I do not see how Voltaire.org.net offers anything really new other than prove again that some Frenchmen believe that they are in the revolutionary vanguard.

Today the vanguard consists of those who are looking for ways to retain the diversity of Europe at the same time there is a more united Europe. This cannot be accomplished without breaking up the reactionary arc de Europe that begins with the centralized governments of Spain, France, Germany, Poland, and ... into smaller more self-regulating regions. Such a break up of course applies to Russia and other large powers.

While such an order is a dream, perhaps it will result of the necessity driven (catastrophe?) reduction of our planet’s population, a novus ordo seculorum by way of a reduction of the numbers of our species.

Here’s an interesting view of Sarkozy and France:
http://www.upi.com/Emerging_Threats/2009/03/18/Walkers_World_Frances_general_strike/UPI-71361237385195/

#Wally: You are soooooo right: Sarkozy IS a disaster, for the French too Everything in your post is correct.  That president (unfortunately “mine”)is more despicable every day and every time he opens his mouth!

The way that the present geopolitical struggle is leading is rather obvious. It is not based on Russia of present times , the foreign polices that the current US Administration is pursuing is

sixty-six years pass due with regards to Uncle Joe . Last I heard uncle Joe is still buried beneath a slab of concrete ,somewhere close to the Kremlin.The foreign policy that the US is presently employing

is very similar to the Comintern that existed during the Soviet epoch.Whether you consider the Fifth Elements or the NGO (I don’t care what color they are ) the objectives are still the same.They are

a breed of infiltrators’ ,whose end result is only chaos.Why would the Russians be angered with the possibility of the Ukraine joining Nato ,maybe for the same reasons as the Cuban Missile Crises.The

Israeli’s on the other hand ,since they cannot find a reasonable agreement with the Palestinians have decided that chaos with Iran and whoever opposes Iran is the best guarantee for a possibility towards

LEBENSRAUM.

Just a test.

This move makes it harder for France to refuse to follow the US lead in any proposed military action.

Why? Well, as Pfaff writes, “NATO has always been a military adjunct to the United States”.

Hmmm. Why would Sarkozy want to modify France’s treaty obligations to make France more subordinate to the US militarily?

Well, suppose Israel were to make good on its threat to attack Iran, forcing the US to join in alongside its so-called ally.

Is it not conceivable that such a war could quickly escalate to the point where the US demands help from NATO (for example, if Russia tried to interfere)?

Now let’s see… what political constituency in France strongly supported Sarkozy’s rise to power and might want to see France obliged to join a US war against Iran?

Take a wild guess.

Looks like tommy_slothrop sees right through the smoke-and-mirrors of “power” politics to the ruthless gangster rules of strip-search “poker.”  The-Rule, of course, is FEAR, plain-and-simple.  Sarkozy gets his marching-orders from the plutoligarchy….just like his less height-challenged ‘peers’ all around the “global” meat-market.

Chess, of course, is so much more “civilized”....and attractive to the squeamish.

HokaHey!

re: By andrushka, March 18 at 12:47 pm:

Yes, andrushka; it’s hard to believe that Pfaff finds Sarkozy’s move so incomprehensible. He just throws up his hands and cries, “What on earth could he be thinking?? There’s simply no explanation!!”

Please, it’s pretty effing obvious.

Inherit the Wind. Of course, you are RIGHT. I meant Notre Dame de Paris, and if you had read and understood the gist of my argument, you would have caught the point and not the error. The point remains—for a long time Paris was the leader of the West, and though it lost that status to London due to the British navy, it did not lose the dream. Few great powers ever lose the dream for loss of a battle or to time. New configurations arise, thus the axis today on Afghanistan by Washington, London, Paris, Berlin, or Washington / Bruessels. I for one doubt that Moscow is part of it, though it may appear so.

Eso:

Chartres isn’t IN Paris—it’s about an hour and 1/2 west of Paris and slightly south.

As for France being “Rome” only during the Avignon Papacy was there French Popes.  From the mid 1400’s until John Paul II in 1978/79, every Pope was Italian.

Virtually every analysis here is either “wrong”, “wronger” or “wrongest” with this from FolkTruther being the only exception:

“West and Central Europe will wecome Russia into the EU, squeszing the US, and thus Israel, out.  the economies match up well, with russia oil and minerals, and would give world strength to the dwarfing White Man of europe.  Merkel of Germany seems sto be cozying up to the Russians, so maybe Sarkozy wants to be a counterweight.  Just speculation.”

The first part of FT’s analysis is between “wrong” and “wronger” but the rest is still pretty darn good for him.  His spelling is still the worst—even worse than mine but…...

Excellent article by Mr. Pfaff, as usual, but he understates the stupid and tragic nature of NATOs continued existence.  It boggles the mind to consider that the U.S. military-industrial complex was allowed to promote an antigonistic relationship between Russia and the west for no other reason than to prolong its contemptible protection racket.

It was, after all, a Lockheed Vice-President, Bruce Jackson, that Clinton appointed to head the committee in charge of integrating the Warsaw Pact nations into NATO.  The result was, that since most people in these countries had neither the inclination nor the means to spend huge sums of money on weapons, U.S. taxpayers generously bought shiny new U.S.-manufactured weapons systems for them.  The result of this was the political empowerment of the most the militaristic elements in the Eastern Europe societies and now in Russia itself, similar to the empowerment of the hard right in Israel after their Faustian arrangement with the U.S. military-industrial complex began 40 years ago.

This is classical (stereotypical even) protection racket behavior just like when rival Cosa Nostra gangs firebombed grocery stores in each others territories 100 years ago.  How could we have allowed this to happen?  Have we learned nothing?  They have finagled themselves another Arms Race less than 20 years after the last so-called threat to our existence surrendered!

Now Sarkozy, playing to the substantial French airhead constituency, wants a piece of the action.  What a fool—an idiot, a chump and a fool—just like the rest of us.

There are two ways to try to kill an enemy. 1. A direct thrust to the heart. 2. A crushing embrace. The first tactic against Russia/Moscow failed. The second tactic is inching along and has many centuries of trying behind it.

Of course, it is not nice to bring this up, but the chief of NATO just asked for 5000 more troops for Afghanistan—to keep the coming up election honest. If such troops are sent, wonder how soon such troops will return home.

Generalizations about countries,and “they” are indeed inaccurate.  (I had a French grandfather, who I never met.)  One country, even historically, over time, does not have a uniform foreign policy.  I am reminded of two things:
In the last century, when I was in high school, taking Honors French, it was taught that French was the language of diplomacy years ago because of its precision.  Second: my favorite joke, going around at the time of German re-unification was:
“The Germans are making a decision about where they would like to put the capital.”  Other person says, “Paris.”.

The threat to US-Israel is that West and Central Europe will wecome Russia into the EU, squeszing the US, and thus Israel, out.  the economies match up well, with russia oil and minerals, and would give world strength to the dwarfing White Man of europe.  Merkel of Germany seems sto be cozying up to the Russians, so maybe Sarkozy wants to be a counterweight.  Just speculation.

#Ed Harges: You are quite right! And THAT is a problem!

One consequence of France’s forsaking of it’s semi-independence from NATO could be this:

As Pfaff writes, “NATO has always been a military adjunct to the United States”. That means that France will now lose, to some extent, its freedom to opt out of certain future military actions undertaken by the US.

For example, suppose Israel were to make good on its threat to attack Iran, forcing the US to join in alongside its so-called ally.

Is it not conceivable that such a war could quickly escalate to the point where the US demands help from NATO?

Now let’s see… what political constituency in France strongly supported Sarkozy’s rise to power and might want to see France obliged to join a US war against Iran?

Take a wild effing guess.

#Anarcissie: You are right the French are not all that imperial, BUT Sarkozy is, or believes he can be, and that is the problem.

I think there’s a method to Sarkozy’s madness—he sees America in decline, and the question is, who will dominate NATO in future, once the USA has withdrawn (voluntarily or not) from the world stage? Britain is too weak, Germany is too discredited by its past and distrusted by the other members due to that same past, and there are no other contenders for a post-American-Empire NATO but la belle France. So Sarkozy’s France is positioning itself for the grand day when the Americans pass the crown and scepter to someone else and leave the throne ...

BTW, Eso, the Russian currency is spelled either “ruble” or “rouble”; I think the former is the most accepted form.

I don’t think the French are all that imperial these days.  The problem of the French ruling class is now to keeps its head above water in the new Holy Roman Empire, dominated by Germany of course.  One way is to try to establish oneself as a representative of the Great Monster of the West, as Great Britain and Poland have done, and maybe get some of whatever money is left.  Remember that the original purpose of NATO was to keep the Americans in, the Russians out, and the Germans down.  Sarkozy is squeezing out the last drop.

There is one big problem with Eso’s argument. Angela Merkel is already in Moscow with all that gas in Moscow’s backyard. Thank you Wm Pfaff for your article.

At the cost of sounding a little simplistic, but to draw the picture from a different perspective, the history of France must be read somewhat differently from the way Wm Pfaff writes it.

France, Paris, was the country whence the Crusades against the Byzantine Empire were first launched, Constantinople (Instanbul) raped and plundered, and a new Rome established using cooperative Constantinopoleans (traitors)to root a new religious bureaucracy, first in Avignon, France, then in Rome, Italy, when the English got jealous and could not be kept from starting their own Anglican church with yet another Rome in London. There was of course the German problem (alas, the Johanns were more resistant that the Jeans and Juans). However, whatever the problems of the future, Paris never forgot that it ought to have been the only Rome (after destroying the Rome in Constantinople), but instead ended up having to deal with four of them: one in London, England, one in Rome, Italy, one in Moscow, Russia, and one, yes, in Paris (remember the Chartres Cathedral).

However, as much as history was rewritten and events steered away from the way it actually was, the chronology was never quite so dismembered that France forgot it or gave up on its originally intented course. We simply have to recall how intent the French government remains in keeping French alive as an international language.

De Gaulle broke from NATO, because he saw that it would be submerged under Washington, yet a fifth Rome (Bush was its Pope, no?). However, then Washington, London, Rome, and Paris (unofficially, because it could not afford to keep out) went on crusades in Iraq, Afghanistan, soon plan to go on to Iran and Pakistan. Not surprisingly, a sixth Rome, Jerusalalem, Israel, is about to announce itself. Which is why, France (Sarkozy) can no longer remain “unofficially” out of NATO—if it wants to have its cake de oil, not to mention trying to beat Merkel to Moscow, and all that gas in its back yard.

Incidentally, the third Rome, Moscow, is not sitting idly by, but is seeking to establish its military presence in Venezuela and/or Cuba. The just announced 130 trillion rubble (?) military budget for updating its military does any Rome proud.