In a complimentary essay, A whirlwind meets the Mideast, Jim Hoagland praises French President Nicholas Sarkozy’s efforts to insert himself into Middle East peacemaking, and sees his efforts as an example for the incoming president.
The Gaza tragedy gives new urgency to Obama’s promise to address, early in his presidency, the Muslim world’s perceived grievances against the United States. When the time for that speech comes, Obama will benefit from comparing notes with the restless, visionary occupant of the Elysee Palace.
“It should be a global Philadelphia speech,” former French foreign minister Hubert Védrine told me recently, referring to Obama’s transcendent campaign speech on U.S. race relations. “We Europeans are in the same boat with you. Our relations with the Muslim world depend very much on America’s relations with the Muslim world. We all need to get it right.”
Funny, how “urgency” seems to become the watchword when Israel is defending itself, but not when it is being attacked.
Nidra Poller, a few days ago had a slightly more cautious view of the French President, Nicholas to the Rescue. She has some kind words for him:
And now Mr. Sarkozy has turned his diplomatic skills to Gaza. Unlike Mr. Chirac, who was viscerally anti-Zionist, Mr. Sarkozy’s sympathies for Israel don’t appear feigned. As a sincere friend of the Jewish state, Nicolas Sarkozy believes he can speak frankly, criticize freely and act wisely. (He takes the same position vis-Ã -vis the U.S. and the war in Iraq.) Determined to forge the same forthright relations with the Arab world, he has been trying, in vain, to include Israel in a new, improved Mediterranean Union.
However she answers her opening question:
Israeli authorities insist they have learned the lessons of the botched 2006 Lebanon war. How about France?
with
How can an intelligent man like Nicolas Sarkozy carry his penchant for negotiation to the absurdity of protecting Hamas, which figures on the EU list of terrorist organizations? If Israel is not allowed to defend itself against terrorists who have fired some 6,500 rockets at Israeli civilians since 2005, it follows that anyone can do anything to Israel without fear of retribution. Is this the assumption behind the notion of “disproportionate force”?
Mr. Sarkozy’s condemnation of Hamas for “irresponsible . . . inexcusable” action, repeated at every step of the peace junket, is meaningless when combined with his demand that Israel silence its guns. Syrian President Bashir al Assad, reintegrated into the international community by the grace of Mr. Sarkozy, lent a deaf ear to his requests for a calming influence on Hamas. The Syrian dictator only condemned Israel’s “war crimes.”
Mr. Hoagland’s enthusiasm for any and all constraints on Israeli self defense notwithstanding, it would appear that President Sarkozy has not, in fact, learned the lessons of Israel’s war against Hezbollah.
Crossposted on Soccer Dad.
What is this fascination that empty-headed liberals (sorry, redundant) have about “disproportionate” force? If the police arrest a mass murderer who killed with an axe, do we send one Police Officer with an axe to arrest him? No, we send 25 fully armed SWAT Team members! The only other thing that makes my mind hurt every day is why we even listen to Liberals – who are so obviously wrong about everything…
Sarkozy ought to remember this Irving Kristol quote. “Whom the gods would destroy, they first tempt to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict.”
I admire Sarkozy’s honesty here. He says, pretty much openly, that his prime concern is the Muslim minority in his own country, which does have a habit of rioting and burning when it’s upset, displeased, or just to keep in practice. If Israel’s safety and the lives of Jews have to be sacrificed for France’s domestic tranquility, well, we can hardly claim that it isn’t in the French tradition to do so.