (...)

NATO officials, as well as some allied countries, argue that with the alliance already involved in Afghanistan, taking on Iraq as well is beyond the organization's capacity. But the truth is, if NATO cannot

take on a mission such as Iraq, when the United States is providing 90 percent of the forces, then why should Americans continue to value the organization? Germany may be tapped out in Afghanistan and the Balkans, which is a sorry commentary on the state of that enormous and wealthy country's military capabilities. But surely France has several thousand troops to spare, if the French government wants to provide them.

Now that the Security Council has opened the door to internationalization in Iraq, the Europeans would be wise to step through. Alliance leaders meeting in Istanbul later this month should agree to take over the security training and equipping mission immediately, with a country such as Germany (which is already involved in training some police) perhaps taking the lead. They should also agree that NATO will take command of the Polish-led sector in southern Iraq immediately and begin planning for eventually placing the entire multinational force under NATO command.

It will be a deadly blow to transatlantic relations if NATO does not become involved in providing security in Iraq. Many Europeans believe their problem is only with the Bush administration. That's a dangerous miscalculation. If John Kerry wins in November, one of his first acts will be to request Europe's help in Iraq. If France and Germany are intent on saying no, then future American administrations, including Kerry's, will have to reconsider the value of the alliance. Do Europeans really want to sever their strategic ties to the United States? If not, they need to understand that the ball is now in their court.

Ivo Daalder is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Robert Kagan is a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

(Hat tip Hartmut Lau)

Comments

[WhatDoIKnow]

Eric in USA said: I am not trying to lump all Germans together. I'm sure that there are some who (th)link differently

LOL ! SOME is the right word :-)))

I haven't met them. Maybe they are just being quiet

Same here, haven't met one yet. But I heard they exist ;-) Probably somewhere in the Bavarian Alps.

Smart Germans definitely exist (we can find some here), but I havent found/heard any in my own little world :-( They are hiding real well. Soon there will be a secret handshake, just for the US-loving Verräter (traitors)...

The US-German relations keep goind doooooownhill and the descent won't stop anytime soon. The "movement" has become stronger than the German politicians who initiated it. In fact, the politicians only had to scratch the surface and the goodies came out by themselves. For most people, the Iraq war was just a pretext for the "dislike with the present Administration". The suffering of the Iraqis was something everyone loved to shed crocodile tears for.

Saddams's real torture chambers were something every respectable dictator is supposed to entertain. No need to get excited about that. The word "suffering", found in the mouth of every respectable representative of the "elites", lost its real meaning and became just a metaphor.

Damage control is still possible, but it won't happen. Germany/Europe aren't interested in that. There is still some political capital to be gained from anti-Americanism, so why give up now ? Especially when you have nothing else to offer. Panem et circenses has always produced admirable results.

[Gabi]

"Umso wichtiger wäre ein einstimmiges Signal des Westens, dass er der Interimsregierung hilft. Das schienen EU und USA aus Irland zu senden. Nur wurde diese Nachricht eingeholt von der vom Gipfel in Istanbul dräuenden Einsicht, dass es George Bush vor der US-Präsidentenwahl wichtiger ist, die Nato in den Irak zu ziehen, als den Aufbau möglichst breit zu fundieren."

Das schreibt Monika Kappus in der Frankfurter Rundschau:

http://www.frankfurterrundschau.de/ressorts/nachrichten_und_politik/die_seite_3/?cnt=461113

Mir leuchtet diese Kritik nicht ein. Sie wirft Bush vor, aus wahltaktischen Gründen den Aufbau zu vernachlässigen. Die NATO hätte Sicherheit bringen sollen. Wie soll der Aufbau möglich sein, wenn die Terroristen die ausländischen Helfer kidnappen und köpfen? Welche ausländische Firma ist denn bereit, in dieser desolaten Situation Helfer zu schicken? Wieder wurden 5 Menschen gekidnappt. Ich befürchte das Schlimmste. Wie kann Frau Kappus derartigen Kappes reden? Sicherheit VOR Aufbau. Wie schnell die UNO rennen kann, haben wir ja schon erlebt. Bush hier Wahltaktik vorzuwerfen zeugt von krankhafter Kritiksucht. Soll doch Frau Kappus sich in Bagdad hinstellen und berichten, dann bekommt sie mal ein Gefühl, unter welcher Gefahr die Menschen dort leben.

[Mathesar]

@Gabi

1. Was will uns dieses Zitat sagen?

2. "...in dieser desolaten Situation Helfer zu schicken? Wieder wurden 5 Menschen gekidnappt. Ich befürchte das Schlimmste..."

Das tun wir auch, schon seit diese Situation angefangen hat. Was soll man sagen, wir sind bei der Einschätzung der Situation auf einem Level.

Jetzt fehlt nur noch die Erkenntnis, wer die desolate Situation im Irak herbeigeführt hat...(hint: 54% der US-Bevölkerung wissen das schon...)

[Mathesar]

@Gabi

Aber im Ernst, die UNO oder die NATO in die Sache mit hineinzuziehen, wäre natürlich ein Signal, daß das ganze am Ende von deren Mitgliedsstaaten noch gutgeheisen würde. Ein solches Signal käme GWB natürlich vor der Wahl sehr gelegen, da es für Ihn ja so überhaupt nicht gut steht.

Allerdings werden diese Institutionen, aus naheliegenden Gründen, alles tun um genau diesen Eindruck zu vermeiden.

PS: Meine Langzeitprognose zur Energiewirtschaft: Einen Vorteil werden alle Staaten haben, welche zukünftig verstärkt auf alternative, nicht-fossile Energieträger setzen.