Sarkozy Opens New Front In Israel's Proxy War in the Middle East

New France gets tough with Iran

French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner has again raised the spectre
of a conflict with Tehran, warning the world "to prepare for the
worst... and the worst means war".

This is one of the strongest indications yet of the new Atlanticist
accent to French foreign policy under the new President Nicolas
Sarkozy. The hardening of France's position towards Tehran was first
signalled by the new president in a speech to French ambassadors last
month. Then he called for tougher economic sanctions against Tehran
and warned that if these failed to halt Iran's nuclear programme,
there would be, as he put it "a catastrophic choice" between "an
Iranian bomb or the bombardment of Iran".

So what is going on?

In the US, the Bush administration certainly has established war plans
for a conflict with Iran, as it has for so many other contingencies.
There are still hawkish voices within the administration who, despite
all of the chaos in Iraq, still believe that Iran should be the next
target in the Pentagon's sights. Nonetheless, there still remains
considerable leeway for diplomatic action. Much attention is focused
on Moscow, the government with the strongest potential "sanction"
against Tehran - namely its refusal to supply nuclear fuel for Iran's
first power-generating reactor.

Sanctions

In recent weeks though there have been signs that the diplomatic
pressure on Tehran has been weakening, just as the Americans in
particular are pushing for additional UN Security Council sanctions.
[This] is part of a broader change of diplomatic gear under a young
and dynamic president who carries little of the anti-American baggage
of his predecessor Moscow's position seems less certain, and an
agreement in August brokered with the Iranians by the head of the
International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei , has angered
not just the Americans but the three European governments - the UK,
France and Germany - who have taken the lead in negotiations with
Tehran.

Mr ElBaradei's intervention, which has led Iran to accept a plan of
action to gradually shed light on its past nuclear activities, is seen
by these governments as too lenient. They say it gives the Iranians
yet more time to make a full disclosure of their nuclear programme
while failing to insist that they halt uranium enrichment as the UN
Security Council has demanded. The French want to see stronger
European Union sanctions whatever the UN might do. And Mr Kouchner is
signalling that France is willing to pay a price by encouraging French
firms to limit their dealings with Tehran. US financial sanctions,
both formal and informal, are seen as beginning to have an impact on
the Iranian economy. However, critics of such moves argue that this
simply panders to the siege mentality of Iranian hard-liners, and
rallies popular support around the government in Tehran.

New attitude

The shift in Paris, though, is significant.
It is part of a broader change of diplomatic gear under a young and
dynamic president who carries little of the anti-American baggage of
his predecessors. Since he took office France has announced that
combat aircraft supporting Nato operations in Afghanistan will now be
based in Kandahar. And there has even been speculation that France
might rejoin the alliance's integrated military command, which it
walked out of in 1966. But it is the tougher rhetoric aimed at Tehran
which will please Washington the most. It is bound to cause divisions
within the European Union and complicate discussions on Iran within
the governing coalition in Germany. Until now there has been a good
deal of talk about Iran's nuclear programme - and some modest
sanctions. But the Iranians have largely stayed ahead of the game,
pursuing their research activities whatever the wider international
community might say. The French government, for one, is now saying
that this situation cannot continue. The overall message is still
diplomatic: the UN and others need to get much tougher towards Tehran.
If they do not then the subtext is clear: the thinly-veiled military
threat could become the only alternative.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6998118.stm