FRENCH WARY OF ISAF/OEF COMMAND PROPOSAL AND

C O N F I D E N T I A L PARIS 006694

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/29/2015
TAGS: PREL MARR MOPS AF FR NATO
SUBJECT: FRENCH WARY OF ISAF/OEF COMMAND PROPOSAL AND
CONCERNED ABOUT U.S. TROOP COMMITMENTS

Classified By: Political Minister-Counselor Josiah Rosenblatt, Reason 1
.4 B/D


1. (C) Summary. According to the MOD Policy Director,
France can live with the NATO proposal for an ISAF/OEF
integrated, but still dual-hatted command, so long as there
is clear differentiation between the OEF and ISAF missions.
It is for this reason that Defense Minister Alliot-Marie
continues to speak of "synergy" (between two distinct
operations) rather than integration. The French are also
worried about U.S. long-term objectives in Afghanistan,
concerned that the U.S. may be planning to reduce its troop
levels in Afghanistan, in conjunction with an integrated
ISAF/OEF command. There is a real fear that not only would
NATO members have to fill in for departing U.S. troops, but
that this could result in ISAF mission-creep to compensate
for a decreasing OEF force. That said, France remains
committed to ISAF, OEF, and training the Afghan army, and is
proceeding with its plans to take over the Kabul regional
command in conjunction with Turkey. End summary.


2. (SBU) Political Minister-Counselor and Poloff met
September 21 with new MOD Director for Policy Jean de Ponton
d'Amecourt to follow up on the Berlin informal defense
ministerial meeting and to try to obtain clarification of
French thinking in the context of Defense Minister
Alliot-Marie's insistence that the dual-hatted commands be
viewed as "synergy" rather than integration.


3. (C) According to Ponton d'Amecourt, France is going along
with NATO planning for an integrated ISAF-OEF command. That
said, Alliot-Marie's primary concern is that the ISAF and OEF
operations be separate and distinct, and remain so. The
French see it as essential that there be no confusion between
counter-terrorism operations (OEF) and NATO's stabilization
role (ISAF). Ponton d'Amecourt stated that, despite press
reports to the contrary, Alliot-Marie had sought to avoid a
confrontation on this issue at the Berlin informal
ministerial. However, France still needed further
clarification as to exactly how the combined, dual-hatted
command would work in practice. While there are those in the
GOF-- including the French CHOD General Bentegeat on
September 19 -- who have cast Alliot-Marie's statements more
in terms of semantics than substance, in fact this is not
entirely the case.


4. (C) Ponton d'Amecourt emphasized that cooperation on the
ground in Afghanistan between U.S. forces in OEF and ISAF was
excellent. However, he said France remained concerned about
U.S. long-term planning for Afghanistan, and in particular,
that the U.S. was planning to downsize its troop presence
once the combined ISAF/OEF command was put into place. This
is a concern often voiced by our MFA contacts, as well. The
French worry that a reduction in the U.S. presence would
create two sets of problems for France. In the first
instance, it would mean by definition that France, as a major
contributor of forces at NATO, would be under pressure to
bear a larger burden, at a minimum proportionately. French
forces are already thinly stretched through their overseas
commitments. In the second instance, they see a risk that
the withdrawal of U.S. forces would lead to the temptation to
try to compensate for smaller OEF forces through an expanded
ISAF mandate. Alliot-Marie was putting down a marker against
such mission-creep.


5. (C) On France's own commitment to Afghanistan, Ponton
d'Amecourt noted that France was still planning to take over
the ISAF Kabul command next year with Turkey, and that it
would increase its troop deployments in Kabul to some 1,000
personnel in that context. In response to Pol MC's queries,
Ponton d'Amecourt said France still had a problem with PRTs,
as it believed the NATO presence in Afghanistan should focus
on military roles and not on reconstruction and development
efforts, which are the domain of assistance agencies.
(Comment: The French want NATO to remain much more than a
peacekeeping organization. End Comment.) Ponton d'Amecourt
volunteered that MOD sensitivities on PRTs might also be
linked to budgetary considerations, although this was not
explicit MOD policy. The MOD would not want to be held
responsible for funding (French) reconstruction work out of
its own budget.

Please visit Paris' Classified Website at:
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/eur/paris/index.c fm
STAPLETON