Article copyAmong the many benefits of Anglo-Saxon "warmongering" in general — and of American "hegemonic military power" in particular — that the French most conveniently and frequently forget, is the fact that for a solid half-century now (in sharp contrast with the one before that), French officials of all branches of the government (particularly the Foreign Affairs one) were able to meet with "ze Germans" without necessarily having to forfeit half of the Motherland to our Teutonic neighbor's Fatherland.
Last in line to benefit from this situation, paid in blood, sweat and cash by the "Anglo-Americans" they so much despise, is our neat and new Foreign Affairs minister, Bernard Kouchner, fearlessly interviewed here by the thereafter
Notice first a rather stunning display of naïveté on Hans Bitterman's part:
SPIEGEL: "(…) yet officials in Berlin complain that their friends in Paris are claiming every diplomatic success as their own."Silly Boche: what else is new? Every success is French, every failure is the European Union's(1). Where the hell have you been for the last 60 years?
SPIEGEL: "Sarkozy baffles the Germans with statements like: "If France doesn't assume the leadership role, who will?"Well, what can you expect? You lost the war Hans.
Admittedly, France didn't win it either, but it's no reason to get cocky — or do-you-want-we-shall-call the Yanks again for a new Schmeisser-spanking session?
But enough Blockheads-Bashing, let's get down to the nitty-gritty. On Iranian nukejobs and the Sound of Sanctions:
SPIEGEL: "If this doesn't work there could be war. You said it yourself."Indeed he did, but just you wait, you impetuous Kartoffel:
Kouchner: Wait a minute.(2) What I said was: "War would be the worst possible thing." And that's what I am determined to prevent, through unremitting negotiation.(3)Oh so nice. The Kraut's relief is palpable here, and for a reason: this sounds much like the song one could hear from Paris in the days before the Great Leap Towards Sarkozy. Remember when Jacques Chirac and his powdered monkey, the vile de Villepin, were leading the Saddam Task Force Europe, and then Foreign Affairs villain would serenade his domestic audience like so:
SPIEGEL: It's nice that you set it straight.
War is always the worst solution. (...) We're ruling out no option, but obviously want to take as far as possible any peaceful course of action which works before - should we reach an impasse - considering other options.That was de Villepin on Iraq 2003, this is Kouchner on Iran 2007. Somebody with much time to lose please try to spot a difference in either the style or the substance; because I am feeling a bit dizzy.
Must be all that déjà vu.