The French position on the anti-missile shield, cautious reluctance
(BRUSSELS2 to Chicago) The French position on the anti-missile shield, set up by NATO (at the request of the Americans), has evolved over time. From being very reluctant at the start of the project, this position has become less hostile over the years, believing that anti-missile defense is complementary to nuclear deterrence. But there is still resistance, reluctance that is not expressed only on the left. Before giving up his duties, Gérard Longuet, Nicolas Sarkozy's Minister of Defense had thus underlined - in front of a few journalists including B2 - that not everything could be settled in Chicago. " There is a whole series of questions that cannot be solved in Chicago, given the state of the art, of the technology, and of the finances. » Starting with waste. " What happens with the debris and waste of an intercontinental missile destroyed on European territory to protect American territory? ? More generally, he had also expressed some reservations about this anti-missile shield, “this myth of absolute protection "which already existed" with star wars and still exists. The " defense of theaters of operation against short-range missiles is partly plausible (while the defense of territories against long-range missiles remains highly problematic ". And to conclude with a plea in favor of nuclear deterrence: “ the cost-benefit ratio fully justifies the French choice of deterrence. This avoids having to pay too high a price. »
The 4 conditions set by France
François Hollande, as before his Minister of Foreign Affairs, Laurent Fabius, took over in Chicago, on their own account some of the French prejudices. The President of the Republic thus summarized, late Sunday afternoon (Chicago time), the four conditions set by France: 1° Anti-missile defense "cannot be a substitute for nuclear deterrence but a complement (NB: a French tradition which appears in the declaration adopted); 2° there must be a political control over its use. We will have to work there” (NB: this is essentially the rules of engagement that were approved for the interim capacity prior to the meeting); 3° it is important that “ our manufacturers are directly interested » ; 4° there must be a “ control of costs so that there is no financial drift which would be unbearable for the Alliance budget”.
France gives its discharge to the anti-missile shield
François Hollande added a fifth principle: “ There can be no question of countries feeling threatened by this anti-missile device, I am thinking in particular of Russia. The dialogue with Russia must therefore be maintained.. And to conclude On these 4 conditions, the final press release gives us satisfaction”.
Comment: even if the new French president has credited the success of the enterprise, we cannot identify between the French left and right major differences in approach. On this point, the French position remained rather the same.