They couldn't prevent the war, but that hasn't stopped the "Non-Nyet-Nein" coalition of France, Russia and Germany from staking their individual claims to a role in shaping, and profiting from, the new Iraq.
Even before the fighting stopped, the three European powers were moving to build bridges to the US and Britain to ensure their companies get a share in rebuilding the infrastructure in Iraq.
France says it wants to be pragmatic, Germany says it is an honest broker because it has no economic interests in Iraq, and Russia says it will consider Washington's call to forgive some US$8 billion in Soviet era debt.
All three have sounded conciliatory in the past week, while saying they want to see the UN play the lead role in post-war reconstruction -- tactics widely seen as an effort to avoid being locked out of business deals by the US.
Their fears are understandable, especially after the US House of Representatives passed a measure last week to bar French, Russian and German companies from winning business in Iraq after the war they resisted. The measure did not become law.
"Nobody in France is under any illusion about France's place in the reconstruction of Iraq in terms of the contracts that will be awarded," said Barthelemy Courmont, a researcher at the French Institute for International and Strategic Relations in Paris.
"Even before the outbreak of hostilities, we knew we would get nothing," he said.
France led the drive to prevent a war and threatened to use its veto at the UN Security Council to block any resolution authorizing military action against Iraq.
But Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin recently warned against a "victor's spoils" attitude in Iraq.
"The idea that Iraq can be a sort of Eldorado, a cake that states can carve up, seems to me contrary to good sense," he said.
German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, who opposed an Iraq war in his 2002 re-election campaign, has been out of favor with US President George W. Bush ever since. He has tried to tap his friend, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, to repair the damage.
"It's always good for mankind when a dictator is removed," said Schroeder, in the midst of a remarkable metamorphosis, at a meeting with Blair in Hanover.
"No matter what the differences of opinions were before, it goes without saying healthy trans-Atlantic relations are necessary and we'll work towards that aim in the future,"he said.
Blair, eager to help Schroeder out of the "Non-Nyet-Nein" axis, called the German leader "a good friend of mine."
"Whatever the differences were before the war, the state of our bilateral relations is extremely strong," Blair said.
In Washington, Bush administration officials have made clear the president will attend a G8 summit of industrialized nations in Evian, France on June 1. But US officials have made clear in recent days that Bush is unlikely to reach out to mend diplomatic ties with the anti-war coalition, and they may well feel the sting of retribution.
The likely result is that those who opposed the war may well take a back seat when a new Iraqi government hands out business and may be left out of the discussion in future international crises.
FIVE-YEAR WINDOW? A defense institute CEO said a timeline for a potential Chinese invasion was based on expected ‘tough measures’ when Xi Jinping seeks a new term Most Taiwanese are willing to defend the nation against a Chinese attack, but the majority believe Beijing is unlikely to invade within the next five years, a poll showed yesterday. The poll carried out last month was commissioned by the Institute for National Defense and Security Research, a Taipei-based think tank, and released ahead of Double Ten National Day today, when President William Lai (賴清德) is to deliver a speech. China maintains a near-daily military presence around Taiwan and has held three rounds of war games in the past two years. CIA Director William Burns last year said that Chinese President Xi Jinping
President William Lai (賴清德) yesterday said that China has “no right to represent Taiwan,” but stressed that the nation was willing to work with Beijing on issues of mutual interest. “The Republic of China has already put down roots in Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu,” Lai said in his first Double Ten National Day address outside the Presidential Office Building in Taipei. “And the Republic of China and the People’s Republic of China [PRC] are not subordinate to each other.” “The People’s Republic of China has no right to represent Taiwan,” he said at the event marking the 113th National Day of
SPEECH IMPEDIMENT? The state department said that using routine celebrations or public remarks as a pretext for provocation would undermine peace and stability Beijing’s expected use of President William Lai’s (賴清德) Double Ten National Day speech today as a pretext for provocative measures would undermine peace and stability, the US Department of State said on Tuesday. Taiwanese officials have said that China is likely to launch military drills near Taiwan in response to Lai’s speech as a pretext to pressure the nation to accept its sovereignty claims. A state department spokesperson said it could not speculate on what China would or would not do. “However, it is worth emphasizing that using routine annual celebrations or public remarks as a pretext or excuse for provocative or coercive
CONCERNS: Allowing the government, political parties or the military to own up to 10 percent of a large media firm is a risk Taiwan cannot afford to take, a lawyer said A Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislator has proposed amendments to allow the government, political parties and the military to indirectly invest in broadcast media, prompting concerns of potential political interference. Under Article 1 of the Satellite Broadcasting Act (衛星廣播電視法), the government and political parties — as well as foundations established with their endowments, and those commissioned by them — cannot directly or indirectly invest in satellite broadcasting businesses. A similar regulation is in the Cable Radio and Television Act (有線廣播電視法). “The purpose of banning the government, political parties and the military from investing in the media is to prevent them from interfering
RSS