The French Have a Word for It: Merde

By: Peter Lee

George W. Bush once famously complained that the French "have no word for entrepreneur". But the French certainly have a word for the sorry state of the world a la Bush.

And so do the Mexicans, Russians, Chinese, English, Filipinos, Koreans, Turks, Kurds, and everybody else who has endured America's foot-up-the-ass approach to diplomacy.

There's probably a word for it in Jamaica, too. You can see it in Colin Powell's tired, beaten look as he morosely shills the U.N. on behalf of Bush's war program.

Colin Powell should resign now and come out publicly against the war. After all, the war party blames him for steering their triumphant red-white-and-blue attack-Iraq Humvee into a U.N. ditch.

Powell's last gasp effort to redeem himself is apparently an effort to hijack the U.N. oil for food program so the United States won't have to foot the bill for the humanitarian crisis it is about to create in Iraq. A U.S. aid official said: "I don't think the U.N. will let people starve." which kind of implies the U.S. will let them starve if the U.N. stubbornly refuses to buy into the Iraq war or its aftermath (Washington Post; U.S. Wants Iraq Oil Revenues Shifted, 3/7/03).

This blackmail is optimistically billed as a chance for "healing" the U.N. after the U.S. jackhammered an irrevocable rift into it; "screwing" is a word that comes to mind more readily.

Good luck getting the U.N. to divert the billions it is holding in trust for the Iraqi people to Halliburton, Wackenhut, Cargill, and whoever else is lining up to contribute to Bush's re-election.

But that's not going to be enough to atone for the tooth-grinding Colin Powell has already caused his boss.

No BBQ in Crawford for Colin; no room on the next presidential ticket; just a succession of angry, resentful looks from Rummy and Dick Cheney until Colin gets the message and decides to pursue exciting opportunities in the private sector and spend more time with his family.

Might as well resign now, and go into the history books as the guy who made the wheels come off the Iraq adventure.

But Powell probably could have wangled a workable resolution out of the U.N. if not for the serial incompetence and arrogance of the White House team, starting with our Commander-in-Chief himself.

Let us count the ways:

1. Bush assumes the quaintly menacing air of a dominatrix and threatens "discipline" for Mexico for its anti-war stance;
   
   
2. White House arrogantly complains "the Turks think the bazaar is open all night" in haggling over aid package;
   
   
3. We shoehorn our forces into the Philippines in defiance of its constitution only to terminate the arrangement with the snide assertion that we weren't ready to lie about it the way Manila wanted us to lie about it;
   
   
4. To the dismay of Seoul, we threaten to pull our troops out of South Korea so it would be left holding the bag alone after a pre-emptive U.S. strike on Kim Jung-il's nuclear program;
   
   
5. We sell out the northern Kurds again, this time before the war even starts, in our botched attempt to entice the Turks into a basing agreement;
   
   
6. We insist on "regime change" as a war objective just to show the Brits we have no intention of calling off the war even if the U.N. process succeeds.
   

And this is just in the last two weeks.

But the real clincher is the utter mismanagement of the French situation.

The turning point of the war and perhaps the whole decade probably came in an astounding speech by Richard Perle in Washington DC delivered on February 4, as reported by UPI (Pentagon adviser: France 'no longer ally', 2/4/03).

Richard Perle aka: Lord Vader should need no introduction. He is the brains behind not only the get-Saddam program and the Sharon-clone approach to Middle East peace, but the whole unilateralist, pre-emptive, "let the world whimper beneath America's boot" war and regime-change policy that has so infatuated our armchair Pres, George Bush.

His is the only true and truthful voice of U.S. policy we hear these days. People and nations ignore Richard Perle at their peril.

Here's the UPI lead: "France is no longer an ally of the United States and the NATO alliance 'must develop a strategy to contain our erstwhile ally or we will not be talking about a NATO alliance'."

Rely on it: the French heard the message and understood the danger.

Then came the joint letter from the pro-war European states, ostensibly the brainstorm of Tony Blair, that announced a split the European opinion and relegated France from its cherished slot as European leader to the ignominious and vulnerable status of "Dead Frog Walking" in the eyes of the United States.

And of course, Donald Rumsfeld, America's designated asshole for European affairs, weighed in with his "Old Europe" jab.

Now that France has gotten into the bad books of our notoriously vindictive President, even a deathbed conversion to the gospel of unprovoked aggression is not going to get Chirac and de Villepin a spot at the Iraq trough. No litany of desperate promises and inducements by Colin Powell and Tony Blair can convince them otherwise.

So there is little incentive for Paris to choose the humiliation of capitulation over the guilty pleasure of tugging a few feathers out of the American eagle's tail.

Nevertheless, I conjecture that all of this might have been dismissed as a bit of good-natured joshing and France might have shuffled into line on the Iraq war with an insouciant Gallic shrug that they're doing it for Colin, Tony, and of course dear George, but for one thing: France fears the U.S. is trying to put its Security Council seat in play.

Certainly, the justification for Europe holding two of those 5 groovy permanent member seats on the Council is questionable. Presumably, with some subtle nudging from the United States, the South Asian, African, and South American nations might get up on their hind legs and start baying for one of their own to sit at the high table.

Certainly, after all the grief Tony Blair has endured on our behalf, the U.S. is not going to let the U.K. get pushed off the council. But what about France - goddam anti-American snooty France?

France was vulnerable. Its position as leader of the fragmented Frogophone bloc that extends from Quebec to Africa to western Switzerland probably doesn't merit veto parity with Russia, China, and the U.S. And with Eastern Europe enthusiastically kow-towing to the U.S. and its designated poodle, the U.K., France couldn't claim to speak for Europe either.

But what happened? France dug in its heels on the Iraq issue, and has emerged as the unacknowledged champion of dozens of nations, not necessarily "evil" or even hostile, that desire an institutional check on American unilateralism and presumption.

France, with its developed economy, stable society, diplomatic acumen, and a deep reservoir of national pride and suspicion of the United States, is best equipped to stand up to America. It can endure American hostility and reprisals much better than smaller, weaker, and more fragile countries whose political and social fabric would be irretrievably rent by U.S. retaliation. So it is more willing to take positions that reflect the views of the international community but provoke the wrath of the United States.

France can certainly take the heat better than any Muslim country, which is why the Arab quasi-clients whose economies and armies are hopelessly dependent on the U.S. are happy to let the French lead the charge - and divert attention from their pitiful, divided response to the Iraq crisis.

Young Muslims disgusted with the corrupt, undemocratic regimes that rule them are more likely to hang up Jacques Chirac's picture on their bedroom wall than Paul Wolfowitz's. At least France desires little more from its allies than the sordid gratifications of commerce. The United States, on the other hand, backs Israel to the hilt, floods the Middle East with troops, and turns whole countries into subjugated supply depots serving its immense and unpopular military presence.

If the U.S. could hold a bake-off today to choose the most abjectly servile country to occupy a "brown" permanent seat on the Security Council, I predict that Indonesia would get the nod over India, Nigeria, and Brazil. It's got that world's largest Muslim population thing going for it, it's politically weak and dependent on the United States, and the only people it would piss off are the even more dependent Australians - and the Chinese, who we like to piss off anyway. Did we mention there's lots of oil and natural gas there, too?

But it probably won't happen. Because the U.N. has learned to distrust the United States, which seeks to dominate it with a unique combination of arrogance, intimidation, and mendacity. And easing France off the Security Council, which might have been quite doable two months ago, is probably impossible today.

Quite possibly, the Middle 6 on the Security Council will toe the U.S. line on the March 17 ultimatum, instead of antagonizing it with opposition they believe futile. Maybe even France, China, and Russia will abstain, satisfied that they've made their point. But the toxic residue of anger, fear, and contempt will remain.

In any event, we are about to embark on a hugely unpopular war with the international system in tatters. And we are going in hoping that the same clumsy crew that created this dreadful mess is going to make everything come out right.

It's a debacle. It's a disgrace. It's shameful.

We have a word for it in America - it's Bush.