Is France Serious About Iran?

While I am here, I want to see if I can get and convey a better picture of what France must do to meet the threats posed by Islam to the West. One thing is clear and that is after the 1960's (more on that later), France plunged into the multi-culture link with the Islamic and North African World. I took a walk around Montpellier last night and and it is very clear that Muslims are as part and separate to French life as African-Americans are to life in the US. They have invested in the experiment. You see many mixed race and ethnic couples, but come away with a sense of danger as well. I like doing "what ifs" when trying to de-construct a problem. To understand the French dilemma, think about what the US society would be like if we tried and reverse the clock and separate African-Americans from US society. It would be a tragic mess. The Muslims in France are both more integrated and less that African-Americans are in the US. This must play very heavy on their view in all matters vis a vis Islam and Iran.

Here are three recent questions posted to various French Ministers about Iran.
II.-

IRAN
INFORMAL FOREIGN MINISTERS' MEETING (GYMNICH)
PRESS BRIEFING GIVEN BY MME CATHERINE COLONNA,
MINISTER DELEGATE FOR EUROPEAN AFFAIRS
(EXCERPTS)

"(Lappeeranta, 2 September 2006)

THE MINISTER – On the first point, i.e. Iran, what is there to say that you don't know? You know the situation. Iran's response isn't what we expected. Moreover, the IAEA Director General concluded in his report that Iran isn't implementing UNSCR 1696. We have to discuss together what to do next in the framework of what the resolution had decided. I remind you that UNSCR 1696 was passed unanimously, and, of course, it commits us. So it's normal for the experts from the Six to consult each other next week. That's a first point.

The second point I wish to bring to your attention is that this morning we Europeans assessed the situation. We are united, the Europeans are united, in considering our three key words to be unity, firmness and dialogue. With this in mind, Mr Solana and the Iranian negotiator have to hold talks soon. The high representative is our representative, he needs to obtain, on our behalf, clarifications on certain aspects of the Iranian position. I want to say publicly that Mr Solana has our wholehearted support. Here I'm not speaking only for France, I mean that he has the support of all the Europeans, that's one of this morning's conclusions.

Third point to stress to you, on our French position. Yesterday, the Prime Minister expressed our regret that Iran has not replied positively to the offer of cooperation made to her. We hope she will change her position. Of course, we're giving priority to dialogue. We all have to be absolutely clear on this. Philippe Douste-Blazy said so, yesterday, when presenting the French position, it's obviously the main message he wanted to convey yesterday. We're giving priority to the dialogue, but, of course, it's important for the international community to get Iran to understand that she needs to change her position, suspend her enrichment activities and so comply with UNSCR 1696. I don't need to remind you of its content, i.e. that since this resolution, suspension has been an obligation. Let me add that we are convinced that it's in Iran's interest to return to the concert of nations, grasp the opportunity currently offered to her, particularly since the offer made at the beginning of June, and so choose the path of cooperation which the international community has proposed to her.

(…)

Q. – As regards Iran, can there concurrently be negotiations and sanctions? Have any member States spoken out against sanctions?

THE MINISTER – We're not at that point. In the process set in train in the United Nations framework, a step has already been taken with UNSCR 1696. Yes, the discussion has begun. It's normal, after stating that Iran hadn't implemented the resolution, for us to ponder the consequences we draw from this and the different possibilities which may present themselves. For the rest, I reiterate this and it's really this morning's main conclusion, we want, through dialogue and the contact the high representative is shortly going to have with the Iranian negotiator, there to be a discussion to remove a number of ambiguities and provide clarifications where necessary. This is something we're still waiting for. The Iranian reply is long and complex, and we wanted to study it in detail before asking for clarifications. This is the framework of the mandate for Mr Solana's mission. He has our full support. This is a delicate moment; this meeting is, of course, one of the elements which will help us think about the future. We want dialogue to prevail, while drawing attention to the framework in which the international community is reflecting. (…)./.

III.-

IRAN
INTERVIEW GIVEN BY M. PHILIPPE DOUSTE-BLAZY,
MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, TO "RMC"
(EXCERPTS)

(Paris, 6 September 2006)

(…)

Q. – Tell me straight out, are any sanctions ready to impose and what are they? The Americans have given a week – I see George Bush comparing Iran to al-Qaida! You've seen that too, he's reiterating his determination to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons, and for him Iran is al-Qaida.

THE MINISTER – Only one question matters: suspension of the sensitive nuclear activities, and to this question we have to find a solution which combines the necessity of halting these activities – if we want to have serious negotiations – with respect for Iranian sovereignty to which Tehran is rightly attached. Indeed I believe we can end the present deadlock, it's up to us to display imagination, for example, by adopting, in the discussions, an incremental approach allowing us, without lowering our demands, to address the Iranian concerns. (…)./.