Iraq Flag Iraq Special Collection

The French Position on the Current Iraq Crisis

by Sonia Ben Ouagrham

The French response to the US strike on Iraq of December 16, 1998 is broadly negative. Though the French government’s condemnation was not as explicit as that of the press, both agree that the strike was neither justified nor required.

While the French government has not explicitly condemned the US strike on Iraq, it has not supported it either. The communiqué issued by the French government states, "France deplores the escalation which led to the American military strikes against Iraq and the grave human consequences which they could have for the Iraqi people." But the fact that this communiqué has been repeated by several leading officials, such as Prime Minister Jospin and Minister of Foreign Affairs Vedrine, without changing a word of it, means that the French government has not yet given its final position on the issue.

France is indeed in an awkward situation. On the one hand, condemning the strike would imply support for Saddam Hussein, even though France has never expressed any doubts about the fact that Saddam Hussein has not complied with the UN resolutions. On the other hand, supporting the air strikes would be tantamount to recognizing that the US has the right to override the UN Security Council. Both outcomes would contradict France’s belief that the international crises should be dealt with by the entire international community.

However, there is little doubt that in the coming days the official position of France will become much more critical of the US for several reasons.

First, the US decision to bomb Iraq was made without the prior consent of the United Nations Security Council. This is a "legal" mistake, as France believes that the only body with the authority to make decisions regarding Iraq is the Security Council.

Second, the decision to strike was based on the report made by UNSCOM Chairman Richard Butler, which stated that Iraq did not allow the UNSCOM inspectors to complete their missions. However, this position has been challenged by Mr. Butler’s French and Russian advisers, as well as by the report produced by the International Atomic Energy Agency, which reaches the opposite conclusion. Further, Mr. Butler’s decision to withdraw UNSCOM personnel from Iraq before the strike without prior consultation with UN Secretary General Kofi Annan or the Security Council is another "legal" mistake that has been severely criticized by Minister of Foreign Affairs Vedrine.

Third, the strike was not justified. Even thought Saddam Hussein did not cooperate "sufficiently" with UNSCOM personnel, he did not create a real crisis.

Finally, the strike may invalidate UNSCOM's work, which is broadly considered to be positive, since it has allowed the destruction of more weapons over the past few years than were destroyed in the 1991 Gulf War.

Therefore, the official French criticism may be based on the fact that the US strike is not in conformity with international rules and that the reasons given for the strike are blurred and do not reflect the interests of the international community.

Even though the French government remained rather restrained in its criticism of the US strike, the French press has severely condemned the operation. All the reasons given by the US President are considered excuses. According to the French media, international peace was not endangered by Saddam Hussein’s repeated refusal to cooperate with the UNSCOM teams, nor was US security. The strike on Iraq is considered unfair because Iraq has already been "weakened and humiliated" (Liberation, 17 December 1998), and the amount of force used against Iraq was disproportionate. But more importantly, the strike was condemned because it is believed that the US used Iraq to solve domestic problems. Indeed, the French press has unanimously conveyed the idea that the strike’s main purpose was to stop the impeachment procedure.

Another concern raised by the press is that the strike may help Saddam Hussein regain the support of his own population and that of some Arabic and Muslim countries, especially since the strike took place a few days before Ramadan. Thus, however the crisis is resolved, Saddam Hussein will be a winner because he would have preserved his power. The international community, to the contrary, will be the loser, because the crisis has created a division within it and may endanger the resolution of other important international issues: the peace negotiations between Israel and Palestine, and the ratification of the START II treaty by the Russian Parliament.

Sonia Ben Ouagrham is a Post-Doctoral Fellow at the Center for Nonproliferation Studies. She received a degree in Strategy and Defense Policy at the Higher School of International Studies in Paris, and completed a Ph.D. in Economics at the Higher School of Social Sciences in Paris. Her main fields of research are economic reform and defense issues in Russia.


Sonia Ben Ouagrham, 17 December 1998.
© Center for Nonproliferation Studies,
Monterey Institute of International Studies.


Return to the Iraq home page.

Return to Top