MEDIA REACTION REPORT - Israeli-Lebanese Conflict - French

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PARIS 004913

SIPDIS


DEPT FOR INR/R/MR; IIP/RW; IIP/RNY; BBG/VOA; IIP/WEU;
AF/PA; EUR/WE /P/SP; D/C (MCCOO); EUR/PA; INR/P; INR/EUC;
PM; OSC ISA FOR ILN; NEA; WHITE HOUSE FOR NSC/WEUROPE; DOC FOR
ITA/EUR/FR AND PASS USTR/PA; USINCEUR FOR PAO; NATO/PA; MOSCOW/PA;
ROME/PA.

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: OPRC KMDR FR

SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION REPORT - Israeli-Lebanese Conflict - French
and American Cooperation - Middle East - French and American
Policies
PARIS - Wednesday, July 19, 2006

(A) SUBJECTS COVERED IN TODAY'S REPORT:

Israeli-Lebanese Conflict - French and American Cooperation
Middle East - French and American Policies

(B) SUMMARY OF COVERAGE:

Left-of-center Le Monde's headline: "Chirac and Bush Want to
Neutralize Hezbollah" and accompanying article assert that by
sending Pm Villepin to Beirut on Monday, President Chirac wanted to
"make a strong political gesture as a reminder of the special nature
of the Franco-Lebanese relationship."

Right-of-center Le Figaro's editorial by Pierre Rousselin entitled
"Bush and Chirac Together Against Hezbollah" says that for once
"French and Americans are playing off the same sheet of music with
the same objectives in view." (See Part C)

The editorial by Guillaume Goubert in Catholic La Croix underscores
that "Lebanon will not be seen as sovereign as long as its southern
border is controlled by not by its own army but by armed militias
that are more attentive to what they are told by Damascus and
Teheran than by Beirut. This in itself explains the lack of
criticism on the part of the great powers as well as a number of
Arab countries to Israel's incursion."

For right-of-center Le Figaro, French diplomacy is "caught between a
rock and a hard place." "On the one hand it cannot afford to remain
inactive with regard to the conflict... and on the other hand it
cannot make any hasty decisions that would cause tension namely with
the Americans... For the time being Paris has decided to hide behind
the UN consultations and the return at the end of the week of the
mission sent by Kofi Annan from to the Middle East."

The Paris-based International Herald Tribune columnist William Pfaff
explains the failures of America's policies in the Middle East in an
op-ed entitled: "American Weaknesses" in left-of-center Le Monde.
(See Part C)

Former Clinton adviser Robert Malley is interviewed in Liberation,
stressing that the Bush Administration's lack of involvement in the
Israeli-Lebanese conflict is "deliberate... The Administration's
line has always been not to negotiate with terrorist or rogue
states... therefore Washington's capacity to have an influence with
the principal players in this tragedy: Hezbollah, Hamas, Syria and
Iran is nil."

Left-of-center Le Monde notes the reticence of France and the U.S.
to send UN troops into southern Lebanon "both countries have had
painful experiences in the matter. 58 French paratroopers and 241
American marines were killed in Lebanon in October 1983 in attacks
believed to have been perpetrated by Hezbollah." Right-of-center Le
Figaro says that a "recourse to UN troops is difficult... especially
given that UNIFIL's mission will come to a close at the end of the
month and that it has by and large been a failure."

An op-ed by Richard Hiault in economic right-of-center Les Echos
outlines the "The Unkept Promises of the G8." "Like every year
commitments were made, like every year only some or even none of
then will be kept... And yet the club that brings together the
countries that represent two thirds of the world's economy should
serve as a guide and as an example.

Joseph Limagne in regional Ouest France analyzes the future of the
relationship between Russia and Europe: "The escalation of violence
in the Middle East has almost completely overshadowed the first
summit organized by Russia since it became a part of the G8 in
1994... Europe is still trying to determine what its relationship
should be with Russia... ideally it should be a partnership that is
both honest and non-complacent... As an example: it is not because
Europe criticizes the U.S. for Guantanamo that the latter is less of
a partner."

(C) SUPPORTING TEXT/BLOCK QUOTES:

Israeli-Lebanese Conflict - French and American Cooperation
"Bush and Chirac: Together Against Hezbollah"
Pierre Rousselin in the editorial in right-of-center Le Figaro
(07/19): "Contrary to other crises that strongly opposed George W.
Bush and Jacques Chirac, their positions on the war against
Hezbollah are compatible... As early as 2004, Lebanon was a subject
of Franco-American rapprochement after the rift over Iraq. It
remains an issue on which George W. Bush and Jacques Chirac can work
together: both think that the time to contain Hezbollah has come...
In the division of labor between the U.S. and France over the
Israeli-Lebanese conflict, the U.S. maintains its support for
Israel... while France poses itself as the defender of Lebanon."

"Inactivity"
Gerard Dupuy in left-of-center Liberation's editorial (07/19): "The
principal explanation for the relative indifference of the
international community to the armed conflict in Lebanon is the
weight of the U.S. The UN is powerless without it and Bush's blind
conformity to Israel's decisions is a powerful incentive to
inactivity... In reality as we have seen in Darfur, when the
regional players decide to act militarily they have their hands free
for a considerable length of time.... The mixture of military
adventurism and dogmatic ideology incarnated by Ahmadinejad, joined
with the decrepit Baathist power in Syria lend a collision course
feeling to Hezbollah's provocations. It is one thing to condemn
Israel for retaliating disproportionately; it is another to run the
risk of lending a helping hand to Nasrallah!"

Middle East - French and American Policies

"France's Shift"
The unsigned editorial in left-of-center Le Monde notes that there
are two principal reasons for France's shift with regard to Lebanon
(07/19): "The first is the assassination of Rafic Hariri in February

2005. The former Lebanese Prime Minister was considered to be
President Chirac's 'best foreign friend'... The second is the
Franco-American rapprochement that followed the assassination. Paris
and Washington gave their support to the anti-Syrian political
faction that won the elections. And France and the U.S. worked
together to pass Resolution 1559 at the UN which called for the
withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon... Mr. Chirac, the
traditional ally of Arab countries, has decided to measure his
diplomacy. He has called for the Israelis to show restraint on one
side and for an end to the Hezbollah problem on the other. His
current stance has more legitimacy than before and it is the only
one that will ensure that France and the U.S. remain on the same
course working together to promote international consensus."

Regional daily La Republique des Pyrenees' Jean-Marcel Bouguereau
writes (07/19): "Concerning the powerlessness of the international
community with regard to this conflict, the brunt of the
responsibility lies on George W. Bush whose foreign policy from Iraq
to Iran to the Palestinian territories has ceaselessly reinforced
Islamic extremism."

"A Conflict Without an End But Not Without a Solution"
In left-of-center Le Monde Daniel Vernet writes (07/19): "The one
thing that has not been tried yet is the massive involvement of the
international community, that is to say above all else the U.S.,
working to promote a compromise and with a military presence on the
ground. The Americans refuse because the successive Israeli
governments have refused. But the rubble that is American
Middle-Eastern policy from Iraq to Lebanon, from Iran to the
Palestinian territories should prompt the U.S. to change its mind."
STAPLETON