De Gaulle, He Ain't

Nicolas Sarkozy's misguided quest for glory in Libya.

BY ARTHUR GOLDHAMMER | MARCH 22, 2011

View a photo essay of Sarko's grand tour here.

The Libyan uprising has given French President Nicolas Sarkozy an opportunity he has long coveted: to lead a risky international mission that holds out promise of ultimate glory. For Gen. Charles de Gaulle, the founder of the Fifth Republic, the pursuit of what the French call la grandeur was the primary raison d'être of a head of state. His successors have by and large shared the general's view, tenaciously defending French national interests and independence.

Sarkozy's idea of grandeur differs from de Gaulle's or Mitterrand's, however. The two former presidents saw themselves as students of history, men with long views of the national interest. Sarkozy is a creature of the moment who has always lived by the daily news cycle. Risk quickens his pulse and whets his appetite. He first came to prominence as mayor of the Paris suburb of Neuilly, when a madman with a bomb held a preschool classroom hostage. Sarkozy entered the room, talked the bomber into surrendering, and emerged to waiting cameras with a child in his arms. Crisis is his element.

In the crisis that followed Russia's invasion of South Ossetia in 2008, for example, Sarkozy, who then occupied the rotating presidency of the European Union, inserted himself into the center of the conflict and, in a whirlwind of shuttle diplomacy, persuaded the Russians not to make good on their threat to overthrow the Georgian government. His penchant for taking risks has not always paid off, however. Before he became Muammar al-Qaddafi's nemesis, he tried to reintegrate the colonel into the international community by inviting him to Paris in December 2007. This gesture drew criticism from Sarkozy's own secretary of state for human rights and proved to be an embarrassment because of Qaddafi's erratic behavior. Worse, it was probably quid pro quo for Qaddafi's agreement earlier that year to release Bulgarian nurses he had been holding prisoner. Qaddafi also extracted other tribute from France in return for this favor, including a promise to sell Libya €100 million of weapons and build a nuclear power plant in the country. Despite these overtures, the Libyan leader  later refused to join the Union for the Mediterranean, a pet project of Sarkozy's, on the grounds that it would wreck "the unity of the Arab League." If Qaddafi disappointed Sarkozy, the Arab League must surely have disappointed Qaddafi by joining the current action against him.

Of course the French president had motives other than disappointment for urging decisive action against the Libyan dictator. Sarkozy likes to stress the humanitarian motive, which is perfectly legitimate, and "shared democratic values," which the rebels may or may not in fact hold. But he also hoped to draw a veil over earlier disarray in his government's response to the "Arab spring." When demonstrators in Tunis faced the armed forces of another dictator, Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali, then Foreign Minister Michèle Alliot-Marie proposed sending French riot police to Tunisia to help train their Tunisian counterparts in crowd-control techniques. She also vacationed in Tunisia in the rebellion's early days and accepted transportation on the private jet of a Ben Ali crony with whom her elderly parents had entered into a business deal.

These revelations eventually forced Alliot-Marie's resignation and led to the appointment of Alain Juppé, a man of vast experience as well as an old rival of Sarkozy, as foreign minister. But the president then stunned Juppé by deciding to recognize the rebels and bomb Libyan airfields while his foreign minister was in Brussels, negotiating with European partners. Juppé had not been told of this decision in advance and was visibly dumbfounded when informed by reporters. To add insult to injury, the announcement of France's policy was made on the steps of the Élysée Palace by the playboy philosopher and gadabout humanitarian Bernard-Henri Lévy, an acquaintance of Sarkozy who had developed his own private contacts in the rebel camp. Juppé reportedly threatened to resign over this affront to his authority, but to date he remains in his post.

Sarkozy also faces a tough fight for reelection in 2012. His approval rating is at its nadir, around 25 percent. Several recent polls have shown him running third, behind Marine Le Pen, the new leader of the extreme right-wing National Front, and any of several possible Socialist candidates. And in cantonal elections held this past weekend, as the military action in Libya was unfolding, the president's party took a shellacking. In such circumstances, a leader who takes his country to war will always be suspected of seeking advantage at the polls. Yet there has been no discernible surge of support for the president since French jets first took off for Libya a few days ago.

Getty Images

 

Arthur Goldhammer is an affiliate of the Center for European Studies at Harvard University. He blogs on French politics at http://artgoldhammer.blogspot.com.

MALICEIT

7:26 PM ET

March 22, 2011

RE:

Did you really compared HIM to Charles de Gaulle? Thats like comparing Bush to FDR.

 

EREVOLU

9:39 PM ET

March 22, 2011

a hero

france president does his best to overthrow the regime of gaddafi, a dictator and a madness, who likes to suppress opposition of lybian by bloody iron fist, because he matters forces in his hands. on the other side, the rebels is much weaker than him. if no helps from outside, the rebels immediately become a dash of gaddafi's meat and be eradicated. in the sense, sarkozy is a hero.

 

BIG BOY

5:04 AM ET

March 23, 2011

A Fool

Sarkozy is not a hero, he is a fool. He is not fighting because he wants to defend some special "values" but rather he wants to restore the lost glory of France. If it's glory he is after then that makes this not a noble mission but an semi-imperialist selfish deed.

If he butchers this war, then there is no re-election for him and France will suffer a political and diplomatic setback.

 

DENNIS_WITTIG

12:42 AM ET

March 29, 2011

Amen.

Amen.

 

COMETLINEAR

2:20 AM ET

March 23, 2011

 

PUBLICUS

3:35 PM ET

March 23, 2011

Whaaat?

In 1956 Egypt's new president Col Nasser nationalised the Suez Canal. I hope you've noticed there's no Suez Canal in Lybia. In the Suez Crisis the United States was the Alain Jupe' that was not informed of the joint British-French-Israeli military action against Egypt and Col-Pres Nasser, nor would the US participate in the military action. Pres Eisenhower referred the matter to the United Nations where the entire military operation by the three countries collapsed. The British PM took his meds with him to Bermuda then resigned and the French PM crawled under his desk for a while.

During Suez the population of Egypt was squarely behind Nasser, as was world opinion. If Gadhafi were to prevail now, he would slaughter everyone he suspects or doesn't like, and a bunch more besides just because Gadhafi can do it.

Re-read your history. It also shows that deGaulle finally had the good sense to get out of Algeria and that Sarkozy has the good sense to go into Lybia.

I see also that La Republic acting in military unision with the United States puts a craw in the author's throat (not to mention joining with the Brits too). This military operation is complicated and complex but will be successful. The key is to show that the battle is between democracies and dictatorships rather than NATO vs the Arabs.

 

NICOLAS19

7:50 AM ET

March 23, 2011

give me a break

When Obama (or some of you other retarded presidents) go to war at the other end of the globe (Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya), he is "exporting democracy", "fighting for freedom", "fights against terrorism/WMDs", "building nations", etc. Yet when anybody else decides to make his voice heard, he is doing it just for political gains.

I'm not saying Sarkozy isn't because he is. Just don't forget the fact that the several wars of the US are only fought because of lies (Iraqi WMDs anyone?) and continued because the successive presidents are too much of cowards to stop.

 

ANDYLANGENKAMP

10:29 AM ET

March 23, 2011

"Human bomb" didn't surrender

The "Human Bomb" who took a preschool hostage didn't surrender. He was shot dead by the police days after Sarkozy negotiated with the man. It is still an heroic deed mr Sarkozy undertook, but things shouldn't be exaggerated.

From the New Yorker:

"He called himself H.B., the human bomb. He had an incoherent set of demands—a true lunatic—and the police surrounded the place. Sarkozy went into the school, completely alone, and began to talk to the human bomb. He engaged him in conversation: what did he want, what were his problems, could he solve them? But first he had to let the children go. Well, half an hour later, out comes Nicolas with children in his arms and all around him. Later, of course, the police went in and shot the human bomb dead.” He shrugged. The French police are not known for their gentle touch with psychos."

Read more http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/08/27/070827fa_fact_gopnik#ixzz1HR7pm3uG

Andy Langenkamp
Global Political Analyst at www.ecrresearch.com

 

TOMHE

6:45 PM ET

March 23, 2011

A breakup of EU

I noticed that Germany took rather different approach than France. This difference seems profound. It may trigger EU breakup because one major stakehold of EU decides to pursue its own interest without accommodating another major power. And Sarkozy will be blamed for the crime if the breakup indeed happens.

 

DORIS37

12:12 PM ET

March 24, 2011

Sarkozy and Libbya

The french don't practice political correctness......once they commit to a cause they don't abandon the cause until it is done. They know history and know that staying in one place to long not getting anywhere is not the way to go. They have past experience and also watch carefully our losing battle in Afghanistan. That is why Sarkozy will hit Libya hard and quick and has I am sure a goal to be out in days....He can't leave Ghadaffi alive or him and his frenchmen never will be save anymore in Paris.....that would be a big headache. And why should he be a De Gaulle?

 

DENNIS_WITTIG

12:48 AM ET

March 29, 2011

No doubt

I don't think anybody doubts that Gaddafi is done.

The interesting question is whether Libya will turn into a dry version of the Netherlands or into Iran.

 

ODYSSEY8

2:56 PM ET

March 26, 2011

Sarkozy is sacrificing lives to revive his political career

Prior to the Libya crisis, the approval rating for Sarkozy in France was at around 20%. However, once things started going sideways in the North African country, Sarkozy saw an opportunity to do something about that and he jumped at it.

As far as Sarkozy's popularity in France goes, so far it has worked. His approval numbers are on the rise; but one cannot help but ask themselves how many human lives will end up being sacrificed on the altar of Sarkozy's political career and ambitions? I'm not just talking about the LIbyans, I am talking about the NATO forces who will eventually be drawn into the fray on the ground big time. Seriously, does anybody truly believe that Sarkozy gives a flying fig about the people of Libya and their plight?

If this effort in Libya does not work out the way Sarkozy hopes, probably the worst thing that will happen to him is that the people of France will send him into retirement. The same cannot be said for those on the ground in Libya.

 

PUBLICUS

3:01 PM ET

March 29, 2011

Sarkozy is a leader

If I may reference Shakespeare in referrring to a Frenchman, "Cometh the moment, cometh the man." Sarkozy had to reign in welfare spending by reckless lala land socialists in France, most particularly reducing the age of retirement. This is of course unpopular among the body politic but Sarkozy unhesitatingly took the unpopular but responsible position. Sarkozy is not George Dumbya Bush who declared himself the "war president." There is no gain to a president of La Republique in being a 'war president.'

You have Sarkozy all wrong. British PM David Cameron saw the truth of Sarkozy's arguments about Lybia, as did Pres Obama whose Secretary of State Hillary Clinton agreed with Sarkozy (Kosovo etc).

This is just not a matter of political popularity to any of the major democracies involved: the UK, France or the US. And because the action in Lybia is the right thing to do, Nato will assume direction of the operation, led by a LTG from the Royal Canadan Air Force with assistance from an admiral from Italy. The UAE has comitted a dozen jet fighters to the air effort.

Quit the politicing for a change.

 

TECUMSEH35

3:10 PM ET

March 28, 2011

The fifth republic. lol I

The fifth republic. lol I could have a field day with that, but its not the topic. Not being compared to deGaulle is a compliment. Reading some of these posts compel me to ask if you really know about what kind of leader deGaulle was? His military achievements in world war 2, in which he was only a Colonel, is hardly noteworthy. It consisted of not being caught by the Germans, before leaving his country and citizens for Britain. The great "General", rolled triumphantly into Paris after the French resistance, aided by the UK and US, to hero's welcome without doing a thing. He was leader during the Algerian genocide by French troops and left a do-nothing socialist government in his wake, after resigning. What a guy!!

 

PUBLICUS

4:27 PM ET

April 2, 2011

Well said

It is indeed a compliment not to be a clone of de Gaulle and to be a different man in a different time as Sarkozy is. Jacques Chirac de Gaulle helped considerably to give France and the world Sarkozy and we give a roundabout thanks to Mr. Chirac for this important contribution from the Gaullist Party of la Republique.