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